Anonymity vs. Responsibility

Last Friday, an interesting article appeared on www.opinionjournal.com, essentially the opinion pages of the Wall Street Journal. This article discusses how anonymity has allowed critics (in this case, book critics) to deride books with conservative viewpoints or arguments and build up book with liberal viewpoints or arguments. Traditionally, critics have been permitted to remain anonymous with their reviews, under the impression that this makes them somehow more objective, because they are completely removed from us as readers. The author believes, however, that such anonymity has merely allowed unchecked partisan destruction of conservative views in favor of liberal views. And to a great extent, I agree.

But really, the issue goes much further. What is anonymity REALLY all about? It’s about no one knowing who you are, and you using that “protection” to say whatever the heck you want to say or do whatever the heck you want to do. This is a phenomenon we see more and more with the Internet, where users have an illusion of anonymity in their actions. Just look at the “flame wars” you see everywhere from Internet forums to office e-mail threads. Flame wars can happen anywhere, any time, where non-personal communication is involved (you will also see these regularly in your office e-mail system).

And that’s the entire key to this discussion. The type of communication used on the Internet, and the type of communication discussed in the article referenced above, are all non-personal; they are written communications going out to an audience of more than a single person, in which that person is usually not directly faced. The book critics just write their reviews and send them in, knowing full well that they will never meet anyone who has read the article and knows that he or she wrote the review (unless the critic reveals that they wrote it, and even then, they’ll typically only reveal that to people who agree with them). The users who engage in flame wars typically do not directly face the person their flaming, certainly not in a forum as widely-read and used as Slashdot. Even in office flame wars, the two parties involved will rarely meet directly to figure out a solution, and even if they do, the attitude is a 180-degree turnaround from what is revealed in their message.

The supposed anonymity of these types of communication have really given way to something much more sinister in human nature and culture. We have lost our sense of responsibility for our thoughts, ideas, and communications. THAT is what anonymity REALLY provides, the ability to say or do whatever the heck you want without facing the consequences of your actions (which is what true human nature really desires, anyway). Back in the Old West, if you approached someone and called them a liar to their face in front of others, there was a good-to-excellent chance that he was going to throw down on you, draw his pistol, and blow a few holes in you (or at least use his fists and beat you within an inch of your life). Neither were you insulated if you told someone else that you believed a man to be a liar; it would usually get back to him and he would then hunt you down and give you the aforementioned holes or beating. Even authors were not immune; there are instances documented of duels being fought for something bad that an author wrote about someone else. There were consequences then not necessarily for the things you thought, but for the things you said and acted on. A person was held responsible for his own words and actions. Isn’t this idea the entire basis for our criminal justice system? For our governmental and regulatory systems? Isn’t this what everyone screams about when someone else pollutes the planet, drives drunk, makes a bone-headed play in the National Championship game, or crosses against the light and gets hit by a car? Unfortunately, there is very little anyone can do today if someone else calls them a liar or maligns their good name in any way, with our overly-litigious legal system (always that “free speech” argument) and our supposed anonymity. Sure, there are libel and slander laws, but the legal standards to prove such are so ridiculously strict that it’s very difficult to prove them.

The “free speech” argument just doesn’t hold water with me, though. Read the ACTUAL text of the First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Those words are sacrosanct, and should be. But what about the rights of others to object to someone’s “free speech”? There’s no mention of such a situation; read it again. “CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW…”. So, Congress can’t do anything about it; I can certainly see and understand the need for that. Even the ACLU only discussed free speech in the context of government suppression. But what about me? Let’s go back to the Old West example. If a person called me a liar in public, and I shot him down, what happened to me? Well, usually, a whole lot of nothing. I might get a few days in jail, maybe a fine, and many times, no punishment at all. People understood the rules back then. You watched your mouth, or you paid the price. You were mindful of your actions, or you paid the price. Now, unfortunately, we must all be more “thick-skinned” and give up our OWN personal right to hold someone else responsible for their words and actions toward us, in the name of “free speech”. I'm not saying we should go back to the days where I could shoot a man for calling me a liar; while humans would certainly be mindful in those conditions, that is not constructive. The first step in holding others accountable for their words and actions is to remove the anonymity that so many of them hide behind. The target of such attacks should at least be given the right to face their attacker and defend themselves and their ideas. I find it humorous that in these days of victimization, of building self-esteem, of concerns regarding emotional pain and suffering, this issue has been overlooked for so long.