Is there an online cloak of invisibility?

Since the very beginning of the online era, we’ve all realized that the luring ability of being anyone we’d like to on the internet leads to nasty comments and outrageous online behavior. However, it is likely that when the internet started to intervene into personal life the way it has been lately, things tend to go opposite way. Instead of having fun being an anonymous on the internet, we might get caught doing inappropriate things which ended up online and screw it all for us. The Room for Debate has the discussion on this particular issue heading the section; it’s called “You're Mad! You're on YouTube!”

Recent incident of Anthony Weiner’s inappropriate messages and other similar undisclosed behavior via the internet is threatening the freedom of people to express themselves freely. Now, do we have to behave ourselves more in public, the discussion asks. Daniel J. Solove, a professor at George Washington University Law School, tells the readers that though “anonymity allows people to unleash their id and all the ugliness they conceal beneath their polite facades”, when it is destroyed by technologies, it might not to be a thing to appreciate. (¶1, The Virtues of Anonymity) Being anonymous encourages people to criticize and speak freely. On the contrary, being monitored makes it oppressive for people to speak their minds and discourages a lot of valuable ideas. Finally, he asks for an appropriate balance in taking side on anonymity. Peggy Post from Emily Post Institute, one of the debaters, states an important point which is there is no such thing as “privacy” when it comes to the online world since everything on the internet is permanently recorded and no set of password could disguise the truth that everything is out there, risking to be stolen and hacked. In social network and Youtube era, all the covered behaviors are likely to be caught and posted online. She suggests that we watch what we are doing and take responsibility for our behavior and that “being civil is being self-regulated”. (¶4, Practicing Self-Regulation) While Anita L. Allen, the Professor of Law and philosophy at the University of Pennsylvania Law School, discusses the importance of “the value of old-fashioned decency toward others” which should not be violated. (¶1, This Isn't '1984') She points out though getting caught doing inappropriate behavior can have devastating consequences, involving in uncivil acts is not as worse as judging people from their private business that was revealed online.

When it comes to the internet, the only place I feel that my privacy might be intervened is on social network. On my Facebook page, I block all my information and pictures away from people who are not “friends” and I think carefully before posting anything, especially my whereabouts. But for the discussion this debate is focusing on, it is not the thing you can monitor and decide on anymore. This is more like, your real life is watched and recorded. And everything you do might end up online and stay there forever to humiliate you, to sabotage your life, and for other people to criticize. This is a nightmare even for a nobody, let alone public figures. I agree that to some extent the feeling that we must behave ourselves otherwise we’re screwed has its own benefits. As the idea of being exposed would be a great reminder for us to act more civil, respect others more, and think before we do and speak. But that is not healthy and in the long run, that stops creativity. Also, it has a high risk of violate people’s rights, privacy, and freedom of speech. If we let this sick revelation continue without setting some rules to restrict it, I predict that it would goes further and further. It would do more harm to the society than advantages. I suggest we look carefully on this issue and stop encouraging these revelations.

__________

References

You're mad! You're on Youtube!. (2011, Jun, 22). The New York Times. Retreived June 23, 2011 from http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/06/21/youre-mad-youre-on-youtube