Opinion / Public Editor

Are real names a step toward online civility? Public Editor

The Huffington Post has declared an end to online anonymity to meet the needs of ‘the grown-up Internet.’

Star public editor Kathy English says it's not the Internet that must grow up — it’s just some people.

Dreamstime

Star public editor Kathy English says it's not the Internet that must grow up — it’s just some people.

Would an end to online anonymity mark the dawn of online civility?

Call me cynical, but I doubt that simply demanding real names in digital discourse would halt the culture of nastiness and bullying that pervades too much of the Internet.

Still, I regard such a bold move as a step in the right direction to aiming to create a culture of better behaviour online. I was thus heartened this week to see that Internet media magnate Arianna Huffington has declared that the Huffington Post will end anonymous comments next month.

As first reported Wednesday by the online technology and media site, GigaOM, Huffington said that the online news aggregator she launched in 2005 and sold to AOL in 2011 will require its extensive community of commenters to use their real names when voicing their views. Huffington Post Canada is part of this new measure.

This is a significant development in the ongoing debate about online anonymity.

Since its founding, “HuffPo” has reportedly published more than 260 million comments, the bulk of them anonymous or pseudonymous. But as Huffington told reporters in Boston Wednesday, “Trolls are getting more and more aggressive and uglier. . .

“I feel that freedom of expression is given to people who stand up for what they say and not hiding behind anonymity,” Huffington said. “We need to evolve a platform to meet the needs of the grown-up Internet.”

Predictably, Huffington’s pronouncement sparked much debate online about whether anonymity should be blamed for the ugly “trolls” of the Internet and the challenges of verifying identities online.

That’s a debate that has played out for some time in news organizations throughout North America, including here at the Star. Readers repeatedly ask me why the Star’s requirements for publishing online comments are not in line with those of the newspaper’s Letters page, where those who want to have their say must identify themselves.

These readers expect some measure of civility from all content published on the Star’s many platforms and lay the blame for the nastiness that too often predominates in online comments squarely on the fact that people can hide behind anonymity.

As I told you last month, the Star has launched a new commenting system that includes a Community Code of Conduct that spells out the Star’s — and its many readers’ — expectations that commenters “maintain respectful and civil discussion.” The new system allows readers to flag questionable comments for subsequent moderation.

At that time, digital editor John Ferri told me this issue of anonymity is open for discussion at the Star. Moving forward, he and his team hope to experiment with opening some topics for commenting only to those who identify themselves with real names.

That column resulted in numerous emails from readers voicing support for an end to anonymity in the Star’s online comments.

“Anonymity is the bully of the Internet,” said British Columbia reader Nina Munteanu. “How the Star and other media organizations treat this step in our online evolution may help shape the very freedom that Internet society so values.”

Expressing a view similar to what Huffington said this week, Munteanu added: “We prevailed over the formative “teenage” years. Now it’s time for the Internet to grow up.”

On the other hand are those who believe that anonymity online creates more honest debate and allows those who might be fearful of being identified with controversial views to speak freely. They make the good point that nasty bullying still occurs on Facebook and other digital spaces where real names are demanded.

As the Guardian’s Joanna Geary wrote in a column Thursday, “The issue is far more complex. There are a variety of psychological factors that contribute to people being mean online.”

I agree this issue is complex and using real names won’t guarantee civility online or anywhere else. Ask any Star columnist about the many mean, threatening emails they receive, a lot of them signed with apparent real names. It’s staggering to see how nasty some people will reveal themselves to be in communicating their opposition to a columnist’s opinion. It’s the most uncivil of discourse.

I do wonder, though, whether the culture of incivility that now dominates online has emboldened such incivility in public discourse overall. Time will tell if more news organizations end anonymity online.

But I also have to wonder if the reality here is that it is not the Internet that must grow up — it’s just some people.

More on thestar.com

  • Dean Del Mastro hides behind his baby in court: Mallick

    Dean Del Mastro hides behind his baby in court: Mallick

  • Why Makayla Sault was allowed to die

    Why Makayla Sault was allowed to die
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/public_editor/2013/08/23/are_real_names_a_step_toward_online_civility_public_editor.html
www.thestar.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2015-06
105196
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:QIA6ZF6EHWR4R2VLQ7Y6QIASETGUZ42H
<urn:uuid:42548c42-ecbe-456e-8ead-23b4dae4aea9>
2015-01-28T01:27:47Z
54.230.192.208
sha1:CS77STVNWLIUDGJKYJOTUPIJJA6HJIIO
<urn:uuid:18da176e-ea53-43c9-abe1-454b67117e19>
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/public_editor/2013/08/23/are_real_names_a_step_toward_online_civility_public_editor.html
response
<urn:uuid:fe211d3f-120d-43ec-b52a-782fef9ffb6e>
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-180-212-252.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)/CC WarcExport 1.0
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2015-06
operator: CommonCrawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web with URLs provided by Blekko for January 2015
publisher: CommonCrawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf