As I read through the blogs I continually ask myself why people let these secrets of themselves out on the public internet. I realize that this is one of the big draws to blogging online anyway. People find a certain sense of freedom and confidence when they are able to blog about whatever they want and not allowing others to know who they are. This reminds me of an incident that happened on a message bored. usawaterpolo.com had a forum where people can go on and blog about anything that they thought was interesting in the sport and you could respond and say whatever you wanted. A couple of years ago though, there was an incident were people were using names and teams and saying very rude stuff about innocent people. After this happened the website made a rule that you had to be a member of usa water polo to blog and you had to use your name and say who you were. This only lasted for a little while until they realized that no one was posting anymore. SO they changed the rule to be that you only had to be a member of usa water polo but you could now post anonymously. I found this interesting how what was once a very interesting website to go on and read about what was happening in my sport suddenly changed to a site that was barely updated. This site has changed a lot, it is still rarely used. There is now a new site, waterpoloplanet.com, where people can go and write whatever they want anonymously.
I think that this story is a perfect example of how much people really use and cherish the ability to post things anonymously. It shows that habing to say who you are and admit your identity, changes the whole blogging experience. I think that this is very interesting, blogging is like hidding behind a mask.
1 comment:
I totally agree.
The same thing you talk about happened after the "South of the Border" theme party on The Santa Clara's website message board: people said some things that they probably wouldn't have said in public if they had not had the comfort of anonymity which the internet provides.
The issue with The Santa Clara makes clear that anonymity has both its pros and cons. One way to look at anonymity is that is allows people with racist views to be able to voice them, and in doing so intentionally hurt others. On the other hand, maybe it is good that we hear them, despite the hurt that is caused, because it creates awareness and prevents people from becoming naive.
Personally, I would side with the latter argument only because I feel having awareness is a crucial first step toward solving any major problems.
But I digress. Internet anonymity is without doubt an interesting part of the puzzle. I liked what you had to say.
Post a Comment