Following on to Dave's thoughts on the relationship between anonymity and freedom to express non-conforming opinions or behaviors, we can liken those vehicles with totally blackened windows that allow some of their drivers to have their basic, innate rudeness travel with them with impunity and anonymity. [For anecdotal evidence of this psychological phenomenon see for example this study at http://www.apa.org/ed/precollege/undergrad/ptacc/anonymity-driving-behavior.pptx ]
Back in February, the *New York Times* carried an article <http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/03/opinion/social-media-destroyer-or-creator.html?smprod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share&_r=0> titled "Social Media: Destroyer or Creator." In the article, Wael Ghonim--the one who is credited with starting the Arab Spring by way of Facebook--characterizes the aspect of having the ability on the Internet to respond to thoughts with our baser instincts only a click away this way: "My online world became a battleground filled with trolls, lies, hate speech." [See http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/03/opinion/social-media-destroyer-or-creator.html?smprod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share&_r=0 ] As Ghonim reveals in a subsequent TED Talk <https://www.ted.com/talks/wael_ghonim_let_s_design_social_media_that_drives_real_change#t-798505>, once the revolution spilled onto the streets, it turned from hopeful to messy, then ugly and heartbreaking. And social media followed suit. What was once a place for crowdsourcing, engaging and sharing became a polarized battleground. Ghonim asks: What can we do about online behavior now? How can we use the Internet and social media to create civility and reasoned argument? [See TED Talk at https://www.ted.com/talks/wael_ghonim_let_s_design_social_media_that_drives_real_change#t-798505 ] Like Dave, I doubt that having the Government watching--they already do a lot of this now--would have any effect on civil behavior anywhere because mass surveillance by a government doesn't really exert any peer, parent, or pal pressure. Just strangers watching strangers doing ... and just my $0.02. Robert On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 3:25 PM, Prof David West <profw...@fastmail.fm> wrote: > Awareness of being observed by peers and your social group absolutely > inhibits the expression of non-conforming behavior. Anyone who has lived > in a small town – where everybody knows everybody else and where > individual behavior is observed by so many others who can report that > behavior to parents or friends —knows the forces that inhibit > non-conforming behavior. > > There are numerous anthropological case studies (e.g. the "sexual > revolution" in the US brought about by the automobile, the breakdown of > marriage patterns among the Sami due to the snowmobile) that show the > relationship between anonymity and freedom to express non-conforming > opinions and behaviors. > > The real question is whether or not mass surveillance by the government > has the same effect. I would really doubt it - despite the Washington > Post report. I would expect to see similar kinds of self-censorship > among "friends" in social media, but not among "strangers" in that same > context. In fact I would expect that "strangers" would exhibit extreme > non-conforming, antisocial, behavior. > > davew > > On Tue, Mar 29, 2016, at 12:55 PM, glen wrote: > > On 03/29/2016 11:05 AM, Merle Lefkoff wrote: > > > Thought you guys would be interested in this: > https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2016/03/28/mass-surveillance-silences-minority-opinions-according-to-study/ > > > > Is it right to say that mass surveillance _causes_ the silencing? It > > seems to me that our tendency to conform is the cause. Then the cause[s] > > of that tendency [is|are] probably occult, where some will yap about > > things like group selection and others about ontogeny (education, > > demographics, etc). I assume that various generations vary in their > > tendency to conform. (We just watched Experimenter the other night: > > http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3726704/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1 , which suggests > > it's robust across lots of conditions.) So, perhaps the relationship > > between (recognition of) mass surveillance and self-censorship is simply > > a symptom of a deeper cause. > > > > -- > > ⇔ glen > > > > ============================================================ > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > > to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
