There was an excellent article on this in the guardian by Yassmin Abdel-Magied:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/dec/01/bullies-rely-on-power-to-protect-them-not-online-anonymity
Bullies rely on power to protect them, not online anonymity

I’ve had more death threats than flat whites. But almost everyone who abused me 
did so using their real names

The prime minister would have you believe that social media is where people 
hide behind faceless avatars to cause harm. ​​​​​​

Those who “go anonymously on to social media”, he said, “need to be responsible 
for what they’re saying.” According to Scott Morrison, those online bullies 
lurk only in the shadows, spewing lies and wreaking havoc, cowardly exploiting 
the cover of darkness.

His comments came as he was announcing that a bill would be introduced to 
parliament this week which he said would help reveal the users behind anonymous 
“troll” accounts and make it easier to sue them for defamation.


But those who cause the most harm in our society do not need to hide. They 
vilify, harass and abuse in plain sight, and are often rewarded for their 
trouble. The worst bullies in Australia are not anonymous trolls but those in 
power who do not wish to be challenged, using every weapon in their arsenal to 
maintain the status quo.

Trust me, I know.

I’ve had more death threats than flat whites. I’ve spent years opening my inbox 
to emails from strangers detailing their graphic fantasies of my execution 
(after I have been raped and flogged, of course). I’ve listened to pundits 
casually chatting about murdering me on national radio, politicians suggest I 
support dictatorships, seen over 200,000 words written about me in the press, 
all amounting to a “full-scale assault on [my] existence”.

I know first hand what it’s like to be vilified and harassed, so naturally, I 
would welcome a genuine attempt to help.

But this, no matter how the prime minister and his government try to dress it 
up, will not. Because here’s the kicker: Almost every single person who took 
part in the unrelenting tsunami of abuse and harassment against me did so using 
their real identity.

The government’s proposed legislation, forcing social media companies to reveal 
the identities of anonymous accounts, is less about protecting the average 
citizen and more about the government’s singular obsession with control and 
power.

Anonymity is not what protects bullies. Power is.

Morrison has framed the bill as a pathway for individuals to sue anyone online 
for defamation. Let us ask ourselves: who has enough money to sue anonymous 
users of the internet? Who has the financial resources, legal knowhow, the 
time? I certainly don’t, but defence minister Peter Dutton does.

When Dutton sued the activist Shane Bazzi for defamation, he told the court 
Bazzi’s since deleted tweet had “deeply offended” him, was “defamatory, hurtful 
and I took particular exception to it”.

We all take particular exception to things people say about us. The Lebanese 
community took exception to Dutton saying it was a mistake to resettle 
Lebanese-Muslims in Australia. The South Sudanese community took exception to 
Dutton’s hurtful and offensive comments about “African gang violence”. I 
personally took exception to Dutton gloating when I lost my job at the ABC.

But none of us were in a position to sue Dutton, for defamation or otherwise.

“The rules that exist in the real world must exist in the digital and online 
world,” the prime minister has said.

It is worth remembering our reality, where the rules in the offline world 
favour those in power. By attacking anonymity, this proposal entrenches 
inequalities further. As Digital Rights Watch reminds us, real-name policies 
leads to real-world harm.

Anonymity online is one of the few things that ever so slightly levels the 
playing field, allowing us to explore and organise and play without fear. 
Whether it’s a woman creating a nameless account to help her leave an abusive 
relationship, a young teen exploring identity or our favourite political parody 
accounts, anonymity is foundational to the free and open internet.

If the government is genuinely interested in online safety, there are plenty of 
avenues worth considering: updating archaic data protection laws, resourcing 
existing regulators effectively and tackling big tech’s harmful business model.

Online safety is a vitally important issue but one that can only be dealt with 
by addressing the concentration of power in companies that are not accountable 
to their users. That is where the attention of any government seriously 
concerned with digital rights should be.

Anonymity is a red herring, cloaking the fragile egos of cowardly men.



On 2021/12/7 5:03 pm, Bernard Robertson-Dunn wrote:
Re the Federal Government's proposed new rules to expose online trolls

Have I got this right? The Federal Government wants to force social media sites to identify all their users so that someone who abuses others on-line can be identified and potentially taken to court.

Is giving a social media site lots of identifying data a good idea? Many people already give quite a lot away, but to force everyone to be positively identified to the social media sites seems to be a very bad thing to do.

Social media sites must be quietly rubbing their hands with glee - all that 
high-quality personal data they can quietly sift through.

Or am I just being paranoid?




--
Kim Holburn
IT Network & Security Consultant
+61 404072753
mailto:[email protected]  aim://kimholburn
skype://kholburn - PGP Public Key on request

_______________________________________________
Link mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Reply via email to