Social Media Abuse Stories to Shrivel Your Soul
http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/001132.html
Recently in "Research Request: Seeking Facebook or Other 'Real Name'
Identity Policy Abuse Stories" ( http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/001131.html ),
I requested that readers send me examples of social media abuses that have
targeted
themselves or persons they know, with an emphasis on "identity"
issues such as those triggered by Facebook's "real name" policies.
These are continuing to pour in -- and please keep sending them -- but I
wanted to provide a quick interim report.
Executive summary: Awful. Sickening. I knew some of these would be bad,
but many are far worse than I had anticipated anyone being willing to
send me. It seems very likely -- though obviously I couldn't swear to
this under oath -- that these abuses have resulted in both suicides and
homicides.
And if we as an industry don't get a handle on these issues, we
ultimately risk draconian government crackdowns that will simply enable
more government censorship and create even more problems.
Here are some of the more obvious observations I can derive from the
messages I'm being sent (not in any particular order for now):
There is no longer any realistic dividing line between the online and
offline worlds. Abuse taking place online can quickly spill offline,
affecting targeted persons' physical lives directly and devastatingly.
Most forms of social media abuse are interconnected. That is, we cannot
realistically demarcate between "identity policy" abuses (e.g.,
Facebook's "real name" requirements), and other forms of social media
abuse (such as comment trolling, Gamergate, and far more).
Women are disproportionately targeted by social media abuse (as a male I
find this fact to be personally offensive), but yes, many men are also
attacked as well.
A lack of realistically useful and advanced moderation and abuse
report/flagging tools, and/or insufficient surfacing of these tools to
users, combined with "lackadaisical" (that's the most polite term I can
use) attention to these reports in many cases, exacerbates existing
problems.
Social media systems with strict "real name" requirements are especially
problematic and can be extremely dangerous. This particularly relates to
the 800-pound gorilla of Facebook in this context (Google+ wisely
dropped its real name requirements quite a ways back).
Facebook's identity "real name" policies have been effectively
"weaponized" by abusers. Many FB users who are already targeted and
marginalized in their offline lives (domestic violence victims, LGBT,
racial and religious minorities, and so many more) still need to use FB
to stay in contact, but (in an attempt to protect themselves) are using
"real appearing" pseudonyms instead of their real names. If one of their
protagonists discovers their FB identity, it is not uncommon for the
abuser to report the victim to FB (for example, as a twisted form of
"revenge") in an attempt to expose them online and offline, and to
destroy their ability to be safely online.
Social media firm reactions to flagging and abuse complaints --
particularly in the case of Facebook -- can be erratic and seemingly
arbitrary. Complaints that in one instance might target an innocent
person might cause an account suspension, but one targeting a guilty
person may be ignored. Innocent parties may be required by FB to jump
through a series of humiliating and embarrassing hoops to try regain
access, including persons whose protective pseudonyms have been exposed
and persons whose actual, real names have been falsely flagged as fakes.
In some cases, Facebook actually suggests to affected users that they go
to court and change their name legally to match FB's rules!
Governments in general (which tend to see censorship as a solution
rather than the problem it actually is) and law enforcement in
particular, usually make these matters worse, not better. The police
tend to be clueless at best, and often explicitly "stop wasting our
time" antagonistic. Victims of bullying and online threats to their
offline lives who go to the police are usually informed that there's
nothing to be done to help them, or victims are told to just "stop using
the Internet" as a proposed (inane) solution.
We could go on with this list, but I'm sure you get the idea.
I'm forced to add that not all of the reaction to my research request on
these topics has been positive. I've received some responses that
attempt to minimize the entire controversy. They've told me I'm wasting
my time. They've suggested that in a relative sense "so few" people are
actually victimized by these problems (compared with the billions using
these system) that it would be ridiculous for the companies involved to
make significant changes just to cater to to a small group of actual
victims and a much larger group of supposed malcontents.
I can't emphasize how forcefully I categorically reject that entire line
of reasoning.
The inherent suggestions that because "relatively" few persons might be
affected (and that still means vast numbers of warm bodies at these
scales) could somehow excuse the abysmal status quo -- are entirely and
completely unacceptable, untenable, and unethical.
It's true that we can't put precise numbers on the victims. After all,
most of these vulnerable persons are already trying to protect
themselves from exposure, being forced into essentially a "shadow"
universe of social media identities. And we'd expect that most would
also be understandably unwilling to discuss their situations with a
stranger such as myself.
But many have been so willing, and I thank them for their trust. And I
believe we can safely extrapolate to the reality that there are one hell
of a lot of people being victimized by these issues.
And in fact, the numbers shouldn't really matter at all. How many deaths
or lives otherwise ruined attributable at least significantly to social
media abuses are tolerable? I would assert that the answer in an ethical
sense at least is zero.
Does this mean we can quickly solve all these problems? Is there a magic
wand?
Of course not. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't try. And remember,
once politicians get their claws into these controversies, you can bet
that the kinds of "solutions" they push will aim to further their
agendas more than anything else.
These are problems we must ourselves work toward eliminating.
Obviously, education outreach must be a major part of this effort,
especially to law enforcement and other government agencies.
But we also need to have a much better handle on these situations as an
industry, because the problems are ultimately not isolated to single
firms.
There need to be individuals and teams within the involved firms who not
only are working internally on these issues, but who also participate
broadly in related public communications efforts. These companies need
to work together toward understanding the impacts of their ecosystems in
these contexts -- a formal or informal industry consortium to
specifically further such interactions would seem a useful concept for
consideration.
Most of all, it's crucial that we as individuals -- not just those of us
who have built and used the Internet for many years, but also users who
have so far only barely gotten their feet wet on the Web -- recognize
that it is intolerable for the Net to be turned into a tool for the
destruction of lives, and that it's up to us to pave the path toward
changes that will truly help the Net to flourish for the good of our
societies, rather than allowing the Net (and ourselves) to be shackled
by politically shortsighted restrictions.
Take care, all.
--Lauren--
I have consulted to Google, but I am not currently doing so.
All opinions expressed here are mine alone.
- - -
Lauren Weinstein ([email protected]): http://www.vortex.com/lauren
Founder:
- Network Neutrality Squad: http://www.nnsquad.org
- PRIVACY Forum: http://www.vortex.com/privacy-info
Co-Founder: People For Internet Responsibility: http://www.pfir.org/pfir-info
Member: ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy
Lauren's Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com
Google+: http://google.com/+LaurenWeinstein
Twitter: http://twitter.com/laurenweinstein
Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800 / Skype: vortex.com
_______________________________________________
pfir mailing list
http://lists.pfir.org/mailman/listinfo/pfir
