Amidst the drama and fervor surrounding the Dimensions protest and its aftermath, a new issue has emerged: the role of anonymity in online communication. From Bored at Baker to the comments section of The Dartmouth, the ability to anonymously share thoughts, and sometimes threats, has come under fire. Earlier this week, The Dartmouth announced that its soon-to-be unveiled new website will attempt to eliminate the ability to post without a name. However, I believe that anonymity provides for honesty that otherwise would remain unspoken for fear of judgment or embarrassment.
I understand that attaching one's name to comments is meant to increase accountability. It would likely diminish ad hominem attacks and the "rude" comments that are sometimes left for writers on The Dartmouth's website. We would see fewer, if any, threats because people would be more cognizant of potential discipline. Obviously, I agree that such threats, whether on Bored at Baker or in media coverage of recent events, are reprehensible. But stifling opinions, the vast majority of which are harmless and contain no threats to other individuals, is not the answer.
In fact, continuing to allow anonymous comments could actually reduce the danger of threats being carried out in real life. Even if someone does not explicitly write a threat on the Internet, if there is true intent to harm another person, the inability to post it on a website will not stop that individual from following through. If someone's threat is not serious, then however ignorant or foolish such comments might be, there is no real danger. And in the event that there is real danger, the visibility of such threats online allows the proper authorities to discover them and subsequently search for the responsible parties.
Consider the fact that Dartmouth has a system of anonymous reporting. Students may contact Safety and Security to report a violation of college policy without having to identify themselves. This ensures that students can notify authorities about issues without concern about possible retribution. This idea extends to the world of online communication. It is possible that someone's opinion could be so abhorrent that it could incite threats and the possibility of real harm. The behavior and atmosphere that those opposed to anonymous comments wish to prevent could actually become even more likely.
The anonymity of the Internet is essential in allowing people to feel comfortable voicing their true feelings. If people are able to post an anonymous comment on The Dartmouth's website or Bored at Baker, they will not be worried that friends and peers may see the comment and judge them. They will say what they really feel, rather than a censored view with which they think others will agree. If we want "real talk," we need the ability to express ourselves without fear of censure. In an ideal world, this would be possible even with names signed beneath every comment online. In the real world, people are often critical of opposing viewpoints, so anonymous posting is integral to promoting honest dialogue.
Bored at Baker, in particular, is a crucial social space on the Internet. It is an important platform for students to discuss issues affecting themselves or campus as a whole. Among the relatively meaningless posts about random topics, you can find both sides of key campus arguments play out. Though similar conversations often take place on The Dartmouth's website or via social media, Bored at Baker allows students to communicate solely amongst themselves. Some of those conversations are about sensitive, personal topics such as mental health or sexual assault, and users can ask for or provide advice without risking their privacy. Eliminating the website would prove detrimental in encouraging honest discussions about topics that some are too embarrassed or uncomfortable to put their names and faces behind.
There will always be those who feel perfectly secure in displaying their names along with every word they post online. There is certainly something noble in doing so, but making the choice to remain anonymous is not necessarily dishonorable. In order to foster and sustain honest discussion about issues on campus, the decision whether to sign one's name should remain in the hands of the user.
