Horrible, horrible things were said by men on campus via this anonymous app. Aggressive responses were met with more hate and the animosity grew. Two fantastic student leaders decided to put together a campus-wide forum to discuss "Free Speech, Social Media & Creating Conversations." The event - attended by about 150 people - was moderated, questions were taken from Yik Yak directly (gulp) as well as from the audience. I was asked by the coordinators to be a panelist (gulp) and speak briefly on "Social Media & Anonymity" before joining a panel up front to take questions (gulp).
I spoke for just 3-4 minutes and felt good about my message. Most of the questions for the panelists that day were handled by the Vice President for Student Life and the two exceedingly intelligent faculty members. I just smiled a lot and tried to not sound silly.
The event was successful. As expected, there was not clear resolution. However, the conversation was started and in a very public way. Anonymity has its place in community - I truly believe it can. But a conversation that allowed for both anonymity and face-to-face interaction proved to be of great value.
I felt like posting what I wrote and read that day.
-------------------------------
I'm here today to talk
briefly about social media & anonymity.
Specifically, where
does ethical and social obligation begin & end in digital space. This is
hard enough to navigate in spheres in which we carry names, but particularly in
the realm of the anonymous.
Anonymity can be
powerful. Anonymity, by definition IS and in theory SHOULD BE, void of labels.
Void of names. Void of direct judgement within the context of who you are.
Erikson said identity
is a "conscious sense of individual uniqueness." The ability to be
anonymous in digital space allows us to obscure that part of us that accrues
reputation. This seems counter-intuitive to who we are here at Gustavus, right?
We spend so much time working on our resumes and our experiences, yet we often find
solace in anonymity. But maybe that's the appeal. The ability to just be
another person and not carry the stigma of what you have to say.
Rey Junco is a leader
scholar in the area of research around college students and social media. He
says that online anonymity is a powerful force for democratic freedoms,
interpersonal growth and creative expression. The American college campus is a
place defined by those three things. Students from subordinated identities
often thrive when given an opportunity to express themselves anonymously.
I talk often of
"Keyboard Warriors," those individuals who hide behind the shield of
a screen and keyboard in order to speak what they feel is a truth they would
otherwise not be willing to speak to our faces. Keyboard Warriors say horrible
things. Keyboard Warriors can be nasty, belittling and angry. Now add the mask
of anonymity, and the Keyboard Warriors are not just hiding behind false
courage, they are performing while knowing we don't know who they are. Junco
refers to this as "the online disinhibition effect." The removal of
social barriers that would prevent one from speaking his or her mind.
This is complicated.
We know that developing identity involves a stable sense of self that is both
internally consistent and externally validated - so can that happen when you're
anonymous?
Anonymity via social
networking is nothing new. There have been anonymous chat rooms and web pages
since the internet was created. But the widespread appeal and access to mobile
applications that allow for anonymity have raised this within our
consciousness. Social media is not just another thing on our list of things to
do - it is a central means of communication, of idea and knowledge sharing and
of making statements that reach wide audiences.
The average Tweet
reaches four times what we assume the audience to be and we never know it.
Facebook changes its algorithms like I change shirts, so who knows what sort of
statement goes to 10 of your friends today but to 100 future employers
tomorrow. A Yak, though void of an identifier, might reach thousands of people
within a geographical radius. So what does that say about our obligation to one
another?
We know that nearly 90%
of the population aged 18-29 uses social media and we know that Yik Yak is used
on nearly every college campus in the country. So what? So we better understand
how we’re using it and our ability to be aware of intent vs impact.
Those who want to
limit access to Yik Yak feel it's only destructive and harmful. The opposite
stance is that by limiting Yik Yak we curtail free speech. But free speech
often requires a thoughtful approach to context. Just because you CAN say
something does not mean you SHOULD. Your platform has power. Your words have
power. Whether your name is tied to it or not.
I'm here to talk about
social media but it's not the platform, my friends. We can blame anonymity for
our challenges and we can blame Yik Yak all we want. But the root of the
problem with offensive, crude posts on Yik Yak is that people are writing these
things. Gusties are writing these things.
But maybe there’s a
light. Because Gusties are also writing the positive Yaks.
And anonymity doesn’t have
to mean “awful.” Anonymity can have power, anonymity can have positivity. The
platform is really just potential. It's what we choose to do with it that makes
it matter.
---------------------------
What are your thoughts on anonymity in social media?
What role does it play on your campus - is it finding it's way comfortably into your community or is it acting as a disruptor?
Is disruption good or bad?
How are you helping educate students on the power of language?
What are you learning about the power of language?
No comments:
Post a Comment