Topic 2: Reflection on Online Identities

After reading and reviewing other people’s blog posts, it’s clear that what constitutes a separate ‘online identity’ has a subtly different meaning for different people; some took this to mean that if their Facebook and LinkedIn ‘persona’ were different then they had multiple identities. I’d taken a different tack, assuming that an identity was only ‘separate’ when it was fragmented and disconnected (which really can only happen by design).

Both interpretations are valid, but if I’d recognised the different ways the questions was going to be approached then I would have presented a clearer rationale in my original blog.

Given my interpretation of ‘separate’, my blog expressed my reservations about the darker uses of such separate identities – and although no one challenged me directly – it is clear that I’ve been slightly narrow minded – as Nicole Odofin noted, professional bloggers need a private space to avoid their personal identities getting overwhelmed, while Saber Hamidi makes a similar point regarding TV personalities such as Christopher Poole’s TV interview. It is true that I’d be more interested in establishing different identities if I had a more newsworthy life.

That said, I still feel people are too keen to hide rather than exercise common sense – often expecting the law to provide an alternative to acting responsibly. Hence my question to Cheuk Sun, asking whether we are really clear enough about what is right and wrong to be able to legislate. And in similar vein I asked Bartosz Paszcza if he would be proud or ashamed of developing a tool that could hide your online identity.

Bartosz Paszcza also made an entry on my blog, challenging why I’m not more concerned about faceless government employees accessing ‘my’ data. I did have an inward debate when creating the original posting whether to include (and ridicule) such concerns by referencing a YouTube video: 

Perhaps, in hindsight I should have included it.

Topic 2: Me, Myself and I – Multiple Online Identities

When we go online we leave behind a digital footprint; information about what we have accessed and posted. This can be used by individuals, organisations and governments, to assemble a picture of the persona we adopt on the web and, potentially, what we are like in the real world.

So, to what extent should we be concerned – and should we create different online identities to protect ourselves?

If a shop assistant remembers me, and recommends something that I might be interested in, then I’d regard this as good customer service. But when a computer does the same, people argue that it’s an invasion of their privacy.

Further, if a computer scans my e-mails looking for key words, such as names of chemicals used to make a bomb, then I don’t object because I know that this is done as a form of crime prevention but many see this as a perceived erosion of our freedoms.

Eben Moglen
Scull image from Fotolia, Artweaver used to add text.

So what are the threats that might persuade me to create duplicate online identies?

  • Identity theft – where criminals use spam, guess passwords and use computer viruses to access your bank accounts, or clone your identity. The FFA estimates that in the UK alone £247.6 million was lost to credit card fraud in the first six months of 2014.
  • Loss of privacy – where the information you post is used for purposes other than that you intended. However, work is being done to protect our privacy online, for example, new laws are imminent outlawing posting “revenge porn”.
  • Loss of religious and political freedoms – when authoritarian states track electronic communication to curtail protest.

The last point, while not a concern in the UK is emphasised in this Amnesty International posting. Also a number of Iranians were arrested for recording and posting a version of Pharrell Williams’s “Happy”:

Of course, in reality we can’t avoid creating different online identities; the persona you present on LinkdIn will be different from that on Facebook.  But should you go further and deliberately create separate, fragmented persona?

I have explored the advantages and disadvantages of having multiple online identities in a Slideshare presentation:

So, living the UK, should you deliberately fabricate separate online identities? Personally, I don’t think so, but I do follow these tips:

I agree with Costa and Torres: “If we are to encourage people to develop several personas, are we encouraging a responsible environment, or are we creating new playgrounds? Furthermore, how much can we trust a person who ‘owns’ different characters online?” Emphasising these concerns, this article by Awais Rashid talks about internet bullies hiding behind false online identities.

In a sense this is nothing new, we have always had the opportunity change the way that we behave to suit the situation. But pretending to be someone you’re not – online or in the real world – is, in my opinion, not genuine and therefore should not be condoned.

An interesting topic – I suspect we will see very different views.


References:

http://www.internetsociety.org/what-we-do/internet-technology-matters/privacy-identity

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/apr/19/online-identity-authenticity-anonymity

Christopher Soghoian: Government surveillance — this is just the beginning https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrxDrpi1XNU

Cristina Costa and Ricardo Torres, To be or not to be, the importance of Digital Identity in the networked society, Revista Educação, Formação & Tecnologias, n.º extra (Abril, 2011): pp. 47‐53.p, (p. 51)

FFA, Customers Urged to be Vigilant as Fraudsters Increase Spam Attacks, http://www.financialfraudaction.org.uk/cms/assets/1/2014%20h1%20fraud%20figures%20-%20final.pdf

Awais Rashid, Director of Security, Lancaster Research Centre at Lancaster University, With the Right Tech, Online Bullies can be Outsmarted

http://theconversation.com/with-the-right-tech-online-bullies-can-be-outsmarted-16981

Amnesty International, The Internet and Human Rights, http://www.amnesty.org/en/campaigns/irrepressible-info