This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/aug/29/not-safe-use-own-name-online
The article has changed 16 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| What can you do if it's not safe to use your own name online? | What can you do if it's not safe to use your own name online? |
| (about 2 months later) | |
| Jonathan Myerson (Licence to bully, 28 August) is absolutely right: online anonymity is debasing true debate. | Jonathan Myerson (Licence to bully, 28 August) is absolutely right: online anonymity is debasing true debate. |
| Currently arguments about internet governance swing from one extreme – John Kampfner's demand last week for no restrictions at all – to another – Theresa May's desire to track all email traffic. We need a more balanced approach, matching rights to responsibilities. Tackling anonymity is key. | Currently arguments about internet governance swing from one extreme – John Kampfner's demand last week for no restrictions at all – to another – Theresa May's desire to track all email traffic. We need a more balanced approach, matching rights to responsibilities. Tackling anonymity is key. |
| When I call for better child protection on the net the industry responds by saying it's like traffic – parents must teach their children safety. But to go on the road you need a driving licence, and it's an offence not to give your true name and address. The internet needs to grow up – it cannot remain like the forest in the 13th century at the time of Robin Hood, totally outside the law. Myerson's argument is timely and helpful. Helen Goodman MP Shadow minister for media | When I call for better child protection on the net the industry responds by saying it's like traffic – parents must teach their children safety. But to go on the road you need a driving licence, and it's an offence not to give your true name and address. The internet needs to grow up – it cannot remain like the forest in the 13th century at the time of Robin Hood, totally outside the law. Myerson's argument is timely and helpful. Helen Goodman MP Shadow minister for media |
| • Jonathan Myerson has a point about online anonymity facilitating abusive comments. I always use my own name when tweeting or posting online. Either you can defend what you have to say or you should keep quiet. But there are exceptions. First, for a range of reasons – employers being one – not everyone does feel as free as they might wish to say what they want. This goes beyond whistleblowing to the expression of political views. As important is the role of the pseudonym or pen name. Here the writer's name can be discovered, but not easily, and the cloak of relative anonymity allows them to say publicly what they might otherwise not. The Secret Footballer comes to mind. Keith Flett London | • Jonathan Myerson has a point about online anonymity facilitating abusive comments. I always use my own name when tweeting or posting online. Either you can defend what you have to say or you should keep quiet. But there are exceptions. First, for a range of reasons – employers being one – not everyone does feel as free as they might wish to say what they want. This goes beyond whistleblowing to the expression of political views. As important is the role of the pseudonym or pen name. Here the writer's name can be discovered, but not easily, and the cloak of relative anonymity allows them to say publicly what they might otherwise not. The Secret Footballer comes to mind. Keith Flett London |
| • Jonathan Myerson doesn't mention the unhelpful and potentially pernicious exercise in collecting and displaying customers' anonymous comments on services such as restaurants. | • Jonathan Myerson doesn't mention the unhelpful and potentially pernicious exercise in collecting and displaying customers' anonymous comments on services such as restaurants. |
| Looking recently at just such a case I found an instance with three almost slanderous comments interspersed with several glowing testimonies, one of which said "it was so good we went again the next night". It is difficult, if not impossible, to glean anything from such diametrically opposite views, and the aggregate score added little light. More importantly, the owner of the restaurant has little or no opportunity to rebut potentially damaging comments, and may even wonder whether his competitors are posting false messages of dissatisfaction. Alan Gilchrist Brighton | Looking recently at just such a case I found an instance with three almost slanderous comments interspersed with several glowing testimonies, one of which said "it was so good we went again the next night". It is difficult, if not impossible, to glean anything from such diametrically opposite views, and the aggregate score added little light. More importantly, the owner of the restaurant has little or no opportunity to rebut potentially damaging comments, and may even wonder whether his competitors are posting false messages of dissatisfaction. Alan Gilchrist Brighton |
| • It is all very well for Jonathan Myerson to decry online anonymity in the Guardian – he will not suffer the consequences of his writing the article. There are many parts of the world (including the US) where being a member of the LGBT community can result in persecution or death. There are parts of the world where being an atheist can have fatal consequences; in the US atheists can lose their jobs. | • It is all very well for Jonathan Myerson to decry online anonymity in the Guardian – he will not suffer the consequences of his writing the article. There are many parts of the world (including the US) where being a member of the LGBT community can result in persecution or death. There are parts of the world where being an atheist can have fatal consequences; in the US atheists can lose their jobs. |
| Is Myerson saying these people should keep quiet, or perhaps he does not think the consequences of speaking out matter? Pseudonymity (not anonymity) on the internet has given many oppressed people the ability to speak out without fear of reprisal – should this be abandoned to assuage Myerson's tender feelings? Andrew Deacon Leicester | Is Myerson saying these people should keep quiet, or perhaps he does not think the consequences of speaking out matter? Pseudonymity (not anonymity) on the internet has given many oppressed people the ability to speak out without fear of reprisal – should this be abandoned to assuage Myerson's tender feelings? Andrew Deacon Leicester |
| How the US government secretly reads your email | |
| 11 Oct 2011 | |
| Heather Brooke: Secret orders forcing Google and Sonic to release a WikiLeaks volunteer's email reveal the scale of US government snooping | |
| 11 Aug 2011 | |
| Rioting leads to Cameron call for social media clampdown | |
| 2 Apr 2012 | |
| How to hide emails from government snooping | |
| 2 Apr 2012 | |
| Internet companies warn over government email surveillance plans | |
| 2 Apr 2010 | |
| More must be done to stop cyberbullies | |
| 'Online snooping' scheme expected to cost at least £1.8bn | |
| 14 Jun 2012 | |
| Home Office reveals pricetag for tracking emails, phone use and Facebook and Twitter accounts as Theresa May attacks critics as 'conspiracy theorists' | |
| Turn autoplay off | |
| Turn autoplay on | |
| Please activate cookies in order to turn autoplay off | |
| Edition: UK | |
| About us | |
| Today's paper | |
| Subscribe | |
| Letters | |
| Jonathan Myerson (Licence to bully, 28 August) is absolutely right: online anonymity is debasing true debate. | |
| Currently arguments about internet governance swing from one extreme – John Kampfner's demand last week for no restrictions at all – to another – Theresa May's desire to track all email traffic. We need a more balanced approach, matching rights to responsibilities. Tackling anonymity is key. | |
| When I call for better child protection on the net the industry responds by saying it's like traffic – parents must teach their children safety. But to go on the road you need a driving licence, and it's an offence not to give your true name and address. The internet needs to grow up – it cannot remain like the forest in the 13th century at the time of Robin Hood, totally outside the law. Myerson's argument is timely and helpful. Helen Goodman MP Shadow minister for media | |
| • Jonathan Myerson has a point about online anonymity facilitating abusive comments. I always use my own name when tweeting or posting online. Either you can defend what you have to say or you should keep quiet. But there are exceptions. First, for a range of reasons – employers being one – not everyone does feel as free as they might wish to say what they want. This goes beyond whistleblowing to the expression of political views. As important is the role of the pseudonym or pen name. Here the writer's name can be discovered, but not easily, and the cloak of relative anonymity allows them to say publicly what they might otherwise not. The Secret Footballer comes to mind. Keith Flett London | |
| • Jonathan Myerson doesn't mention the unhelpful and potentially pernicious exercise in collecting and displaying customers' anonymous comments on services such as restaurants. | |
| Looking recently at just such a case I found an instance with three almost slanderous comments interspersed with several glowing testimonies, one of which said "it was so good we went again the next night". It is difficult, if not impossible, to glean anything from such diametrically opposite views, and the aggregate score added little light. More importantly, the owner of the restaurant has little or no opportunity to rebut potentially damaging comments, and may even wonder whether his competitors are posting false messages of dissatisfaction. Alan Gilchrist Brighton | |
| • It is all very well for Jonathan Myerson to decry online anonymity in the Guardian – he will not suffer the consequences of his writing the article. There are many parts of the world (including the US) where being a member of the LGBT community can result in persecution or death. There are parts of the world where being an atheist can have fatal consequences; in the US atheists can lose their jobs. | |
| Is Myerson saying these people should keep quiet, or perhaps he does not think the consequences of speaking out matter? Pseudonymity (not anonymity) on the internet has given many oppressed people the ability to speak out without fear of reprisal – should this be abandoned to assuage Myerson's tender feelings? Andrew Deacon Leicester |