Inside Higher Ed has an account of a response by Princeton University students to JuicyCampus, “where students can call out others by name and make potentially libelous, hateful or damaging statements without apparent consequence.” Below is an excerpt:
The issues raised by anonymity : online, in bathroom graffiti and in more mundane contexts such as defaced or removed posters : aren’t unique to Princeton, whose section on JuicyCampus is relatively tame compared to those of other campuses. But the collective impact of expression that lacks accountability and even contributes to the decay of a campus culture, they believe, led some students to try a more constructive response than calling for banning the site or denouncing those who use it.
The petition declares a”stand against anonymous character assassination, a culture of gossip, and all other acts of ethical and intellectual cowardice.”It continues:”Anonymity may have its place in certain kinds of political speech, journalistic endeavors, and other arenas, but its overuse and abuse is not consistent with the standard of behavior we, as members of an academic community, wish to maintain.”
In response, naturally the Publius trope is raised, as if Publius wasn’t hiding his identity to more effectively manipulate people who otherwise might notice the self-interest of the writer.
–Ann Bartow
I supose one could make the arguement that being anonymous is the same as driving a car. It usualy is human behavior that creates bad results. Should we not have cars? Tough question. Does the term”compromise solution” help?