Выбрать главу

Then along comes Google Plus, thinking that it can just dictate a “real names” policy. Only, they made a huge mistake. They allowed the tech crowd to join within 48 hours of launching. The thing about the tech crowd is that it has a long history of nicks and handles and pseudonyms. And this crowd got to define the early social norms of the site, rather than being socialized into the norms set up by trusting college students who had joined a site that they thought was college-only. This was not a recipe for “real name” norm setting. Quite the opposite. Worse for Google... Tech folks are VERY happy to speak LOUDLY when they’re pissed off. So while countless black and Latino folks have been using nicks all over Facebook (just like they did on MySpace, by the way), they never loudly challenged Facebook’s policy. There was more of a “live and let live” approach to this. Not so lucky for Google and its name-bending community. Folks are now PISSED OFF.

Personally, I’m ecstatic to see this much outrage. And I’m really really glad to see seriously privileged people take up the issue, because while they are the least likely to actually be harmed by “real names” policies, they have the authority to be able to speak truth to power. And across the web, I’m seeing people highlight that this issue has more depth to it than fun names (and is a whole lot more complicated than boiling it down to being about anonymity, as Facebook’s Randi Zuckerberg foolishly did).

What’s at stake is people’s right to protect themselves, their right to actually maintain a form of control that gives them safety. If companies like Facebook and Google are actually committed to the safety of its users, they need to take these complaints seriously. Not everyone is safer by giving out their real name. Quite the opposite; many people are far LESS safe when they are identifiable. And those who are least safe are often those who are most vulnerable.

Likewise, the issue of reputation must be turned on its head when thinking about marginalized people. Folks point to the issue of people using pseudonyms to obscure their identity and, in theory, “protect” their reputation. The assumption baked into this is that the observer is qualified to actually assess someone’s reputation. All too often, and especially with marginalized people, the observer takes someone out of context and judges them inappropriately based on what they get online. Let me explain this in a concrete example that many of you have heard before. Years ago, I received a phone call from an Ivy League college admissions officer who wanted to accept a young black man from South Central in LA into their college; the student had written an application about how he wanted to leave behind the gang-ridden community he came from, but the admissions officers had found his MySpace which was filled with gang insignia. The question that was asked of me was “Why would he lie to us when we can tell the truth online?” Knowing that community, I was fairly certain that he was being honest with the college; he was also doing what it took to keep himself alive in his community. If he had used a pseudonym, the college wouldn’t have been able to get data out of context about him and inappropriately judge him. But they didn’t. They thought that their frame mattered most. I really hope that he got into that school.

There is no universal context, no matter how many times geeks want to tell you that you can be one person to everyone at every point. But just because people are doing what it takes to be appropriate in different contexts, to protect their safety, and to make certain that they are not judged out of context, doesn’t mean that everyone is a huckster. Rather, people are responsibly and reasonably responding to the structural conditions of these new media. And there’s nothing acceptable about those who are most privileged and powerful telling those who aren’t that it’s OK for their safety to be undermined. And you don’t guarantee safety by stopping people from using pseudonyms, but you do undermine people’s safety by doing so.

Thus, from my perspective, enforcing “real names” policies in online spaces is an abuse of power.

This article first appeared on the author's website at http://zephoria.org

Criminal of Innocence

Travis McCrea

Charlie walked into class on Wednesday, like he did every Wednesday (and as he did every Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, and Friday as well). This was, however, not an average Wednesday, as after the announce­ments were over, a girl walked into his class room, and delivered a note to Mr. Wiener (pronounced Whiner, but this did not stop the junior class from making the jokes).

“This is going to be me, I just know it.” Charlie said to himself. Of course, he said this to himself every time a note came into his class, as did every other student.

Charlie Wells was a 16 year old boy, who grew up in a small town in Kansas, just south of Topeka. A sandy haired boy, who had good grades, good friends, and was a good athlete. His favorite sport was wrestling, which had a meet coming up this Friday. Charlie was shorter than most of his classmates, but in general a high achiever. Rarely got in trouble at home, and never got in trouble at school (even won a student of the month award once).

“Mr. Wells,” Mr. Wee-ner always seemed to have a condescending tone, he could tell someone they won the lottery, and they would instantly think of all the things their parents taught them about money. “You have been requested to the office by Mr. Jay.”

Mr. Jay was the vice principal of the school, though typically the stu­dents call this position the “disciplinary principal” around adults. Though, when they were in private they would of course call him “Mr. BJ” due to high school students uncanny ability to find a sexual reference in anything.

“Will I need to take my stuff?” Charlie asked, as does every student who is being called out of the room, there should be a check box on the little slip that comes to the room… of course Mr. Wiener knows about as much about this trip to the office as Charlie does. Mr. Wiener simply told him to leave his stuff under his desk and he can get it after his meeting, and if class was over he would set it on the counter.

As annoying as Mr. Wiener was, Charlie always had a certain respect for him. Sure he sounded condescending, but Charlie’s voice was still relat­ively high and he mocked himself that he sounded like a girl. That’s not his fault as much as it was Wiener’s for sounding like a dick (there it is again). Wiener always looked out for his students, and on more than one occasion has even wrote Charlie a late pass to his next class, just so he could stay and finish up some math problems, so he wouldn’t have homework.

Charlie didn’t even see the girl who brought the note leave, he must have been in the zone or just didn’t care, but now as he walked to the office he wanted the company of that girl. He didn’t even know her name, she looked like she might be a freshman, “How do you even be­come the office helper person?” he quietly thought to himself.

Charlie didn’t want to talk to the girl because he was particularly attrac­ted to her, though at his age he was attracted to anything with breasts, he simply wanted to stop thinking about what awaited him at the office.“They caught me for using the proxy to check my Facespace account.”