Abstract
Anonymity on the Internet is a contentious issue; by some seen as an important freedom to be protected, while others argue for increased identification to protect groups at risk of exploitation. The debate reflects a dichotomous view of online anonymity; you are, or you are not anonymous. However, anonymity is a complex process played out on different levels and defined by various actors. While empirical studies show this, theoretical synthesis is lacking. This essay provides perspective on anonymity online by comparing two critical cases, online auctions and online gaming, we corroborate results from a 4-year interdisciplinary project with researchers from sociology, economics, and computer and system sciences. We argue that one should talk about anonymities in plural form, as online anonymity is not a state but a relational process. We put forth a conceptual model, which unpacks online anonymity as interdependent macro structures – legal, commercial, and technological – and micro/meso facets – factual, social group, and physical – to be used in future research.
Highlights
Anonymity on the Internet has become a contentious issue; it protects freedom of speech yet hampers accountability of, for example, crime or harassment
While a great deal has been written about online anonymity in the early days of the Internet (e.g. Donath, 2002; Turkle, 1995) as well as more recently (Sharon and John, 2018) most studies have focused on anonymous communication on a micro level, such as user expressions and experiences of online anonymity in person-to-person interaction
Studying our two cases has showed us that online anonymity cannot be placed on a single scale but should be understood as a multileveled phenomenon consisting of three regulating structures – legal, commercial, and technological on a macro and – identity bearing information conveyed in three main forms; by factual information, social group membership, and embodied expressions on micro/meso level
Summary
Anonymity on the Internet has become a contentious issue; it protects freedom of speech yet hampers accountability of, for example, crime or harassment. Studying our two cases has showed us that online anonymity cannot be placed on a single scale but should be understood as a multileveled phenomenon consisting of three regulating structures – legal, commercial, and technological on a macro and – identity bearing information conveyed in three main forms; by factual information, social group membership, and embodied expressions on micro/meso level. Factual anonymity pertains to information about individuals (and other entities) linked to them as legal entities and in our two cases we see how users both are and are not factually known on the same sites, at the same time, depending on if we look at it from the platform owners’ or users’ perspectives. Playing an online game together or selling things on online auctions under a handle, an individual can reveal key social identity features – willingly or unwillingly – which will tell others about who we are; which in turn affect interaction between users. Structures and facets affect each other as people interact and context shape their interrelated importance
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
