|
A Wonderful Lack of Information: Anonymity is good.
|
By Allan T. Price
[Hits: 9366]
|
|
When you talk to people online there is a wonderful lack ofbackground information. Generally, I'm in favour of the'all-the-information-you-can-get-your hands-on' theory, but inthis case less is better. Talk to someone face-to-face and youcan't help making judgements about them, based on their height,race, clothes, gender etc. Sandra Bullock said on the 'OprahWinfrey Show' that she'd met a redneck with tattoos, a baseballcap, and work boots, and had assumed that he was both racist andstupid. She was surprised when this 'redneck' spoke like anormal person, and they had an intelligent conversationtogether.
Talking to people over the Internet you don't see their heightor their race. You only know about their tattoos if they tellyou about them. You don't know if they look gay, or if they aregay. Don't know if they are deaf, or in a wheelchair. You don'teven know what country they're in unless you ask. All you get isa screen name which gives you some hint as to the kind of personthey are. Being self-chosen, this 'name' 'tells' you more aboutthe person than their family, country, or religion. It oftentells you what THEY think is important about them. Someone whopicks the screen name 'Padme_Skywalker' is a Star Wars fan andthat is a significant fact about them. It is more specific thanif their screen name is 'MusicWeaver' or 'CakeLover'.
All our relationships with anonymous people have an equal andegalitarian starting point. In many cases it is an optimisticbeginning that assumes people are interesting, intelligent, andmoderately good until they show otherwise. A few people seem toassume everyone is a fool or a criminal, but that is theirchoice and everyone still gets the same start with them. Thanksto this anonymity, people who hate Muslims or Christians, blacksor whites, Germans or gays, might unknowingly talk to someonethey would otherwise hate. They might get to know their enemy asa person before they find out that their new friend is 'one ofthem'.
Or someone might start talking to 'Padme_Skywalker' and justassume that all Star Wars fans are Americans. Then minutes orweeks later ask her want she thinks of the racial violence inGermany and find that she has lived in Germany all of her life,and belongs to the group the violence is targeted against. Plus,she is happy to give her first-hand impressions of these events.
Naturally, you don't need to rely on luck for these personalinsights. If there is a controversy in California about gaymarriage, or about Muslims headscarves in France, you can goonline looking for people who live on the spot and ask themabout it. I love this aspect of the Internet: being able toconnect with anyone, anywhere, anytime.
Summary - Face-to-face we can't avoid judging people by the waythey look. Online we only know what people choose to share, sojudgmental separatists might talk to their 'enemies' withoutknowing it, even until they've become friends with their'opposites'. We can also talk to people about the state ofinternational events at the actual scene to get personalinsights into the situation.
|
|
|
|
