Anonymity is not to blame here, but rather proximity. People with real real identities tied to their online avatars are just as bad if not worse than anyone else on the internet. ie, they're not anonymous. Internet hostility is more analogous to road rage.
>People with real real identities tied to their online avatars are just as bad if not worse than anyone else on the internet.
So-called "edge lords" and people for whom provocativeness is their brand, perhaps.
But, I don't think that's true for the average person at all. I think we all know this intuitively / empirically, but there have also been studies that bear it out. [0]
>Internet hostility is more analogous to road rage.
No. Road rage is a function of losing one's temper and acting outside of one's self in the moment. Distinctly different from purposely shedding one's identity to engage socially.
Besides that, we're not just talking about hostility, but an overall disposition when one is acting without the social constraints of identity and accountability.
A big fear I have is that the folks who want to do away with anonymity finally win. Most of the negative effects and hostility of social media (youtube, twitter, facebook, etc.) come from named and publicly-identifiable individuals.
>that the folks who want to do away with anonymity finally win
I wasn't aware there was a sizable effort to this effect, and I'm not even sure that I'm proposing it. More just observing the impact of anonymity on society/civility and considering aloud that perhaps the price of anonymity is not worth its perceived benefits.
>Most of the negative effects and hostility of social media (youtube, twitter, facebook, etc.) come from named and publicly-identifiable individuals.
Citation? Because this seems counter to the accepted understanding, multiple studies (see my previous comment) and, anecdotally, my own observations.
But, even allowing that wouldn't preclude that a significant amount of toxicity is also coming from anonymous usage.
