If Michael Scott has flaws, then it is only logical that each and every one of my proposed solutions will have flaws. I gave you pros and cons for each of them, and in the end they all had a similar outcome: loss of privacy, and an acquisition of unwarranted power.
- With the introduction of an Internet ID the government gains access to a variety of information to use in whichever way they see fit, and consumers are susceptible to an invasion of privacy
- By policing students you are giving schools jurisdiction of something that occurs outside school boundaries, and asking them to take action on something that belongs to the parents
- Should the IPA act ever pass in New York, websites will be given the power to remove any comments, unless you attach your identity.
The introduction of any of these programs could be potentially beneficial, but we must ask ourselves if the benefits will outweigh the negative effects that may accompany them. Some argue that taking away the ability to be anonymous may appear to solve the problem of removing trolls will only create a bigger problem. A study done by Livefyre found that
"Most of those surveyed responded anonymously (or pseudonymously) because they didn’t want their opinions to impact their work or professional life by being attached to their real names. And close to 80 percent of those surveyed said that if a site forced them to login with their offline identity, they would choose not to comment at all."
(Ingram, 2014)
Check out this cool infographic, courtesy of Livefyre
No comments:
Post a Comment