Perils of Online Public Shaming: The Masked Cruelty of Anonymity

There has been a long history of using shame to criticize others for obstructing the acceptable standards or morals. Pressure is placed on others to conform to the norms of society, even though everyone has different beliefs. People depend on others for accepting their beliefs to become a part of a community. However, the differences among beliefs lead to the criticism of others to justify their own beliefs. In today’s internet age, publicly criticizing others has become more dangerous and more prevalent as the use of social media rises.

Anonymity allows people to criticize others without facing consequences. The ones being criticized are nonetheless humiliated and are seen as unworthy or failures. As Jon Ronson demonstrates in his book So You’ve Been Publicly Shamed, public shaming has become an easily accessible, yet excessive, way to punish people for disrespecting their opinions as people are stripped of their individualities. Similarly, Alison Chandra presents her own experiences with public shaming in her article published on Vox as she is criticized on a social media platform where morals are lost, and individuality torn apart.

Get quality help now

writer-Charlotte

Verified writer

Proficient in: Public Shaming

4.7 (348)

“ Amazing as always, gave her a week to finish a big assignment and came through way ahead of time. ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

Although public shaming encourages good behavior to an extent, it is often misused by anonymous online users and ineffectively promotes acceptable behaviors.

With the rise of social media in today’s internet age, people are forming communities to justify moral judgements. People are influenced by others on social media making it a useful tool in spreading awareness and discussing the rights and wrongs of society. It can be a useful tool as people are able to discuss these topics anonymously while being protected by screens.

People are then more empowered to discuss topics freely. With anonymity, people are able to communicate ideas that otherwise would not be discussed due to the fear of other people’s judgements. However, the usefulness of this online tool is beneficial to an extent, and, if not used properly, could drive people to say extreme things that would be detrimental towards the online community.

Though the use of anonymity could be helpful in promoting good behaviors, people also carelessly overuse this power, which communicates bad behaviors. Ronson discusses an online user’s experience as she is criticized for posting what could be interpreted as racist comments online. Justine Sacco faces immediate backlash on Twitter from other anonymous users after being quickly exposed by an online user for tweeting something racist. Users replied back online discussing her “disgusting racist tweet,...[and were] beyond horrified”(Ronson 69). Millions of users who knew about her tweet were waiting for “this @JustineSacco bitch [to] get fired”(Ronson 70). All this public backlash from online users escalated quickly and led to her losing her job.

The use of anonymous online accounts made her situation explode out of proportion, while it could have been avoided if these anonymous users did not exist. Sacco’s situation portrays just how quickly things can get out of hand. Users are able to anonymously post and criticize others without the fear or worry of other’s perceptions of their ideas. This makes people say things that they otherwise would not say in person, because they do not have to deal with any consequences. The outrage was so widespread and would not stop until she was fired from her job. Screens and usernames protect users by forming a detachment from their real identities. Therefore, they are able to post their honest opinions without facing any backlash in their real lives.

The absence of authoritative figures online means no regulations of what can or cannot be posted. This removes the benefits of public shaming as anything could be said to one another, right or wrong. Ronson also discusses the backlash faced by an author, Jonah Lehrer, who is accused of plagiarism as he is consistently attacked on Twitter by anonymous users. As Lehrer publicly apologizes, people are constantly “stabbing and stabbing and stabbing Jonah” with harsh comments saying his “speech should be titled ‘Recognizing self-deluded assholes and how to avoid them in the future’” (Ronson 47, 51). There are no limits to the criticisms online, so people are able to say things like “kill her” or “cut out her uterus with an xacto knife” without getting punished for saying such crude things, while being protected with anonymous identities (Ronson 120). Without authorities to prevent anonymous users from making extreme comments, people push the power of anonymity to the limit in destroying other users.

Furthermore, online users gain power from being anonymous and from having no restrictions as to what can be said online. Users abuse this power and feed off one another by using each other as excuses to continue to attack users rendering the victims of the attacks powerless. Recently, the use of social media has risen, because of so many technological advancements that allow people to remain anonymous online. More and more people are using these online tools to criticize one another. And with the widespread use, people find it as an excuse to continue criticizing people, because they think that if other people are doing it, then they are able to do it.

An author of a Vox article online, discusses how her tweet about her suffering child is constantly getting attacked by anonymous users. She is constantly attacked, because the anonymous users gain power from each other to find excuses to continue attacking her. She tried “to keep up with the flood of [of comments] and even attempted to reason with some of the haters, but…realized quickly that is was useless” a factor being “the sheer number of comments” that she had received (Chandra). Chandra is left powerless compared to the anonymous online users as they are able to constantly attack her and she is unable to do anything to stop them. Anonymous online users are in a two-way street of gaining power from other attackers and constantly putting down powerless users.

In the online community, people are unable to communicate with others face to face. People are anonymous online and lose seeing or recognizing the humanity in other online users. They forget the fact that online users are people with feelings and lives beyond just their online presences. Social media removes the ability to see other user’s reactions such as the shame and suffering they face. Anonymous users misuse social media and do not recognize the humanity of other online users. In Alison Chandra’s article on Vox, she is attacked by anonymous users and is met with comments that are extremely inhumane.

People went to extremes “offer[ing] a .22 bullet” threatening her life or the life of her beloved child (Chandra). She would have definitely not received comments like this if they were to see her in person, because they would face the reality that she is an actual human being and that her story is true. Ronson discusses how Jonah Lehrer “broken and that people mistake it for shamelessness” after the attacks “like he was something not quite human that had adopted human form” (Ronson 81).

Lehrer was dehumanized and broken as people instantly commented on his faults without any context of who Lehrer was or recognizing him as a human being, as someone who has a life beyond social media. A one-way observation is formed on the victims of the attackers and unfairly exposes them. Social media removes the nuances of seeing others suffer and also the shame of making others suffer. These both require face to face contact to recognize the humanity in others.

The widespread abuse of anonymous online identities to publicly shame others does not correct unacceptable behaviors, but destroys people completely. People think that by publicly criticizing someone online, that they are doing something beneficial. However, it gets out of hand and can turn detrimental when millions are constantly attacking a single person for believing in something different. It leaves the victims of these attacks utterly destroyed and humiliated for a small mistake when looking at the big picture of how it could impact people’s lives. There is no justification in publicly humiliating someone in front of millions of people when problems such as having differing opinions can be resolved face to face. Public shaming only pushes anonymous attackers to go to the extreme in saying things they would not say in person.

When it comes to defining acceptable behaviors and morals, social media can be useful to an extent, but by being anonymous, people abuse this power, making it an ineffective way to define these behaviors. Victims of these attackers should not let their past define their futures in online communities, because there is no need to accept attacker’s opinions. There are more positive methods to define acceptable behaviors such as rewarding for good behaviors rather than negatively criticizing bad behaviors. People will judge others regardless of what they do, so learning to be able to ignore the hate and learning from past mistakes will encourage people to move forward and to not waste any more time or energy on anonymous attackers as this time and energy can be applied elsewhere to become more productive members of society.