Helen Lewis

News and views about writing, eating, gaming and watching

Normal person + internet anonymity = ?

Talking on Woman's Hour about sexist trolling online.

By Helen Lewis Published 14 November 2011 18:08

This morning, on Radio 4's Woman's Hour, I think I managed to shock Jane Garvey by relating some of the lowlights from the stories of sexist abuse I've been told in the last few weeks.

We talked about whether women get more abuse, how comment threads could be moderated and what percentage of commenters are abusive. "People are just really nasty on the internet," said my fellow guest Tamara Littleton, of e-Moderation.

We didn't have time to get into it on the programme, but one of the most interesting things to come out of the discussion is whether anonymity is the problem (you can see a light-hearted treatment of that here). I can see the arguments against insisting on real names -- because those in sensitive jobs may feel inhibited from commenting otherwise -- but I think that discussion forums should encourage users to invest in an identity, to take pride in their contributions.

The Guardian, for example, does this with commenters' profiles, so you can see everything a person has written and many sites require registration with an email address. Another interesting suggestion I've heard in the last couple of days is charging a nominal one-off fee - say 20p - for your first comment.

The NS's own David Allen Green, meanwhile, uses pre-moderation on his personal blog, and said this gives the comment section a "letters to the editor" feel.

You can listen to the segment from Woman's Hour here. It's about 20 minutes into the programme.

Tags: feminism

More from Helen Lewis

23 comments

Wed, 2011-11-16 19:29 — Chris McCray (not verified)

I don;t suppose anyone took a screenshot or Freezepage of David Allen Green's tweet? It's linked in the article at this URL:

https://twitter.com/#!/davidallengreen/status/135870349794488320

but it no longer exists.

Mon, 2011-11-14 18:29 — Bunnyrunner (not verified)

What I fail to understand is why this abuse happens at all. What makes apparently normal human beings feel the need to attack and abuse the simple act of writting.

Mon, 2011-11-14 18:31 — Maxine (not verified)

Totally behind the 20p for first comment, for the benefit of those who feel bizarrely compelled to comment on articles saying 'I couldn't care less about this.'

Mon, 2011-11-14 18:49 — Dom (not verified)

The John Gabriel Greater Internet Theory:
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/3/19/

Mon, 2011-11-14 18:49 — Frankie (not verified)

They see me trollin' they hatin'.

Sat, 2011-11-19 05:44 — Anon (not verified)

the abusers are a small price to pay for genuine free speech and instant, global insight

some women just need to be a lot more careful online, throwing their dox all over the web, and taking some of this shit to heart

Mon, 2011-11-14 20:17 — Flashbuck (not verified)

Yawn

Wed, 2011-11-16 01:00 — Dr_Paul

Authors getting abusive messages on discussion websites is not nice, and is a sorry reflection of the senders' mentality, but if sites had proper moderation -- that is, any postings are monitored prior to their appearing -- such comments would not appear, nor would the spam (as shown by the previous posting) for that matter. Authors should demand comment moderation, and this website should apply it to all comments.

Mon, 2011-11-14 22:47 — CountMeIn (not verified)

I just hope that this isn't an attempt to shut down all debate on feminism, much of it is truly barking mad. I agree that nobody should have to tolerate rape and murder threats but the Guardian's wimmin (Isabella Mackie for one) have recently used the word "abuse" to describe no more than honest, polite disagreement. What amounts to "abuse" and who decides?

Mon, 2011-11-14 23:05 — Will (not verified)

The NS is one of the worst offenders when it comes to trolls. Not the usual way in which trolls try to be funny (and in some cases sometimes are), but in a particularly humourles, spiteful, vindictive, snidey middle-class way. There's a really nasty undercurrent of pretensiosness and angst on these pages when certain types of people disagree with something they read. Take any article on Stephen Fry, or any of these middle-class icons, or an article about religion or God*, and as soon as someone dares to express an opinion that doesn't sit well with the 6th form style consensus this pseudo-intellectual sneering starts.

I'm personally more comfortable in a pub where people resort to violence or traditional forms of verbal abuse, but I expect the kind of people I'm referring to wouldn't understand that

(*Disclaimer: Just because I mentioned religion and God it doesn't mean I either believe in God or am religious, they just seem to be the subjects which make certain types unable to communicate without a heavy layer of sarcasm and pomposity)

Wed, 2011-11-16 05:14 — bungie.net admin (not verified)

how very right wing of u doc paul - please piss off forever :)
_________

it says at the top she talks about gaming, but where are these articles?

injecting an even mild feminist slant into such a inexorably misogynistic world would be explosive

it needs to happen

Wed, 2011-11-16 11:29 — frances smith (not verified)

some times naughty comments are funny, and to be honest, if i am reading articles on line i sometimes go straight to the comments and don't mess around with the article.

there are, you know, helen, places where people can get paid for leaving comments, so be careful you don't annoy your audience too much.

Wed, 2011-11-16 12:19 — Des Demona (not verified)

@Bunnyrunner
It happens because there are people like this -

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/nov/15/jerusalem-mayor-battle-ortho...

-in the world. Gross mysoginy hiding behind religion.

Not the only cause obviously, but when swathes of religions (mainly the beardie weirdie adherents, strangely enough - is there some kind of connection between beards and mysoginy?) have this kind of attitude then it does make you despair.

Having said that, no doubt many of these abusers online are just sad, pathetic losers whose only way to make themselves feel important is to abuse others, especially women, as they probably can't get laid.

Tue, 2011-11-15 00:21 — Steve (not verified)

How am I supposed to give you 20p Helen?

Tue, 2011-11-15 01:08 — IOU (not verified)

20P

You know who.

Tue, 2011-11-15 01:12 — tri_pOlar Loony (not verified)

iIt's more fun using different names, spelling, writingg styles and you know what. its funny for the reader.

Tue, 2011-11-15 01:29 — Mr. Divine (not verified)

But now I am saved by Jesus Christ. I am going to say nothing from now on. Goodbye. And thank you very much but I have to go for my own good.

Tue, 2011-11-15 04:35 — visconti DAMNED (not verified)

"many sites require registration with an email address."

http://10minutemail.com/10MinuteMail/index.html

er, sorry hel, when you come out with stuff like this, giving you a nicely paid job in i.t. journalism just looks like positive discrimination

when you say or do stupid stuff online, you get trolled, end of

Tue, 2011-11-15 04:39 — visconti DAMNED (not verified)

also, from a left-wing, ahem, NS pov, trolling represents equality - it's saying, "ok, you went to a public school, i didn't, but fuck you any way :)"

offline, when or where can you do that? ;)