Topic 2 – Reflection
This week saw my peers and I discuss the arguments for and against more than one online identity. It has been interesting to see the varying approaches which my peers took for this topic, and the spread of discussion has been incredibly beneficial for my understanding of the arguments for and against multiple online identities. Whilst some of my peers (such as Alysia Wildman’s blog post) focussed on the split between authenticity and anonymity in terms of online identities, other peers (such as Georgia Varti’s blog post) focused how social media can be used to create multiple online identities and the arguments for and against these.
I feel the debate between authenticity and anonymity particularly useful in my understanding of the arguments for and against multiple online identities. I feel my arguments centred more on the positives and negatives of anonymity in my blog post, discussing the ability individuals have to harness this anonymity to engage in devious and criminal behaviour, but also the positive abilities to take control and be creative. Having considered the authenticity arguments further, I feel this is an aspect I could have discussed more in detail to improve the quality of my original post. I feel I concentrated more on reliability and credibility rather than authenticity itself. Having undertaken further thought and research, I would argue that it is possible to have multiple online identities and still retain an aspect of authenticity to them; but I feel this authenticity can only apply to the identities where we reveal aspects of our ‘true’ self, such as our names or a picture of ourselves.
Something which particularly caught my attention during this topic was the case study tweeted by Jazmin. I think this case study is useful for our understandings of safety with our online identities and also allows us to consider how authentic the person we are interacting with on the internet may truly be. Just because their online identity appears ‘authentic’ with a picture and a seemingly authentic name, are they? I felt this case study was also particularly useful in supporting my conclusion that the ‘concerns and arguments against multiple online identities tend to arise when these identities are used as a mechanism to anonymously engage in devious behaviour’.
I feel this topic has not only increased my understanding of what an online identity is and how they can be used, why they may be advantageous or disadvantageous, but also how we need to take steps to protect our online identities. Despite reading the vast array of arguments both for and against online identities, I still stand by my conclusion that having multiple online identities can be advantageous if they are utilised in the correct manner. Even with the arguments against multiple online identities, I feel this quote by Costa and Torres (2011) demonstrates that online identities are unavoidable, and so I feel we must now concentrate on the safe use of multiple online identities.
‘Almost all projects and activities that are based on using web tools and applications are actually ways of creating our digital identities, even if that is not their main goal. Every time we open an account for an online service, we are producing a small fragment of our digital identities.’
This topic has taught me to be more aware of my online identity, and ensure my personal identities and professional identities are separate and secure. I will continue to use multiple online identities to separate these aspects of my overall identity, but I will endeavour to make sure these are much more secure than I feel they currently are.
