been undermined or when information about a particular social context has been obscured in ways that subvert people’s ability to make an informed decision about what to reveal. This is why people feel so disempowered by technological moves where they feel as though they cannot properly manage the social situation.

In unmediated contexts, choosing when or how to reveal one’s name allows people to meaningfully control a social situation. For example, when a barista asks a customer for her name, it is common for the customer to provide only her first name. There are also customers who provide a nickname or a fake name when asked for such information, particularly if their name is obscure, hard to pronounce, or overly identifiable. The customs involved in sharing one’s name differ around the world and across different social contexts. In some settings, it is common to only provide one’s last name (for example, “Mr. Smith”). In other settings, people identify themselves solely in relationship to another person (for example, “Bobby’s father”). People interpret a social situation and share their name based on how comfortable they are and what they think is appropriate.

When people are expected to lead with their names, their power to control a social situation is undermined. Power shifts. The observer, armed with a search engine and identifiable information, has greater control over the social situation than the person presenting information about themselves. The loss of control is precisely why such situations feel so public. Yet, ironically, the sites that promise privacy and control are often those that demand users to reveal their names.

Who is in Control?

Battles over identity, anonymity, pseudonymity, and “real names” are not over. New systems are regularly developed and users continue to struggle with how to navigate information disclosure. What is at stake is not simply a matter of technology; identity in online spaces is a complex interplay of design, business, and social issues. There is also no way to simply graft what people are doing online onto what they might do offline; networked technology shifts how people engage with one another.

Thus, it is important to move away from offline metaphors in order to address the complexity of people’s mediated interactions.

The “real names” debate goes beyond identification technologies and economic interests. Regardless of the business implications, the issue of whether or not to mandate “real names” is fundamentally one of power and control. To what degree do designers want to hold power over their users versus empower them to develop social norms? To what degree do companies want to maintain control over their systems versus enable users to have control over their self-presentation and actions?

These are complex socio-technical questions with no clear technical or policy solution. Furthermore, even though design plays a significant role in shaping how people engage with new technologies, it is the interplay between a system and its users that determines how it will play out in the wild. Design decisions can inform social practices, but they cannot determine them. As with all complex systems, control is not in the hands of any individual actor—designer, user, engineer, or poli-cymaker—but rather the product of the socio-technical ecosystem. Those who lack control within this ecosystem resist attempts by others to assert control. Thus, finding a stabilized solution requires engaging with the ecosystem as a whole.

 

References

1. banks, e. eric schmidt: If you don’t want to use your real name, don’t use google+. Mashable (aug. 28, 2011); http://mashable.com/2011/08/28/google-plus- identity-service/.

2. Dash, anil. If your Website’s full of a-------, it’s your fault. A Blog About Making Culture (july 20, 2011); http://bitly.com/jaykts.

3. fake, C. anonymity and pseudonyms in social software. Caterina.net (july 26, 2011); http://caterina. net/wp-archives/88.

4. lessig, l. Code: And Other Laws of Cyberspace. basic books, new york, 1999.

5. madrigal, a. Why facebook and google’s concept of ‘real names’ is revolutionary. Atlantic Monthly, (aug. 5, 2011); http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/ archive/2011/08/why-facebook-and-googles-concept- of-real-names-is-revolutionary/243171/.

6. skud. preliminary results of my survey of suspended google+ accounts. Info Tropism (july 25, 2011); http:// infotrope.net/2011/07/25/preliminary-results-of-my- survey-of-suspended-google-accounts/.

 

danah boyd ( [e-mail]) is a senior researcher at microsoft research, a research assistant professor in media, Culture, and Communication at new york university, a visiting researcher at harvard law school, a fellow at harvard’s berkman Center, and an adjunct associate professor at the university of new south Wales.

Copyright held by author.

Calendar
of Events

august 17–19 International conference on Security of Internet of things, amritapuri, India, Sponsored: SIGSac, contact: rangan Venkat, email: [e-mail]

august 21–24
Information Interaction
in context: 2012,
nijmegen, netherlands,
contact: Kraaij wessel,
email: [e-mail]

august 26–29
advances in Social networks
analysis and Mining 2012,
Istanbul, turkey,
Sponsored: SIGMOd,
contact: can fazli,
email: [e-mail]

august 27–29
12th International conference
on Quality Software,
Xi’an china,
contact: Zhou Xingshe,
email: [e-mail]

august 28–31
asia Pacific conference on
computer human Interaction,
Matue-city, Shimane Japan,
Sponsored: SIGchI,
contact: Kentaro Go,
email: [e-mail]

September 3–6
8th International IcSt
conference on Security and
Privacy in communication
networks,
Padua, Italy,
contact: Mauro conti,
email: [e-mail]

September 4–6
24th International teletraffic
congress,
Krakow, Poland,
contact: Papir Zdazisaaw,
email: [e-mail]

September 4–7
acM Symposium on document
engineering,
Paris, france,
Sponsored: SIGweB,
contact: cyril concolato,
email: [e-mail]

September 6–8
the International workshop on
Internationalisation of Products
and Systems,
Bangalore, Kanatak India,
contact: apala lahiri chavan,
email: [e-mail]