Technology evolves much faster than humanity’s understanding of how to ethically use it. One profound example of this disconnect, the internet (and by extension social media), spawned what is commonly known as “trolling”, or the deliberate act of attempting to irritate someone through making malicious comments. Some trolls, empowered by their anonymity, have driven individuals to suicide or tormented the families of murder victims. Julie Zhuo of the New York Times discusses the phenomenon of anonymity licensing poor behavior in her article “Where Anonymity Breeds Contempt”. In the piece, Zhuo analyzes several examples of extremely harmful trolling, granting insight into the minds of people who perpetrate it. Zhuo begins by acknowledging
…show more content…
Or are they merely convenient social constructs, suggestions that people selfishly obey simply for their own benefit? Although social psychology currently lacks satisfactory answers to these questions, these events make the topic impossible to ignore. Social psychologists may disagree on how morality should be discussed and what specifics should be left to philosophers, but it is rapidly becoming apparent that social psychologists have a role to play in figuring out some of these answers. Morality may always represent a clouded topic, but social psychologists are among the few capable of empirically studying some characteristics of it. This ability arguably comes with a responsibility to do so. However, the picture is not entirely bleak and abstract. Zhou continues her article by discussing the various ways fed up individuals can strike back against internet trolling. Some forums and online communities have employed moderators to cull blatantly trollish comments. On a larger scale, every state in the USA has anti-harassment and stalking laws that “cover electronic forms of communication”. Huge content providers, such as Facebook, have taken steps to eliminate anonymity by placing the individual’s face and city next to any comment he or she
Or are they merely convenient social constructs, suggestions that people selfishly obey simply for their own benefit? Although social psychology currently lacks satisfactory answers to these questions, these events make the topic impossible to ignore. Social psychologists may disagree on how morality should be discussed and what specifics should be left to philosophers, but it is rapidly becoming apparent that social psychologists have a role to play in figuring out some of these answers. Morality may always represent a clouded topic, but social psychologists are among the few capable of empirically studying some characteristics of it. This ability arguably comes with a responsibility to do so. However, the picture is not entirely bleak and abstract. Zhou continues her article by discussing the various ways fed up individuals can strike back against internet trolling. Some forums and online communities have employed moderators to cull blatantly trollish comments. On a larger scale, every state in the USA has anti-harassment and stalking laws that “cover electronic forms of communication”. Huge content providers, such as Facebook, have taken steps to eliminate anonymity by placing the individual’s face and city next to any comment he or she