The article focused on the psychological toll such a profession would have on someone and how counseling and higher pay incentives should be offered for the work. One sad and disturbing fact is that these jobs are in extremely high demand since there are so many social networking sites and other websites centered around user-generated content. And reading about the terrible images that content moderators are exposed to (sexual and violent content involving children and animals, for example) really made me wonder whether the anonymity of the internet brings out individuals’ darkest thoughts.
While I’m certainly not suggesting that the internet would be a better place if it wasn’t anonymous, I do wonder whether people would continue to post obscene content under their own name. Below is a YouTube video of a panel discussion in which Jimmy Wales, Andrew Keen, and Micah Sifry discuss how we can maintain civility on the internet.
As Andrew Keen points out, content on Facebook and Twitter, neither of which are anonymous, is much more civil. But I feel as though making the internet not anonymous would be taking away part of its essence. It is such an important outlet for individuals who live in places where they aren’t allowed to voice their opinion. But there must be a way to stop the posting of content that necessitates “screeners.”
Interesting post Lana. The Internet is truly a blessing and a curse. When it's used for good (groundbreaking research, academic link-ups, etc.) the possibilities are endless for a better world. However, as you point out, with so much anonymous content out there, we also are sometimes exposed to some not so great things. The U.S. is based on freedom of speech, but laws have to apply to Internet content as well.
ReplyDeleteLana:
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed watching the video you integrated into you blog. Hearing Wikipedia's founder talk about the internet is interesting. I would tend to agree more with Mr. Keen, he has excellent points concerning the internet, especially the fact that there is plenty of anonymity. People tend to hide behind their keyboards when signed under a given name. Websites that don't allow anonymity, like Facebook, do indeed, have better, more appropriate person to person interactions. I particularly agree with Mr. Sifry, who had excellent points that anonymity isn't necessarily a negative thing. Good post.
It's interesting how you talk about "screeners" and how they are doing a lot of work in the US and it seems odd to us not to be able to put EVERYTHING we want on the internet. My friend just went to China for the last couple of months and he literally had to use an illegal tool to access half the websites that he would usually go on, just because they were screened in China. Facebook did not work, as well as various world cup watching sites. To those living in China this is very normal whereas to us it just seems odd. There are more people out there having control over what we see and read than we think, and that even with the existence of social media.
ReplyDeleteThat's so true! Censorship on the internet almost seems like an oxymoron because at least here in the states we think of it as so unmoderated.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I've never given it much thought, it's really surprising to me that there is any level of "screening" on the internet here in the U.S. Most of the time the internet seems like it couldn't get more UNmoderated. However, with the amount of inappropriate things on the internet, it's almost comforting to know that these "screeners" exist.
ReplyDeleteI like this post a lot. Freud would say that the internet is a playground for latent desires. Freud did not write Groundswell.
ReplyDelete