Since pre-commerce has taken over the e-retail space, customers have turned to public forums to learn what products and services to choose. Smart companies have taken great lengths to own these spaces, facilitating open, unmoderated (or at least seemingly) feedback boards where their customers can not only assist each other but provide the company insight into what the evolving customer's needs are.
Anonymity, if used honestly, can add an extra layer of protection for employees and customers to be more honest and less concerned about consequences of their feedback. Anonymity, if used poorly however, can result in false testimonials by competitors and personal attacks by spurned customers or employees.
The underlying question being, "If someone hides their identity does that make someone more sincere or less accountable?" and "What lines can we draw in the sand to procure the protection while negating the trolls?"
For better insight, let's look at these platforms.
Reddit, and many gaming networks, thrive on anonymity. Whether it's to discuss taboo subjects or not be judged for their interests, these have become places where true identities are almost completely removed - but interestingly enough there is still order. This self-policing by the network happens because you still have an identity, it's just an alternate one, and the more that is invested in these alternate identities, the more someone cares about their good standing with the network. Note that this accountability exists completely removed from their real world existence and has little to no potential to harm that reputation.
Twitter has been criticized for their overt display of number of followers. It is often said it is a popularity contest and that it is not indicative of any real quality user (ex: top influencers include Ashton Kutcher, Justin Bieber and Lady Gaga). However, if critics were to be avid Twitter users they would realize how quickly someone's followers drop when they are negative, blatantly promote products or falsely impersonate others (unless they are really, really funny at it). Like almost all networks, if you do not have a profile picture NO ONE will follow you. Twitter's identities are closely tied to an individual's real identity, and while impersonal accounts exist, it often takes a longer time for users to trust/follow if unfamiliar.
The most important network where anonymity is almost irrelevant is LinkedIn. Other than viewing profiles anonymously, LinkedIn thrives because users attempt to appear to be as true to their real selves as possible. Any falsehood is regulated by the networks monitoring of how do you know each person, and two way confirmation connections. This network exists because of its goal to represent and simplify reality.
Going back to the original questions of whether anonymity results in more sincerity or less accountability - the answer seems to be to get users to see the value in the forum and to respect and understand its purpose. Sincerity is power and whether that sincerity is tied to a real or alternate identity, it really doesn't matter. When customers are invested, whether it's their true self or alternate self, they will give honest feedback and disregard those opinions that are not tied to invested in identities.
No comments:
Post a Comment