The Dark Side Of Doxxing

Doxxing for good reasons is still a bad idea.

Vigilante justice has a long ugly history in America. Civilians have at times taken “justice” into their own hands—as in our egregious history of Black people being murdered by white lynch mobs. More recently, such groups have turned up with ill intent, such as anti-immigration groups like the Minutemen Militia, who have mounted “border patrols” at various parts of the U.S./ Mexico border, and those who proclaim to stand as a counter-force to Nazis and fascism, such as Antifa, known for dressing in all black and, recently, fending off torch-wielding Nazis in Charlottesville.

As the world has gone digital, vigilante justice has made its way to the Internet, that unbounded vastness of cyberspace that lends itself to individual justice at its best and harmful trolling at its worst. A newer form of Internet justice seeking getting lots of attention lately is known as doxxing (also spelled doxing) a term The Atlantic claims was first used by computer hackers in the 1990s as a “simple shorthand of the word documents.” “Documents” can now mean anything from a social media post about your political leanings to a picture someone snapped of you at a protest.

Doxxing is when one party shares the information of another party without their consent, possibly with a large number of viewers, and often in retaliation for an act the first party finds displeasing. There is a great deal of subjectivity involved in acts of doxxing, and they are often done from a place of anger or intent to harm.

But once in a while, someone uses doxxing in the service of what could be seen as a greater good— such as the man behind the twitter account @YesYoureRacist. A North Carolina man, Logan Smith had started the account in 2012 in response to the racist attacks on President Obama. Then the“Unite the Right” white supremacist rally in Charlottesville turned violent for a number of counter-protestors and fatal for Heather Heyer, who was murdered by an alleged white supremacist slamming his car into a crowd. Smith responded by “outing” some of the white supremacists who marched by putting names to their faces from photographs of the night.

“I just started seeing all these photos from the torch march Friday night and the riots on Saturday and it was just so disturbing,” he told the Miami Herald. “These photos from the torch march—it was exactly what you see in photos from 1930s Germany. But this is not happening in history books or some faraway country—it’s here, it’s now.”

Many people cheered him on and followed his Twitter account, which is now up to more than 400K followers.

However, there were real repercussions from these outings. One man’s family publicly disowned him in an open letter. Another man from Berkeley, California lost his job at a hot dog restaurant. Yet, should we feel sorry that people who were out on a mission of hate reaped these consequences of their actions?

Smith said, “I’m not trying to get anybody fired. I’m not contacting anybody’s employers. But you know, if someone goes to a white supremacists’ rally and their employer sees them, then that’s their prerogative—and that’s something they probably should have thought about.”

Mark Grabowski, an Internet law and ethics professor at Adelphi University in New York, agrees. “When you’re in a public place, such as the Charlottesville protest, you don’t have an expectation of privacy. If someone snaps a photo of you marching out in the open, posts it on social media and others connect the dots and identify you, that’s perfectly legal,” he told Second Nexus in an email.

He adds “So long as the information gathered and shared is from publicly available sources, it’s not illegal.”

But does that make it right?

David Ryan Polgar, a New York based tech ethicist and co-founder of the global Digital Citizenship Summit, has reservations. He suggests that arming “society at large with a huge power to amplify and investigate” is not a good idea because “we’re not trained in what we’re doing. It falls under the category of vigilante justice,” he tells Second Nexus.

In fact, Smith did misidentify a professor at the rally as Arkansas KKK leader Billy Roper. While Smith made a correction as soon as he learned the information, the Internet has trouble remembering its facts.

“Everybody hears the accusation but nobody reads the correction,” Polgar says. “Misidentification is going to outweigh the potential benefits. There’s always going to be the chance of falsely labeling someone.”

To read more, please continue to page 2.

Load more...

Page 1 of 2
First | Prev | 1 | 2 | Next | Last
View All



type in your search and press enter
Generic filters
Exact matches only