Fake Names On Social Networks: A Fake Problem

by Rob Pegoraro

I don't know who you are, and I don't care that much. Facebook or Google Plus feel otherwise: The leading social network and its latest challenger demand that members use their real names, and they're not afraid to evict violators.

Facebook's online help bluntly states: "Facebook requires users to provide their real first and last names [....] Fake names are not permitted." Google's guidelines phrase things more gently but still leave no doubt: The pseudonym you use elsewhere isn't welcome there.

Many Facebook users have quietly complied, despite the problems that rule creates for political dissidents, stalking survivors and others. But as Microsoft social researcher Danah Boyd -- a longtime critic of Facebook's privacy policies -- astutely observed last week, the Internet experts who crowded Google Plus early on were less likely to accept that argument and more capable of making a fuss about it.

(Disclosures: I use Facebook and Google Plus to market myself.)

Much of this discussion has centered around people in physical or financial danger of having their identities revealed (Google is at least making the right noises about accommodating them.) But there are broader reasons for social networks to stop pushing real-name policies.

First: These rules risk incorrect removals of people who had used their own monikers. Some, for instance former Mozilla Firefox developer, current Facebook product director and temporary Google Plus evictee Blake Ross, have been sufficiently well known to get their accounts quickly reinstated.

Others have not been so lucky. University of Maryland student Shabaab Kamal told me he got kicked off Facebook in December for using his own name, which the site thought fake. Facebook didn't correct its mistake until May; in the meantime, he returned to it by opening a second account as "Bob Smith," later changed to "Baab Smith."

Second: These sites don't seem serious about these rules anyway. Facebook and Google Plus don't ask for proof of people's identities upfront and appear to rely on other users to flag violations. (Spokespeople for each did not say how they catch offenders or how many had been found.)

As a result, it's trivial to find obviously phony monikers: a profile named after a reporter's beat; a reader with a one-letter last name; another whose first name is a sports team that did not exist a decade ago.

Third: The Internet doesn't need real names to work. You don't have to ask any of the Net's founders (although I have); just look at how online communities blossom or break. Anonymity is not a problem, but a lack of accountability is. If people don't have to choose and keep a username, they don't have to own their words--and some will act like jerks.

This was true in the Usenet newsgroups I posted to in 1994, most of which choked on their own unaccountable conversations. It's true today in forums like Twitter, eBay and FlyerTalk that don't mandate real names but do demand persistent pseudonyms.

Facebook and Google need to police impersonation but should stop pretending they can outlaw anonymity. Give people some reward or validation for using their real names (as Amazon does in its reviews), but don't require it. Most will continue to use their legal identities--how else will long-lost pals from high school find them? But for the minority with sound reasons to speak from behind a veil, let them.