#SocialMediaEtiquette #Tweeting101 #PrivacyConcerns
Hey there! ๐ It’s a great question you’ve asked – why exactly do people black out the names of individuals in tweets or other posts on social media? Let’s dive into this topic together and uncover the reasons behind this common practice.
#ProtectingPrivacy ๐ก๏ธ
When You Want to Avoid Retaliation
One of the main reasons individuals choose to black out names in tweets or other public posts is to protect the privacy and safety of the person being mentioned. By blacking out the name, the individual posting can prevent any potential negative consequences that may arise from outing someone in a public forum. In today’s digital age, where online harassment and bullying are unfortunately prevalent, it’s essential to consider the potential impact of exposing someone’s identity without their consent.
Respecting Confidentiality
Sometimes, the information being shared in a tweet or post may be sensitive or confidential in nature. By blacking out the names of people involved, individuals can maintain a level of discretion and compliance with privacy regulations. It’s a way of showing respect for the boundaries and confidentiality of others, even in a public space.
#AvoidingDrama ๐ฅ
Preventing Public Backlash
Granting anonymity to the person who said a controversial or inappropriate thing in a public forum can help prevent them from becoming the target of online outrage or backlash. By blacking out their name, individuals can shift the focus of the conversation away from personal attacks and towards the issue being discussed.
Promoting Positive Discourse
In some cases, blacking out names can be a way of fostering a more constructive and respectful online environment. By focusing on the content of the tweet rather than the identity of the individuals involved, it encourages a more thoughtful and nuanced discussion around the topic at hand.
#Conclusion ๐
In conclusion, blacking out the names of people in tweets or other public posts serves as a way to protect privacy, prevent potential harm, and promote a more positive online discourse. While it may seem like granting anonymity to someone who said something controversial, it ultimately comes down to respecting boundaries and maintaining a sense of decency in our interactions online. So next time you see a tweet with blacked-out names, remember that there’s often a thoughtful reason behind it! ๐ Let’s keep the conversation going around social media etiquette and privacy concerns for a more respectful online community. #BlackoutNames #DigitalDecorum
Most subs try to avoid doxxing
so to avoid thousands of chronically online people telling a 12 year old to kill themselves
Well, if they’ve already posted something publicly with their name on, I don’t see a problem in reposting it with the name unmasked. What can they do? claim it wasn’t them?
I once screenshotted a comment from an unrelated site. I posted that screenshot on Twitter to call out that person’s insane behaviour.
That person, whom I hadn’t even tweeted the name of outside the screenshot, found it, DMCAed me, and got my account shut down.
People are insane.
There are levels of public. A person with a couple dozen connected users is different from a person with a couple hundred thousand subscribed users. Posting an embarrassing interaction from the former on a forum with thousands (or hundreds of thousands) of users bring attention to them at a level they’ve never experienced before. Without the “dox”, their silliness/stupidity/cringe would have been lost to the sea of other comments made by the masses. That’s not even touching on the reality that the person posting the material is acting in good faith and may be selectively displaying info to garner negative reactions at the person.
Anyway, that can be one of the reasons mods and sites discourage or ban doxxing. They have no problem you sharing the tale, but don’t make identifying people in the tale all that easy. It might still be done (phrase searches for instance), but even that can be moderated for big discussions on the matter.
Not sure why everyone’s crying about doxxing, a better reason is to not drive traffic to their channel to boost their engagement. All publicity is good publicity, especially on social media.
Because these are the rules for some subs. Saying dumb things doesn’t warrant a wave of harassment.
It is a good tone to argue with ideas without directing hate on individuals. Most people can’t hold a discussion without personal attacks though, hence blacked out names.
It’s to stop adults piling on kids or the mentally vulnerable.
I feel like op lost the plot here lol
It may not be doxxing but itโs doxxing adjacent.
Privacy.
Yeah, I don’t get it either. They posted it online for everyone to see, but it’s the rules. It’s to prevent them getting harassed.
OP just seems quite gross knowing full well the amount of harm this could cause and refusing to accept that it is problematic. Even if sites didn’t have this rule, I would always be in favour of it because sometimes it is nice to laugh at other people without wanting any harm to come to them. Not sure why OP is so opposed to this. Sometimes I will post something my family says because my family has a bunch of idiots. It doesn’t mean I think they don’t deserve their privacy.
It’s unnecessary and abusive. Let people have their opinions.
Itโs a common courtesy
Not everybody saying something stupid on a tweet to a couple followers deserves the level of harassment that could happen if it goes viral.
because dumb thing is subjective but trolls swatting them is an objective real consequence trial with no jury
I wonder why it is โblack outโ and the other alternatives โbrown out โ or โwhite out โ or โyellow out โ or โred outโ is not used in expressions !! ;(
Itโs generally a bad precedent to organize brigading people, and thatโs what youโre doing when you post something stupid someone says onto a large forum and leave easy access to said person. People are naturally gonna read it and get angry, and the more mentally ill are gonna harass the poster en masse. Itโs a bad precedent because regardless of where you land politically, all youโre gonna do is make the other side think itโs justified as well and create a world where nobody can post their opinion, even if itโs stupid, for fear of gangs of raving lunatics.
Because others on the internet like to play keyboard warriors and will harass the shit out of them if you donโt. Online bullying is still bullying and it still impacts your mental health.
Do people say dumb things? Yes. Have I said dumb things? Also yes. Am I grateful as hell I was born before the internet? Hell yes as there is less evidence of me saying dumb things.
Because there are people even dumber who read the name of the person cited, coincidentally know someone else with same name, and then immediately believe it was the person they know said said thing. Then they may or may not post the home address of the wrong person online, that wrong person is subjected to a shitstorm, receives murder threats, and is ever traumatized thereafter.
Believe I’m exaggerating things? After some terrorist attacks in Belgium some colleague on Facebook posted pictures he had picked up from others on Telegram. The thing was: The pictures were completely from totally random strangers.
It is way too easy online to make someone else’s life hell, so better to be careful and refrain from openly sharing anyone’s name in this way.
I think itโs to avoid bombardment or *other people* doxxing them. If you say something to a limited crowd of people, you donโt expect people from a wider pool or from other platforms to seek you out?
Because everyone can say dumb shit, so it gives them the possibility for redemption. Otherwise the person might just receive death threats and have to make a new account, but never stopping to think what they said was wrong because the response is so out of proportion they don’t even have time to consider it because there are people in their DMS telling them to kys.
1. The redacter might not be thinking of the situation as being a “*this person* said this thing” so much as a “*some people* say things like this”. The situation might be notable because it is in an instance of a pattern that the redacter wants to highlight.
2. The redacter might be conscious of the fact that when the internet decides that someone should be punished for something, there’s no mechanism for controlling the amount of punishment that is delivered. The nice thing about a formalized justice system is that the justice system gives you a sentence, you serve the sentence, and then you’re (ideally) done. This opens the possibility for the justice system to respond *proportionately* to your infraction. Social media platforms and the culture around them don’t really have a way of saying “okay, this guy’s had his 40 lashes”.
The one time I didn’t when I posted a screenshot of a rabid antivaxxer (like the profile was unhinged), my nephew instead of saying something immediately reported it to Facebook and I got suspended from posting.
Basically it’s because Gen Z acts like a hail-corporate version of the Hitler Youth.
It’s called a witch hunt. It’s against the TOS of most social media.
In some cases, it might show personal information about myself. If my dad made a dumb post and I want to share it and reveal his name, thatโs going to make it pretty easy to tie my identity to this account. Even if itโs a public figure, posting about my governor or mayor could make it easier to narrow my location.
Golden rule is a good idea. You may fuck up one day too.