With Great Power Comes Great...Anonymity

“My name is Legion: for we are many”.

Much has changed since the writing of the Gospel of Mark (5:9) in which the previous quote first appears; and yet the unnamed collective of which it speaks continues to evolve in modern society.

The Internet is a communications channel unlike any other. It offers freedom of expression married with practically complete anonymity: to everyone. It is said that power necessitates responsibility, but what happens when the empowered masses answer to no one? The result is the digital equivalent of mass mobilisation, an army of armchair activists pooling effort, resources and passion into a common goal. However, unlike traditional retaliatory movements of the past this force has no charismatic leader, no Cromwell to incite the masses (digital) warts and all. What we see is an amorphous, nebulous (but not directionless) association. The most famous, or infamous, of these? Anonymous.

“Anonymous” was born out of the message board 4chan, the enigmatic moniker derived from the default name assigned to a poster who does not enter a name when commenting. It is a movement that whilst wielding considering power retains a wicked sense of humour, and an appetite for shock tactics. The 4Chan boards are a haven for raw, uncensored Internet expression. Few things are considered inappropriate, and as such those who are easily offended should think twice before entering.

Recently the digital and traditional media have been awash with the Wikileaks saga. The legality and alleged criminality of the case are not for debate here; moreover I am interested in Anonymous’ role. They are portrayed as the dark underbelly of the Internet, an amoral thieves guild of hackers and anarchists intent on causing the destruction of civilised society. However, to believe the propaganda is to miss a fascinating ménage-a-trois of idealism, mischief and technical savvy. In rushing to the defence of Wikileaks we can see there are three battles being fought: defence of the individual (Julian Assange); defence of the organisation (Wikileaks); and finally defence of an ideal (the fight against censorship).

Anonymous responded by attacking organisations it felt were punishing Wikileaks, and therefore infringing upon a more general Internet tenet of freedom of information. Targets for “Operation Payback” included Paypal and Mastercard, with varying degrees of success. Their strategy was to use a DDoS attack intended to bombard the host site with data to force it to temporarily shut down.

In the end how you feel about Anonymous' actions is a personal decision. If one man’s online protestor is another man’s hacker, we must all consider what is important to us in the digital world we live in. We can be sure that as the Internet continues to shape our society online communities will become evermore prominent, and their reach will extend beyond simply the digital world. Their actions might be the source of moral debate, but I’m glad that Anonymous is there. Because ultimately by being “no one” they represent everyone, and that includes all of us.