Aislinn Raftis

Digital Rhetoric
Hacktivists and Trolls
In light of the readings about 4chan and the documentary about
the collective Anonymous, I have come to believe that there is not a
clear line between hacktivists and trolls. The ambiguity is further
heightened by the contradictions within the group about their values
and beliefs and those they claim to fight against.
The documentary claimed that Anonymous resisted authority
and groupthink, but the experts and former-hackers appeared blithely
unaware of the irony of their own words in describing the situation.
They refer to Anonymous as a collective, as a they, and earnestly talk
about how they are resisting groupthink. All the article and the
documentary served to do for me was reinforce my observation that
Anonymous and those who post on 4chan follow very much a
groupthink ideology. One of the former hackers is quoted in the
documentary as explaining the in-person protests as a cultural moment
where Anonymous members found their group of peoplethose who
share the same jokes, thoughts, sense of humor, values, and sense of
identity.
In the part of the documentary about Project Chanology, the
attack on the Church of Scientology, Anonymous rose up against the
church because youre trying to censor our Internet. The possessive
here is worrying to me, an average citizen, because the internet is
supposed to be a common good, a public utility, and its defenders say
that it is the last free, uncensored realm of creativity. The Internet is
not supposed to be controlled by the Church of Scientology, but if we
concede that we must also point out that Anonymous is not supposed
to be controlling the Internet either. It is not their Internet and that is
the flimsiest of points on which to base a cultural revolution.
In the article The Trolls Among Us by Mattathias Schwartz, the
author profiles Jason Fortuny, a hacker troll, and Weev, another hacker
troll. In one particatlu revealing quote Schwartz says, Unlike Fortuny,
he made no attempt to reconcile his trolling with conventional social
norms. I find it revealing because the author is very subtly pointing
out that trolling, no matter how many lessons it teaches the public, is
still a mean-spirited and destructive game. Trolls may try to justify their
actions after the fact, but the primary motivation remains to push to
peoples buttons. Justifying an act of online bullying as teaching a
lesson is disingenuous, because it presupposes that the audience is
composed of simpletons. It takes advantage of the natural human
instinct (or at least I think its natural) to believe someone and find
excuses for their behavior.
I would like to say that they are justified in taking down online
groups that promote hate speech and racism etc. I think in that sense,

they do turn into hackers. But for two reasons, I will argue that hackers
and trolls are not justified in doing so. 1It is a slippery slope
argument to allow hacking that I consider just but which may not be
just to someone else. 2What happens if I become the next target?
Its very easy to stand and proclaim affiliation with the goals of ending
the monopoly on information, standing up against injustice, and so on.
As it stands right now, I would be happy for the status quo to continue.
Anonymous has the potential to be very dangerous though. Right now,
theyve lost momentum in the political world, but I dont want the
status quo to worsen and lulz to become merely online revenge.
Therefore their actions are not ethical, regardless of whether or not
they believe themselves to be acting within the spirit of the law. The
group is too dangerous, has too few taboos, to be allowed to arbitrarily
define what is the spirit vs the letter of the law.
The redeeming grace of Anonymous though is its openness.
Anyone with a computer and Internet access can potentially join the
organization. In that it forms a meritocracy, the closets thing to a real
democracy.
A real democracy is not all that great though, as proven by the
existence of twitter mobs that target certain individuals. When left to
their own devices, the public turns to lower instincts, destructive
instincts and hunting instincts. For these reasons I am uncomfortable
justifying Anonymous and their celebrating their rule.