Trust in reality – why virtual identity deception can never be as destructive as deception in the real world.

26/04/2010 victoriahainsworth 23 comments

Identity deception on the internet has become of increasing concern in today’s society. As technology improves and evolves, the internet is said to pose a danger to those who are unfortunate or misinformed enough to fall for the many scams put in place to take advantage of the innocent and naive. It is relatively easy and affordable to create a false identity online for one’s own personal gain using false user names, websites and inside knowledge. There are groups of people who are opposed to the internet and its development for fear of its corruption and erosion of society as a whole. There are also mechanisms in place such is IP and email address verification and codes to help curb destructive usage of online identity deception. However, perhaps not factored into the equation is that identity deception is also rampant in real life without the need for the internet as an aid. Stronger trust placed by society into traditionally operating real world companies and institutions results in the increased danger and likelihood of being deceived by those companies than it is through any virtual online operation utilising identity deception.

Judith. S. Donath claims in her paper ‘Identity Deception In the Virtual Community’ that online: “ Many of the basic cues about personality and social roles we are accustomed to in the physical world are absent” (1998, Page1). She also claims that “the body provides a compelling and convenient definition of identity”(1998 page1) . Physical cues cannot always be relied upon, or serve as our only source of information. We cannot draw our conclusions completely based on these observations. People and businesses can cleverly create a false impression of identity in order to gain favour or clientele. One of the most well known and extremely successful businesses in modern society is the infamous’ McDonalds ‘empire. The golden arches have presence in almost every country all over the world. They have human employees, colourful mascots, interesting family orientated advertising, physical restaurants, uniforms and even songs created for children. When a documentary surfaced in 2004 named ‘Supersize Me’ criticizing the entire basis of MacDonald’s products and its advertising. Morgan Spurlock’s findings opened the eyes of many: “The bottom line is, they’re a business, no matter what they say, and by selling you unhealthy food, they make millions, and no company wants to stop doing that” (Spurlock 2004).Spurlock’s “McDonald’s only” diet experiment and rapidly declining health coupled with revelations about everything from ill treatment of employees, to the quality of meat used in their meals, advertising aimed at children and the destruction of large forests as a direct result of the consumption of the McDonalds empire caused much debate. It became quite apparent in this documentary that many elements about this business had been concealed for its success and profitability and that the public face, the physical restaurants do not necessarily display the entire truth. At the time, customers felt betrayed and there was a decline in customer loyalty to the chain:

Chief among its tormentors is Morgan Spurlock, a film director, whose attempt to exist on a pure diet of McDonald’s for a month in the hit documentary Super Size Me saw him pile on 30lbs and suffer a falling sex drive. Meanwhile, the so-called McLibel Two have reopened the scars left by the longest trial in english legal history by taking their case to the European Court of Human Rights. The company is also braced for compensation claims from obese former customers who claim their health suffered by eating too many burgers .McDonald’s yesterday conceded it had faced two challenging years in Britain but insisted the future was bright. “Health fears eat into profits at McDonald’s”(Brown, 2004).

This exposure outweighed all of the positive physical cues for many of the customers who were previously loyal to MacDonald’s. The company had previously presented themselves as completely ethical with a seemingly pristine reputation: “But in a serious blow to the company’s efforts to present itself as socially responsible, the judge decided it was true that McDonald’s targeted its advertising at children, who pestered their parents into visiting company’s restaurants.” (BBC UK, 1997) The immense wealth, power, history and the strength of the real life identity deception of McDonalds ensured their continued business success in despite the ramifications of the documentary.

Online scams and businesses certainly exist but whether they are the real cause for concern in our society is questionable. The internet is often used as an excellent point of blame for individuals and institutions. However, according to the computer crime research centre, it has been proven that internet crimes can be destabilised with their very own mechanisms: “Mike Amadi was sentenced to 16 years in prison for setting up a website that offered juicy but phoney procurement contracts. Amadi cheekily posed as Ribadu himself and used the agency’s name. He was caught by an undercover agent posing as an Italian business man”. (Computer Crime Research Centre 2005). The undercover agent posed online as a customer, using a feasible name and knowledge of the business. This example proves that internet crime is certainly not fully resistant. It was simple for a law enforcer to discover the crime by adopting a false online identity. This story illustrates that it is as easy to discover and consequently stop online crime as it is to create it. This cannot be said for real life crimes. Furthermore, cases such as this create distrust of the internet in our societies thereby reinforcing and enhancing our trust in traditional, perchance, corrupt businesses.

Judith Donath claims that “by imposing high costs on deception a social system can make conventional signals more reliable.” ”(2008,page 4). She uses an example of a resume and a job interview, highlighting that exaggerating qualifications on a text resume has less of a significant consequence than being caught without knowledge in person at an interview and that “identity cues are sparse in the virtual world”(2008, page 1), which may make it easier to deceive. However, there are other factors which contribute to the creation and acceptance of identity deception such cultural and social assimilation which creates trust. In a recent article featured by the MSNBC: “Death exposes illegal cosmetic surgery network, Brazilian doctor offered bargain-basement liposuction for immigrants”(Amendola, 2006), it illustrates the way in which it is practically a cultural norm for Brazilian woman to use plastic surgery to change their bodies. The mentality has made a transfer to groups of illegal Brazilian immigrants in the United States who go to unregistered doctors to have cosmetic surgery. In this case, a young woman died as a result of having illegal surgery. Her doctor was arrested but denied the charges. His identity deception was protected by his clients up until time of the report, vulnerable because they not only trusted him because of his familiar Brazilian identity but also because he took advantage of the Brazilian immigration situation by offering the option of affordable surgery within the United States without the patients having to travel back to Brazil. “Maxine L. Margolis, a professor of anthropology at the University of Florida who specializes in Brazilian immigrants, said unlicensed doctors offering cheap procedures here could be particularly appealing to illegal immigrants, who do not want to risk being unable to return to the United States. (The district attorney’s office would not comment on DePaula’s (The Victim) immigration status.) (MSNBC 2006). Physical identity cues about the doctor and his heritage actually worked against the victim in this case and he was able to use the trust and cultural solidarity of his patients to strengthen his plausibility for his own financial gain though he had never specialised in plastic surgery. Furthermore, it could be assumed that he was protected by his patient’s fear of reporting any unsound treatment due to their illegal immigration status.

Donath points out the difference between real world and online news sources. “In the real world we may believe a story if it was published in the Wall Street Journal but dismiss it, if it appeared in The National Enquirer. With Usenet there is no editorial board ensuring standards of reliability” (2008, page 2).Consequently, if we are more likely to believe real world information sources and lend to credibility to them than sources from an internet source like usenet, we are more likely to be deceived by them. In a recent case in New York an internet savvy criminal managed to convince investors to disclose their personal financial details with the premise of recuperating large sums of money from another financial scam artist, using the victim’s vulnerability to his advantage, “Using a bogus Web site that called itself the International Securities Investor Protection Corp., the overseas scamsters claimed they had $1.3 million in Madoff money stashed away in Malaysia, bolstering their assertions with pictures of huge stacks of cash” (New York Post 2010).In this example, the offender used knowledge gained from the current news reports about the victims and the situation at the time to exploit them. The internet aided his efforts as his website was his point of communication, but it was his sly opportunistic approach to ‘real world’ highly publicised news that instigated his crime.

With or without physical identity cues people can fall victim to a cleverly created scam. In these two examples of the Brazilian doctor and the false website we can see that the vulnerable situations of the victims have been utilized in order for personal financial gain. The internet can aid in the exercising of a dishonest business practice but it is not the internet technology alone that creates these crimes.

Some scholars believe that the internet is affecting the workforce and shaping our world negatively, “The internet will alienate, manipulate and demean workers” Darin 2000 p.267 (James E. Katz and Ronald E. Rice). Fears exist that the internet facilitates illegal trading and businesses, that jobs will be lost and workers will be marginalised due to the growing expansion of the computer internet age. A wide variety of products are sold online but in a recent case, it was uncovered that many steroid dealers sold various brands online which were substandard and well below market quality. It cast a large doubt and distrust over the internet drug market both for sellers and buyers ,“The report aims to shed light on the online steroid underground… “This is about the extent of criminality on the Web, how specialized it has become, in addition to revealing questions about the quality of companies supplying Internet services in the U.S.,” says Bruen. “Do they see themselves as having a moral or ethical obligation to the public?” (Higgins 2008) .The absence of physical cues actually draws this illegal activity away from the internet and back to a more traditional way of trading to allow for a higher quality of product trading. Fears about the internet controlling the world’s businesses and trading, legal or not and eliminating the need for human intervention are challenged by this example.

The growing distrust of the internet and ongoing criticism of the relatively easy methods of online deception brings forth the argument about whether the supposed demise of our society is perpetrated by the internet. Online identity deception on the internet is not as powerful as in real life. The blame is simply placed on modern technology for problems and deception which already have existed eternally in our society. In 2007 a student at Virginia tech, a college in the United States killed 32 people in a massacre without any justifiable motivation. The student was known to be mentally unstable but the college was not informed of his condition due to privacy laws. He was able to conceal his identity due to laws put in place by the United States Government. This student was not aided by the internet, nor any modern technology but by a real world law put in place by physical individuals:

Both transactions were legal. Unlike some other states, Virginia has no waiting period before purchasing a handgun; nor does it require registration. State law does limit purchasers to one gun per month. Law enforcement officials say that the Glock Cho used had a 15-round ammunition magazine, banned under the federal assault weapons ban that expired in 2004” (Washington Post, 2007)

This case became well known and retold all over the world as an ultimate tragedy. Alternatively, it has become relatively common in recent years to hear of youths and school children being vulnerable targets in internet crime, yet according to a study conducted by the National Center For Missing and Explioted Children (USA), “As in YISS-1, only a minority of youth who had unwanted sexual solicitations,unwanted exposures to sexual material, or harassment said they were distressed by the incidents”. “Online Victimization of Youth:Five Years Later”(Wolak, Mitchell and Finkelhor, 2006). Although online crimes can be alarming and serious, as yet, there is no common knowledge of an exclusively internet based massacre, therefore online identity deception is hardly as dangerous as real life identity deception enabled by the loop holes of our own laws.

Through fears of the internet, online deception and a fast changing world where anything can be bought, sold, traded and trafficked there lies an underlying truth. Despite modern advances and new ways to deceive ones identity with user names and domain names in order to generate scams and financial gain, the internet is not the root of all of the inadequacies and injustices in society. The internet may facilitate negative business and social practice but it did not create these issues and problems. Fraud, exploitation and criminal behaviour have always been present in human society.

My examination of real life cases and academic opinions offers a modern view about the internet, its negative power and fears about online identity deception. Although there are many examples of injustice performed by deception of identity online, until the present time it is still real life identity deception which is truly at the root of the most damaging issues in modern society. It is just as simple and certainly more credible to deceive ones identity in a real life situation by utilizing the physical cues that Donath refers to in order to gain the trust and thereby exploit individuals. The various real life mechanisms of identity deception I have discussed include, the usage of a similar cultural back ground to gain a victims trust, usage of the loop holes of the very laws that exist our communities, the vulnerability of certain groups of people and the use specific personal information pertaining to their situation. If the internet had never existed, individuals could still manipulate their identities by changing their physical appearance, work place, general interpersonal manner and groups of associates to appear professional as simply as a username can be changed. Furthermore, these clear physical identity cues do not essentially ensure the sincerity and dependability of that business or person. In fact, they enforce general public trust which in effect could be more perilous than even the most cunning internet scam.

Bibliography

Amendola, E (2006) Death exposes illegal cosmetic surgery network, Brazilian doctor offered bargain-basement liposuction for immigrants. Retrieved March 10^th 2010 from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14719452/

BBC UK (1997) Victory for McDonalds – at a cost. Retrieved from http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/june/19/newsid_2516000/2516301.stm on April 20th 2010.

Jackson, K.(2008) Hundreds of Websites Outed for Illegally Selling Steroids. Retreived 4^th April 2010 from http://www.darkreading.com/security/app-security/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=211201160

Judith S. Donath, MIT Media Lab, “Identity and deception in the virtual community”. Prepared for In Kollock, P. and Smith, M. (eds). Communities in Cyberspace.London: Routledge1998

Katz, J, Rice, R. (2000) “Social consequences of internet use: access, involvement and interaction” Darin.

Mbachu, D (2005). The Biggest Internet scam ever. Retrieved March 1^st 2010 from LAtimes.com

SCHULTE, B and HORWITZ S. (2006) Guns were easy to come by, 15 – round glock clip banned until 2004. Retrieved 24^th April 2010 from http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070418/REPOSITORY/704180366/1013/NEWS03

Spurlock, M. (2004). Supersize me [Documentary].

Whitehouse, K and Golding G(2010). Internet hustlers go after Madoff victims. Retreived 3^rd April from http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/internet_hustlers_go_after_madoff_WW0OB786QzZ9FVZEc3VfCJ#ixzz0k9RouF1A

Wolak, J. Mitchell, K and Finkelhor D.(2006) Online victimization of youth: 5 years later. Retrived April 24^th from THE CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN RESEARCH CENTER.

Identity in Communities and Networks Identity Deception, internet scams, real life identity, trust, virtual identity

Edit in Admin

Comments

Written by Camwhipp about 2 years ago.

“If the internet had never existed, individuals could still manipulate their identities by changing their physical appearance, work place, general interpersonal manner and groups of associates to appear professional as simply as a username can be changed.”
I think I agree with your overall conclusion that identity deception in the cyber world is not as damaging on a wide scale as identity deception in the real world. As I have often found with friends who find their email/facebook has been hacked, an email is usually sent or message circulated by them stating ‘my account has been hacked’ and the situation is remedied quickly. I have not come across serious identity deception in my personal experience but from what I have heard the criminals get away with only minor destruction – scams gather attention quickly and are put to sleep.
Written by KayeE about 2 years ago.

Hi Victoria,

Thanks for your paper – it was a very well presented and researched argument. I think that the internet has just given us another platform on which identity fraud can take place. I was very interested in your comment about groups of people who are opposed to the internet and its development. Are you able to elaborate on that any more – you have captured my curiosity!

Cheers,
Kaye
Written by FransiscaMS about 2 years ago.

Yes, I am agree there are lots identity deceptions in cyber space, more over they would harm the people surround financially and emotionally, what about you? Have you ever go through this experience?
Written by Victoria about 2 years ago.

Hi Kathleen,
I will search for your paper. Your right, Its remarkable that people think that their facebook profiles are sincerely private when most people do not even read the privacy statement or check up on the authenticity of their ‘friends’. There are different degrees of identity deception. I think if someone can use an online vehicle to explore identity issues this could be beneficial, almost an alternative to counselling.Escapism is certainly one of the main reasons people hide their identity online. However, this deception becomes dangerous when its is used in a criminal way. I chose to demonstrate my arguement with real world examples to truly illustrate the criminality already present in or societies before the invasion of Web 2.0. Thankyou for yoru encouraging comment!
Written by KathleenV about 2 years ago.

Hi Victoria, I found your paper extremely interesting and you argued your point really well. Some of the points you raised in regards to false online identity relate to my paper “The benefits of Gender swapping online”. Individuals who are trying to explore various facets of their identity are required to create an identity different to their real life identity to achieve their goals whether that be for legal or illegal purposes. I completely agree with the statement you made “It is relatively easy and affordable to create a false identity online for one’s own personal gain using false user names, websites and inside knowledge”. Although this is against majority of networking sites terms and conditions of use, I believe identity deception is a common practice within our community. Each individual has his or her own reasons for wanting to create a fake identity. These reasons could include deception, identity exploration or even escapism. One of the major strengths of your paper were highlighting the real life examples of identity deception. The examples that you highlighted were extremely relevant to your topic and strongly supported your argument. A great paper, well done.
Written by Victoria about 2 years ago.

I certainly do think it is a fear of online risk that causes this grand debate about internet usage and business online. The fear of the unknown not only inhibits people but encourages increased trust in real world businesses and sources. This increased trust enables traditional scammers to more easily deceive vulnerable people. I believe that by looking at real world examples we can see more clearly what is occurring around us in society. Cyber crime exists, but is not our primary cause for concern. Thankyou very much for reading and providing good research and referencing!
Victoria
Written by JoG about 2 years ago.

Hi Victoria, I enjoyed reading your real world examples of deception, which helps to balance out some of the horror story associated with online deception.

I agree with the premise of your paper that deception is not just an online phenomenon, but rather something that also occurs offline in a number of significant and damaging ways. I also agree with your statement that “(t)he internet may facilitate negative business and social practice but it did not create these issues and problems”. These problems have existed for as long as there has been a way to manipulate a system or person.

An article by Wall (2008) presents an interesting discourse regarding the myths associated with cybercrime. Looking at how a culture of fear about these crimes develops and is incorporated into public expectations of online risk. I think that it is this fear, rather than the anonymity of online identity that impacts on people’s perception of the Internet danger. What do you think?

Thanks for an interesting paper,
Jo

Wall, D.S. (2008). Cybercrime and the culture of fear: Social science fiction(s) and the production of knowledge about cybercrime. Information, Communication & Society, 11(6), 861-884
Written by Victoria about 2 years ago.

Hi Jiawen,
I love your example about the knife. Its really a concise way of describing that it is not the technology of the internet itself that is at the root of all the evils in society. Decepcion, fruad and exploitation have been present in today’s society since the dawn of time.
What are the ways we can protect ourselves against online identity deception? Do we now trust more in real life face to face business because of the negative reputation of some online business or past cases of corruption? What are the implications of this increased trust?
Thanks for your comment!
Written by Victoria about 2 years ago.

Hi Laura,
Community and the media in general sensationalise internet scams. I like your use of the word sensationalise to define the general public reaction to this subject.
Do you believe that with the introduction of the internet in most people’s daily lives observing the various scams and businesses online that we have become even weaker victims to real -world deception? Because we essentially trust what we know have we created stronger ties to face to face interaction making us more vulnerable?
Written by laurap about 2 years ago.

Victoria, I have long agreed with your argument here in the paper. I believe that we sensationalise internet scams – even though all communication channels, including face-to-face have had identical problems for hundreds of years.

People have learned to trust physical cues so much, but the truth is that we must develop defenses against virtual deception as well if we are to make progress against deceivers of all kinds.
Written by Jiawen Lin about 2 years ago.

Hi Victoria, I used to think that virtual identity deception should be more serious that in the real world because everything can be fake in the virtual world. However, I changed my mind after reading your paper which provides strong argument and persuasive examples (such as the McDonald one). Thank you for that. I agree with you that offline deception can happen as easily as online deception, and can be even more serious. As the advertisement is published to the public, we may assume that it is true just like we trust newspapers and dictionaries. But actually with commercial purpose, companies dare to publish untrue information to embellish their products.

I am also with you that Internet is not designed for deception and creating problems; it all depends on how people use it. It is just as simple as how to use a knife: it can be a good kitchen tool to cut vegetable and meat; it is also can be a dangerous tool which can kill someone. Being smart Internet users, we are not only need to learn using Internet in a positive way but also need to know how to protect ourselves from online identity deception.
Written by Victoria about 2 years ago.

Thankyou Jen, for reading my paper and taking the time to do some extra research. As humans I think we take for granted the immediate natural assumptions we make about race, class and social status when we meet someone for the first time. Physical characterstics form a huge part in the was we make judgements about someone´s identity. Predators are expert in noticing the weaknesses of their victims based on their behaviour. If you are behind a computer screen, in a way you are more protected. If a theif in Madrid was to see a young blonde non spanish woman alone with 2 large suitcases, he could use these observations coupled with his knowledge about the probable situation of that woman to his advantage. Don´t you think?
Written by Michael N about 2 years ago.

It would be good Victoria to test that concept because I have a feeling you may be right that the younger person may know how to dectect a scam better. Though there are lots of factors, maybe being brought up with the internet and knowing the technical and social issues around it does equate to knowing deception better. I know some papers discuss stalking, but that may be slightly different, with scams and all the education on it, it will still happen but people, especially younger ones, are likely to be aware and informed.
Written by JenQuinn about 2 years ago.

Hi Victoria,
I really enjoyed reading your paper. Your arguments presented (particularly the Mcdonalds and the Brazilian plastic surgeon examples) were clear and persuasive. I have always assumed that because a persons identity in the ‘real world’ is often limited to physical constraints like appearance, gender, race etc (Zhao et al, 2008) that it would be easier to spot offline identity deception. You stress that it is by using these physical constraints to an advantage that offline identity deception becomes effective – “It is just as simple and certainly more credible to deceive ones identity in a real life situation by utilizing the physical cues that Donath refers to in order to gain the trust and thereby exploit individuals”. A really thought-provoking argument!
Thank you!

Zhao, S., Grasmuck, S., & Martin, J. (2008). Identity construction on Facebook: Digital empowerment in anchored relationships. Computers in Human Behaviour, 24, 1816-1836.
Written by Victoria about 2 years ago.

In my opinion, the types of human characteristics which influence what and who individuals trust are developed over time online, the same way as they are developed in reality. Perhaps younger members of society such as teens are more adept in detecting online deception because they have had more exposure to the internet than an average middle aged adult.Their naivity due to lack of life experienced is cancelled out in place of their advanced technological knowledge. In the 2000′s the internet has become a way of life. Younger members of our society are practically raised on the internet in the school environment as well as utilising computers at home. I believe older or isolated members of our society are more prone to be vulnerable to online deception.
Written by Michael N about 2 years ago.

I do agree with your paper. The strength of your paper was that it did convince me that the internet is not to blame but its users.

I just wonder about the types of human characteristics that influence the decision to go with a scam. One could be age, being naive about the internet which is present still in many older adults with little experience or greed. It might not have been the purpose of your paper but it might have been good to offer some reasons. But one important point about that is sometimes it is indirect that you become a victim of a scam. For example, overnight it was reported that the US Attorney General Tom Corbett told job seekers to be wary of scams and outlined the latest scams taking place (Gant Daily.com, 2010). Now, deception like this to me is destructive when people put their good faith in offering their skills and in return are scammed like that. I am not saying the internet is to blame itself but certainly those that take advantage like that are practising deception on those that are vulnrable.

Gant Daily.com, (2010). AG warns job seekers to be wary of online scames. Retrieved 30 April, 2010, from http://gantdaily.com/2010/04/29/ag-warns-job-seekrs-to-be-wary-of-online-scams/
Written by Victoria about 2 years ago.

Hi Scott,

Thanks for your comment. We may think that we are accustomed to detecting deception more in real life, however, the examples I have given in my paper prove than even in the most close cultural communities where you would expect trust, deception can still occur. Although our detection skills and insticts may sharpen over time, I think with added familiarity, coincidence and abuse of trust, real life deception is at a more dangerous level.
Thanks again.
Written by Victoria about 2 years ago.

Hi Richie,
Thanks for your comment, familiarising and gaining trust to suceed is certainly at the heart of my argument. I think in most cases of grand deception for corporate gain, these elements lie at the base of their advertising.
It was really rewarding to read your comment and specific references to my examples.
Victoria
Written by Victoria about 2 years ago.

Hi Cathy,
Thanks for your comment. I think Mcdonald´s transparancy with their new healthy menu was an effort to rebuff the claims made by the critics, including those in the supersize me documentary. It was quite essential for them to do so. However, I believe they are still decieving the public. In most mcdonalds restaurants in Australia and the United states Big Macs and unhealthy choices are still more publicised than the healty ones. Mcdonalds were more interested in their own profit decline than the well being of their customers. The internet was certainly a reinforcement tool in these changes. Thanks introducing this argument.
Written by Richie_M about 2 years ago.

Hi Victoria,
I found this to be a well presented paper with strong arguments.
I agree with you that although the Internet facilitates negative business and social practices it does not create these issues and problems, and with most of the issues they are nothing new and predate the Internet.
I agree with Scott and Cathy in that people have developed their ability to identify deception through basic cues that are present through face to face communication, however I feel that your underlying point that deception is present and of greatest concern when it is through familiarity to be central to deception.
Deception involves familiarising and gaining trust in order to succeed, does it not?
What better way to gain trust, than to establish a family friendly, recognisable, seemingly philanphropic brand name such as McDonalds? Or establish trust through familiarity such as the unlicensed surgeon taking advantage of patient’s vulnerabilities being in a foreign land, with limited resources and in need of help.
Or in the case of the student that deceived teachers and peers with the assistance of government laws.
With each of your examples there is a familiariity and trust, whether it be to an individual, brand or a government body, and in each of these it is this familiarity that leaves people most vulnerable.
Once again, thank you for the paper Victoria, great work.
Written by Cathy Brzeski about 2 years ago.

Scott I agree that it is alot easier to recognize identity deception face to face/ in real life, as we have definitely become accustomed to picking up, sensing and identifying basic cues of deception. As you have said, we have certain tactics which we haven’t yet extensively developed for the internet.

But i think it comes down to experience. Some may argue that identity deception is easier detected online because they are accustomed to communicating over the web. But as you said those who are unaccustomed to communicating over the internet may have very little knowledge or idea on how to know when an identity is deceptive in some way.
Written by Scott Mackenzie about 2 years ago.

Hi Victoria,

I have to agree with Cathy and say this is a very thought provoking paper.
I particularly like the application of deception when discussing a corporate identity rather than an individual one (as is the case with the McDonalds example).
Don’t you feel though, that using our experience in dealing with people in a face to face environment has meant that the basic cues, which Donath spoke of, are more easily recognisable even when disguised or hidden? That we have developed over the
course of the years greater methods to detect deception than we have yet been able to accumulate for the online environment, especially in those people who are unaccustomed to communicating over the internet?
Written by Cathy Brzeski about 2 years ago.

A interesting & thought provoking paper.

In today’s context i believe identity deception online seems to be the trendy issue to talk about. There seems to be a pattern of the same types of news stories and research in regards to identity deception. Whether it is a 50 year old male who pretends to be a young teen in order to attract young females..or how in games players deceive others by playing a character which is very far away from who they are in real life.

People don’t realize/consider (as you have mentioned) that identity deception can just as easily occur in real life.

Its interesting that you mentioned the Mcdonalds case. From a marketing perspective they did a brilliant job in regards to managing their image up until the Super Size Me documentary was created. However, as you have discussed, after that they not only had to handle a huge amount of legal problems but also had to somehow cope with all that negative publicity.
They dealt with it by introducing a healthy menu, releasing campaigns in Australia which advertised their meat as healthy and home grown and by labeling their food with exact measures of fat and sugar content.

Do you think that by doing the above things they are still deceiving the public? Or do you believe the company has genuinely evolved into a more socially responsible enterprise?

I believe that under the circumstances it would be suicide not to make changes. I also believe the internet strongly helped them regain the public’s trust. The internet was a place were people could go to read about their new ‘healthy choices menu’ and it sort of acted like a reinforcement tool which strengthened all the moves they were making in real life.