Online Media Platforms and Social Networking allow for
Deceptive Communication to Occur Online with Ease
Abstract
This paper explores the connection between social networking platforms and the arise of deceptive communication in cyberspace as social media and technology become more interweaved into everyday routines. The purpose of this paper is to assess how online platforms are changing the role and meaning of identity when evaluating online forums and whether social networking has encouraged deceptive communications upon individuals as new technologies have allowed for misleading and disingenuous interactions with ease. Through analyzing examples and various author studies, further clarity on this topic should be provided to understand if social platforms do indeed influence traditional communications and interactions and if in turn, have affected how identity and communities should be comprehended online.
Keywords: social networks, identity, online identity, community, social media, deceptive interactions, catfishing.
Online Media Platforms and Social Networking allow for
Deceptive Communication to Occur Online with Ease
Technology has had a profound effect on the way it has encouraged individuals to come together and communicate (Smith and Kollock, 1999). Online media platforms allow for interactions to differ from traditional face-to-face encounters, which can allow for deceptive communication to occur online, which can result in the presence of a misconstrued and phony identities being commonplace online. This has given way to the arise of catfishing and dishonest interactions in social networking platforms and within dating communities. These social networks have stripped away many of the core signals and concepts that make up the qualities of a conventional face-to-face encounter and therefore has made it easier for phonies to appear on social networks as someone they are not. (Smith and Kollock, 1999) On these said online networks, communication is fast, inexpensive and reaches people at a world-wide level with platforms that allow for collaboration and interaction that has not yet been seen before this recent decade. (Smith and Kollock, 1999) This raises questions such as “How is the internet changing our basic concepts of identity, self-governance, and community?” (Smith and Kollock, 1999, p. 1). The powerful rise of social networking in accordance with the intensive reliance on technology this modern age has allowed, has encouraged individuals to take part in deceptive activities online, such as the introduction of ‘Catfishing’ on online platforms.
How the Rise of the Net has altered the meaning of Identity Online
The role of identity when evaluating social networks (and the communities that are created within these networks) is significant. When interacting within these social networks and communities, being aware of the persons who you are communicating and interacting with is vital. When communicating in the physical realm, individuals can be certain of whom they are connecting with, due to all the bodily cues that come with physical interaction. When evaluating virtual communication, it’s a very different premise (Donath, 1999). The online world allows people into a space which is abundant with interactive social platforms in which individuals are able to engage and meet with each other. “Instead of people talking to machines, networks are being used to connect people to people…These shifts make the creation of thousands of spaces to house conversations and exchanges between far-flung groups of people practical and convenient. Using network interaction media like email, chat and conferencing systems people have formed thousands of groups to discuss a range of topics, play games, entertain one another and even work on a range of complex collective projects” (Smith and Kollock, 1999, p.3) This has given rise to a completely new definition of identity when evaluating users of the internet, with parallel and multiple identities existing through innumerable platforms through virtual screens at a global scale (Turkle, 1997).
As Pearson (2009 n.p) outlines “Identity- as- performance is seen as part of the flow of social interaction as individuals construct identity performances fitting their milieu. With a heightened self–consciousness, online environments take this construction of performance to another level.” The internet’s technological advancement that has made way for an abundance of social networks, has indeed contributed to the sense of identity for individuals online. The introduction of these social networks is substantial, as the usage of these networks has webbed its way into countless individual’s everyday lives. Considering the limitless social network communities available to people, individuals can now express their identities through social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, and Snapchat. Through Blogs, Wikis or YouTube or even through dating communities like Tinder, eHarmony, and Bumble. There are endless opportunities for consumers of the net to latch their identities onto and “Real life can be just ‘one more window’” (Turkle, 1997, p. 74) These social spaces and platforms in which people are now engaging in and expressing these identities has given rise to the question, are the people we meet and interact with online, in this window, to be trusted?
The Net is Allowing for Deceptive Communication Online with Ease
The rise of the internet has also given rise to questions about the genuineness of the individuals we interact with online, as self-presentation of individuals is an aspect that can be controlled easily raising thought about the authenticity of others online. “We begin with a consideration of identity, the basic building block of social interaction. All of our interactions, even those with strangers, are shaped by our sense of with whom we are interacting. In face-to-face and telephone interactions, there are a wealth of cues of varying reliability to indicate our identity and our intentions. Our clothes, voices, bodies, and gestures signal messages about status, power and group membership. We rely on our ability to recognize fellow group members in order to know who we can turn to and what we can expect.” (Smith and Kollock, 1991, p.8) With these distinctive physical cues stripped away, it leaves space for the imagination to replace what isn’t there. This means anyone on the internet can be anybody or anything they wish to be. The ease of self-presentation has never been so achievable for individuals and the will to create a persona for yourself is one that many find intriguing. “Critics worry that life on the net can never be a meaningful or complete because it will lead people away from the full range of in-person contact. Or, they worry that people will get so engulfed in the simulacrum virtual reality, they will lose contact with real life” (Wellman & Guilla, 1997). Not only is it of concern that meaning, and loss of contact is possible, But, what does self-presentation mean for individuals online? Are internet users under threat of ingeniousness and unsafe encounters? “O’Brien points out that there is a strain between those who view online interaction as an opportunity to ‘perform’ a variety of perhaps fabricated roles versus those who see cyberspace as a new communication medium between “real people” (Smith and Kollock, 1999, p.12). Moreover, how are we to define and decide who a real person is?
On differing social network platforms, the terms and conditions generally differ regarding whether the users of the site are able to communicate through an alternative identity than the one they were ‘legally assigned’ (Van Der Nagel & Frith, 2015). An example of this; is the controversial “real-name” anti-anonymity movement that Facebook CEO, Mark Zuckerberg is leading. The user policies Facebook outlines specifically state that users are expected to identify as one person. With Zuckerberg stating, “having two identities for yourself is an example of a lack of integrity” (Van Der Nagel & Frith, 2015, n.p). However, this has caused some uproar from the drag queen community after Facebook commenced a mass deletion of personal pages from those who prefer to use stage names rather than legitimate names (Buhr, 2014).
Participants of the drag community believe they identify with their stage identities more so than their lawful one and are protesting for the right to express this online. (Buhr, 2014) An extract from their appeal is as follows; “We cannot emphasize enough that Facebook is a poor arbiter of what is or isn’t a real name. Performers with legitimate-appearing names get locked out of their accounts while people with account names like “Jane ICanBeBadAllByMyself Doe” go without scrutiny” (Buhr, 2015, n.p). However, on the flipside of this argument, some argue that the allowance of using multiple identities or illegitimate identities online can be extremely dangerous and can cause major turmoil for some participants of the online world, there have been known “catfishing” incidences that are becoming commonplace amongst Facebook as well as many other social networking sites. “The net is only one of many ways in which the same people may interact. It is not a separate reality. People bring to their online interactions such baggage as their gender, stage in the life-cycle, cultural milieu, socioeconomic status, and off-line connections with others” (Wellman & Guila, 1997, p.3) But what does this signify for our basic concepts of identity, self-presentation and community when people connecting on the social realm have imagined up their own separate reality, and these factors are not true to the person behind the screen.
Deceiving Communication, Phoney Identities and Catfishing Incidence on Social Media and Dating Platforms
The use of modern technology has become a 21st-century cultural necessity to most individuals, most finding it hard to function without the usage of social media in their daily routines. That being said, there are also certain risks that may accompany the use of particular social networking sites. With online deception and catfishing becoming relatively normal to the online realm, users are at risk of experiencing threatening and misleading encounters online (Blazka, Smith & Smith, 2017). ‘Catfishing’ is a term that encompasses the action of an individual online, enacting on an incident of treachery and deceit by fictionalizing an entire being on the virtual realm (Kotteman, 2015). These predators assume the role of an alternative identity to deliberately trick people into a fictitious romantic or emotive relationship by stealing somebody else’s personal information and pictures or by fabricating a unique identity, and in online forums, this act is becoming progressively more mainstream (Kotteman, 2015). One of the first globally documented cases of Catfishing was recorded by known NFL football player Manti Te’o who was fooled into believing his cyber girlfriend, Lennay Kekua, had passed away from leukaemia, or had even existed (Blazka et al., 2017).
The investigators of the case state; “There was no Lennay Kekua. … She was not diagnosed with cancer, did not spend time in the hospital, did not engage in a lengthy battle with leukaemia. She never had a bone marrow transplant. She did not request he send white flowers to her funeral. Her favourite colour was not white. Her brother, Koa, did not inform Manti Te’o that she was dead. She did not exist. (Kotteman, 2015, p. 2). She was merely a creation of someone’s imagination to intentionally deceive. After the relationship between Te’o and fictitious Lennay had been so deeply broadcasted by the media, the world was introduced to the phenomenon of Catfishing, and individuals felt disturbed and scared of the online realm they assumed they could trust (Kotteman, 2015). Catfishing is not only common on social networking sites such as Facebook but has also found its way into genuine dating platforms used by innocent customers whom are intentionally searching for a life partner. “With more than one-third of relationships being facilitated through Internet dating and with 45% of online daters citing social networking sites as the primary way in which they connect with potential mates, there are clear psychological and relational implications that make studying online interaction more important than ever” (Kadrich, 2016, p.9).
The conception of online dating has given humankind the chance to witness and observe the shifting traditional standards surrounding relationships online and understand the significant features of online behaviour, such as “impression formation and self-presentation strategies” (Van Der Nagel & Frith, 2015, p. 415). As online dating has considerably transformed from being a “marginal to mainstream social practice” (Van Der Nagel & Frith, 2015, p. 415) over the past decade with 17.5% of internet users claiming they have tried online dating (Kadrich,2016 ), it can be imagined how many individuals now contribute to the online dating world and what that could signify for the genuine partakers who are forced to engage with phonies, and how these misconstrued identities are becoming more common to ensnare a stranger. In some cases, Catfishing is used as a method to scam lonely and vulnerable romantics. Ian Doney was one of many victims of Catfishing, who at 51 years of age, trusted he had finally found love after finding a woman on a single persons website (Computer Act!ve, 2017). He was scammed out of thousands of dollars, sending his ‘love’, money to meet him abroad. She never showed up. He tried again to send her money and meet her, again, to no avail. Doney was eventually scammed into substantial debts and subsequently struggled to afford basic necessities or to even eat. He eventually spiraled into an immense depression and eventually paid the ultimate price by slitting his wrists and ending his life (Computer Act!ve, 2017).
This is just one example of the dire and extensive effects Catfishing and dishonest social networking can have on innocent victims, with researching showing “that roughly 20% of online dating service users use deceptive tactics” (Kadrich, 2016, p. 52) Even if the deception is something as minor as to enhance their appearance online to appear more desirable or lying about education, culture or class (Kadrich, 2016). It is evident that the technologically reliant world in which we live is increasingly becoming more deceptive on these social networking platforms used by individuals everyday, due to the ease and effortlessness it takes for individuals to conjure up a phony identity and ensnare a stranger.
Conclusions
To close, it is undeniably apparent that modern technology has had a powerful impact on the development and progression of social networks and the way in which individuals are now choosing to interact and communicate online with other fellow networkers. As the net provides a space for individuals that is substantially varying to that of a traditional face-to-face encounter due to the lack of bodily cues, it is proving to be a space that can allow for deceptive communication with ease. The existence of fraudulent and phoney identities is becoming more commonplace with cases of catfishing and deception occurring at a high rate on varying social platforms. This is due to the effortlessness it takes for these imitation artists to fictionalise an entire identity on these platforms that run with accessibility and convenience. It is ascertaining to be a space that is potentially threatening concepts of identity and community as we know it and revolutionising how we comprehend these concepts online.
References
Blazka, M., Smith, L.E., & Smith, K.D. (2017). Follow Me, What the Harm? Considerations of Catfishing and Utilizing Fake Online Personas on Social Media. Journal of Legal Aspects of Sport, 27, 32-90. Retrieved from http://heinonline.org.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/HOL/Page?public=false&handle=hein.journals/jlas27&page=32&collection=journals#
Buhr, S. (2014). Facebook won’t budge on letting drag queens keep their names. TechCrunch Retrieved from http://techcrunch.com/2014/09/18/facebook-wont-budge-on-letting-drag-queens-keep-their-names/.
Ellison, N., Heino, R., & Gibbs, J. (2006). Managing Impressions Online: Self-Presentation Processes in the Online Dating Environment. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(2), 415-441. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00020.x
How can we Detect Online Dating Scammers? (2017). Computer Act!ve (504), 11. Retrieved from https://search-proquest com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/docview/1940858972?accountid=10382
Kadrich, M. (2016). Examining the Use of False Identities in Online Romantic Interactions. Retrieved from Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/docview/1832346720?accountid=10382
Kottemann, K. L. (2015). The Rhetoric of Deliberate Deception: What Catfishing Can TeachUs. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/docview/1707929589?accountid=10382
Smith, M. A., Kollock, P., & Ebooks, C. (1999). Communities in cyberspace / edited
by Marc A. Smith and Peter Kollock. London ; New York: London ; New York : Routledge.
Wellman, B., & Gulia, M. (1999). Virtual Communities as Communities: net surfers don’t ride alone. In M. A. Smith & P. Kollock (Eds.), Communities in cyberspace (pp. 167-194). Retrieved from http://groups.chass.utoronto.ca/netlab/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Net-Surfers-Dont-Ride-Alone-Virtual-Community-as-Community.pdf
Van der Nagel, E., & Frith, J. (2015). Anonymity, pseudonymity, and the agency ofonline identity: Examining the social practices of r/Gonewild. First Monday, 20(3), <xocs:firstpage xmlns:xocs=””/>. doi:10.5210/fm.v20i3.5615
Donath, J. (1999). Identity and Deception in the Virtual Community. In P. Kollock, & M. A. Smith (Eds.), Communities in Cyberspace (pp. 29-59). Retrieved from http://smg.media.mit.edu/people/Judith/Identity/IdentityDeception.html
Pearson, E. (2009). All the World Wide Web’s a stage: The performance of identity in onlinesocial networks. First Monday, 14(3). doi:10.5210/fm.v14i3.2162
Turkle, S. (1997). Multiple Subjectivity and Virtual Community at the End of the Freudian Century. Sociological Inquiry, 67(1), 72-84. doi:10.1111/j.1475-682X.1997.tb00430.x
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
What great writing! I thoroughly enjoyed the way you explored this topic as it is one I believe needs to be talked about more. The case studies you used in each paragraph really helped me to engage with your paper. I was particularly interested in the one that detailed drag queens fighting for the right to use an alternate identity online, after all it is a free country where we are able to be whomever we wish to be. But where do we draw the line at illegitimate identities to protect people in online communities?
I am interested to know which style of communication you favour. While your paper referred to traditional styles of communication being more honest, do you believe all types of conventional communication to be this way? Do you think that online communities give people too much power to manipulate their identities and that the platforms should be more formal, asking for more information from us to check the how genuine we are in saying who we are?
I found your argument very relatable and loved that points that you discussed. I would love to see some differing opinions in this comment thread to debate with.
If you wouldn’t mind having a look at my paper I would really appreciate it. I think you may be able to relate to the comparison in traditional and non traditional communication.
https://networkconference.netstudies.org/2018Bentley/2018/05/07/emotional-norms-in-online-communities/
Thanks,
Abbey
Hi Abbey,
Thanks for your feedback!
I absolutely agree with you that deception online is a topic that should be spoken about more, Especially so users can be aware of what they should be wary of when interacting with others online.
It is hard to draw a definite line between illegitimate identities and expression of identity online. I believe that everyone should possess the right to engage and interact online as the person they feel the most deeply connects to their identity. But the problem arises when individuals online are dishonest about this identity they are parading on the web and interacting with other users in a manner that may be categorized as deceptive and harms the other user. So it’s very tricky to say with certainty which side of the argument is the ‘right’ side as both reap benefits and extreme downsides.
The rise of technology certainly has provided many benefits to users of the internet but it’s also created a realm where users cannot be certain of who they can trust and the power individuals now hold online is insane, it is an interesting thought to wonder where technology could lead us in terms of this new possession of power we hold online and what this could mean for traditional means of communications. What do you think the future holds?
I definitely will check out your paper and leave my thoughts!
Thank you,
– Charis
Hi Charis,
I was drawn to your paper because it covers similar content to the one I wrote (Deceptive Dating) and I was particularly interested to see the types of research you used to prove your hypothesis. I really enjoyed your use of the Smith and Kollock reference, especially how they breakdown identity into physical and social cues ready for interpretation. This definitely provides a strong foundation for your argument, especially when demonstrating how online users can conceal their identity in an attempt to catfish.
I was also drawn to your argument relating to drag queens and their battle with identity on Facebook. This is such an important issue and it made me think more about drag and transgender identity and how that would translate in accordance with Zuckerburg’s comment about having two identities making someone lack integrity. I know that for me, I have colleagues on my Facebook, which makes me rethink/altar the content I post, so would that constitute me being dishonest about who I am online because I am only showing a portion of my true self? Should I be entitled to a second Facebook page where I can freely express myself online?
Also, do you personally think that it is okay for users to have two Facebook pages to express themselves? What would be your suggestion for solving the drag queen identity issue on Facebook?
Thanks for a great paper.
Cheers,
Anna
Cheers for the comment, Anna!
I definitely agree with you that the drag and transgender community and their battle with Facebook is certainly an important issue that should be talked about more.
I don’t believe that in the case of the drag and trans community that Zuckerburg’s comment should apply, as I know a lot of trans and drag members feel more deeply connected to their illegitimate identity more so than there lawful one. It is a really tricky concept and argument. How are we to decide who is entitled to a second identity and what circumstances should allow for someone to possess two accounts without disregarding other individuals who aren’t trans or drag but want a second account?
The topic of a right to personal expression online is certainly becoming a more divisive one within society, due to the power individuals possess online and what this power can mean on social networking sites, with deception becoming more commonplace.
I don’t know what a suitable solution would be to this issue, perhaps Facebook could update their website development and introduce a platform that integrates those who identify as trans or drag in a way which incorporates both identities into one user page? What do you think should be done?
Thanks again for your insightful comment!
Charis
Hi Charis,
Again you raise some excellent arguments about personal identity that need to be addressed beyond the Facebook sphere.
Your comments have made me realise that intolerances of the LBGTQI communities within, say, a workplace, are not tolerated. If such practices are not tolerated in the offline world, why are they tolerated in the online world? Yes, bullies and trolls are rife in online communities, often protected by the guise of anonymity that the online world provides, but why is it seemingly okay for a company like Facebook to dictate who someone’s personal identity is? Perhaps such intolerances of the LBGTQI community online allows Facebook to blur the lines because their presence is predominantly in the online world, with the company existing in a liminal space between online and offline.
I also put forward the argument that often actors do not use their birth names on their social media accounts. For instance, Carmen Electra’s real name is Tara Patrick. She is not required to use that name on her Facebook page. I think to solve this problem users should only be permitted to have one Facebook page, but with the identity of their choice.
Films like Catfish have proven that online deception can still occur on Facebook despite having policies put in place to monitor it. Unless you police all accounts with strict photo identification policies then there is no real way of stopping identity deception on Facebook. They might as well just embrace the duality of the drag queen instead of ostracizing a large community of people.
I would love to hear your thoughts on this.
Cheers,
Anna
Hi Anna,
Some really enticing thoughts you’ve presented here!
Firstly, I definitely agree with you that it is rather hypocritical for the physical world to be so lenient and accepting of the trans and drag community, but won’t allow the same treatment online? I think it’s a great idea you’ve suggested if members of the drag community identify with their drag identity more so than their lawful one than perhaps that is the one that should use online as a means of self-expression, but it is such a tricky topic!
I absolutely loved the ideas you’ve brought up regarding celebrities who use their ‘stage name’ and are not required to use their lawful ones. Who really thinks celebrities such as Lil Yachty, Blac Chyna and Snoop Dog are using their birth names? It’s quite a double standard you have brought up. Especially considering drag queens generally work in a similar industry as actors and musicians, using entertainment as a means for self-expression.
I definitely think Facebook has bigger fish to fry if they want to eliminate deception on Facebook platforms. The drag, and trans community is one that I think are innocently trying to express themselves and Zuckerburg should perhaps focus his efforts on cases that actually harm others like Emotional Deception, Pedophilia, and Deception in Fraud and Theft! What do you think?
Thanks for sharing those great ideas!
Charis
Hi Charis,
I really enjoyed this read. I found it both informative and your use of examples was really enticing from a readers perspective. I particularly found it to be a great insight into the deeper, more psychological side of communicating online. It is a topic that through the rise of social media, has forced us to think about it a lot more and I definitely think you did well to clearly outline this.
I have personally heard the phrase “catfishing” a number of times however was never quite clear on what it EXACTLY is? I found this a very interesting concept that you explored. My rather simple question to you is regarding the discussion of whether online dating can really be facilitated over a longer stretch of time without face to face contact? I personally find it very hard in the modern day to trust many people online who I haven’t met.
The many different and well written examples you gave really intrigued me and kept me wanting to read more regarding this topic of deception!
Regards,
Tom
Hi Tom,
Thanks for the feedback and commendation!
It certainly is interesting how the rise of technology and social networking has allowed for a strong sense of consumer power which has led to online actions such as Catfishing becoming ordinary.
What a fascinating question! It unquestionably would be a challenge for some individuals to even consider facilitating a relationship online. But, that being said, this age of technology has certainly allowed the means for a lot of individuals to do this with ease due to constant internet communications, connections and applications such as FaceTime and Skype.
However, it certainly would be an interesting journey between two individuals but after establishing a sense of trust over a period, I believe this kind of relationship could work, and I’ve seen in many cases it does!
Cheers again for the comment,
Charis
Hi Charis!
Such an engaging paper! Good work!
I found the example you gave about (fraudulent online dating profiles) the non-existent girlfriend of Manti Te’o very interesting as I struggled to find a good example of this for my conference paper. I did a bit of research into this case and I found out that one of the men behind the hoax (Ronaiah Tuiasosopo) actually had strong feelings for Te’o and believed that creating a fake virtual identity (being a female as Te’o is a straight man) would be the best way to express them. My paper focuses on cyber bullying within online communities and some of the effects from them (depression, suicide, etc.). Many of the examples I found were intentional cyber bullying cases where one wanted to harm another (due to jealousy or hatred). However, this case seemed to be somebody showing genuine feelings for Te’o and they wanted to express them, they just didn’t know how (as they did not have the same sexual orientation as Te’o) so they resorted to creating a fake identity of Te’o’s sexual orientation instead to do so. Do you think this is still a form of intentional cyber bullying or someone genuinely trying to express their feelings?
Jack
Cheers for the comment, Jack!
That is a very riveting question to consider! I absolutely still believe the actions of Ronaiah Tuiasosopo to be very deceptive (nonetheless his feelings toward Te’o) as they were damaging to another person in the online realm who was unsuspectedly being fooled into an emotive relationship.
Due to this I still would consider it to be some level of cyberbullying, perhaps not the traditional bullying we have come to know online but certainly a level that acts as an intimidation on emotion. What are your thoughts?
Cheers again!
Charis
Hi Charis
That was a very thought provoking paper you wrote. You really illustrated well how false identities can be used for malicious purposes. However, I liked the examples you gave where it is appropriate to have a false identity or pseudonym (drag community). Your introductory comment “new technologies have allowed for misleading and disingenuous interactions with ease” is a critical point to make and it ties nicely to your closing argument that “fraudulent and phoney identities is becoming more commonplace”. Am I correct in drawing from this that you are acknowledging that there have always been frauds in the offline world targeting vulnerable people, but with Online Media Platforms it has just made it that much easier for them to do it and on a massive scale using fake identities?
I also liked very much how you identified all the social cues there are when people interact with people away from the web (traditional communication). My paper looked at ‘over-sharing’, but one of things I tried to do was to prove that ‘virtue friendships’ could be achieved online. In other words, that we could build strong friendships by being able to get to know each other’s character. I looked at it from the point of view when people use their true identity, not a pseudonym. I think the comparison between your paper and mine is quite interesting when it comes to building relationships. Is it the case that people take the information they are provided by others (whether it be true or false) as being true? Therefore, there are a group of people who build close relationships with real people and go on to have real relationships, and then there are others who are taken in by a lie and only find out at the end. Such as that tragic example you highlighted in your paper. Have people forgotten how important those traditional social cues are in determining a person’s true character? Is there a way of using technology to incorporate features that allow people to see some of those social cues online? Would that help in weeding out fake identities earlier so people are not taken advantage of? For example, could these online dating sites use Skype like features where you can talk to a person in real time and by video?
Hi Julian,
Thanks for your comment! You brought up a lot of great points.
To answer your question regarding the acknowledgment of frauds in the offline world, I would say that certainly, these people would have devious and deceptive minds and the online world is simply a way in which they can facilitate this mindset without being scrutinized as much as they would be in the physical realm. It is hard to say with certainty if these individuals ‘have always been frauds’. In most cases, I believe the internet has encouraged deception and perhaps without the internet, these fraudulent individuals would not be as commonplace without the appropriate platform to facilitate their behavior.
I am really interested in the links you have made regarding true identities and fake identities, and individuals on the net always assuming the content they are receiving is ‘true’. That certainly is an aspect of the online world that is rapidly becoming more concerning and maybe individuals should be less trusting of strangers? I definitely think to utilize applications such as Skype + Facetime…etc. would be beneficial to create social connections by weeding out the fraudulent before they are able to take advantage of innocent internet users, and I certainly hope the online world is heading more in that direction, especially on dating sites to create a safer space for consumers. What do you think?
Thanks again for your insightful thoughts and comments Julian!
Charis
Hi Charis, I agree entirely that the internet has encouraged more devious behaviour. That is a very interesting point because it makes you wonder just how close we all might be from stepping over that line from being honest, to being dishonest and potentially criminal. Give someone sitting on that very fine line the right tool (social media platforms) and suddenly their dishonest fantasies become a reality. Not only has the internet provided a place for people to hide behind fake identities, it also has enable deceitful individuals to target multiple people simultaneously. I also agree with you that dating sites are trying to make it easier to weed out fake identities by demonstrating photos are legitimate or saying that the woman has to initiate the conversation first. However, anyone can Photoshop a tick on an image and even if the woman starts the conversation, there is still no guarantee that the person is real. So I think I go back to my initial comments that really live video type functions on dating sites should be the next step. I think it is much harder to fake that.
We don’t have issues with people we meet offline and then connect with them online. As you point out it is really about the people we newly meet online. The only advice I can offer is that we probably need to educate people to essentially do their homework more. We see this with the fake news that is published online. People believe what they read. However, if they spent the time trying to find additional news stories from recognised outlets that supported what they read initially, they would have a better chance of determining what is real content and what is fake. I recognise that is much harder to do on dating sites, however you can tailor your conversations with people online to extract key information that would give you a clue as to if they are real or not.
Hi Charis, one thing I forgot to add about dating sites was around what happens on dating sites for people in same sex relationships? A man and a woman match on a dating site and the man has to wait for the woman to initiate the conversation. That’s straight forward, but how would that work in a same sex relationship dating site? Who then gets to initiate the conversation? I don’t know the answer to this question, but I think it would be unfair that this safety feature of one person getting to initiate the conversation was not available for same sex relationships. Even still I don’t think it solves the problem of trying to weed out fake people
Hi Charis and Julian,
I completely agree with Julian’s point about live video streaming as a potential way of seeing if someone is real on a dating site.
To further this conversation, how do you feel about Snapchat as a means of verifying if a person is real? I know that in my experience online dating, Snapchat is usually the main way I try to verify if the person is physically who they say they are as you can see the photo being taken in real time. You can also see how often the person uses the app, with a high score suggesting they send a lot of ‘real-time’ photographs. Also, a Snapchat filter can only hide so much. What other popular social media platforms do you feel are the safest to use for online dating purposes?
I look forward to hearing your thoughts.
Cheers,
Anna
You’ve brought up many interesting points here, Julian!
I definitely agree with you that there is a very fine line between honest, dishonest and criminal interactions online and this fine line is certainly something that is becoming very worrying when discussing the online realm.
I would concur with you that using means of video communication is one of the only ways to eliminate deception online or at least give the user a better chance of avoiding deceptive users. Additionally, users absolutely should be educating themselves online more about topics such as deception and fraudulent actions on social media and dating platforms. I still believe that so many users of online communications simply are not aware of the dangers that are becoming so prevalent online! People are just too naive and accepting of the information they are presented, not considering if the information received should be trusted.
That is also a very interesting point you have raised, regarding same-sex dating apps. However, I’m not sure if these safety features are even that advantageous to individuals online, even if the woman is the one initiating the conversation, that does not mean she cannot be the cat-fisher herself. Although it does weed out a lot of male catfishers who cannot be bothered waiting to be messaged, this perhaps gives an upper edge to female catfishers who are able to target men who are awaiting messages a lot easier! It’s really tricky trying to find a suitable solution for weeding out the fraudulent online. It seems one way or another there is leeway for deception to still be possible!
Thanks again,
Charis
Hi Anna,
Snapchat I agree is a good way of eliminating deceptive communications online, definitely, the live time of the application would ensure most users are who they say they are. I myself, always check the Snapchat score of who I am conversing with. If they have a low score, aren’t on the Snapchat map and don’t send pictures with their face, that’s when it’s easy to pick up ingenuine communication. Snapchat is definitely a good way of verifying if a person is real and I would recommend it to anyone getting to know someone they have met online!
Charis
Hi Anna and Charis,
I haven’t used Snapchat myself, but from my limited understanding of its functionality, I think Snapchat is a platform that can bring us closer to identifying genuine people. The cynical me says we can integrate as much functionality as we like into dating sites/apps, but it always feels like there will be someone who finds a way to cheat the technology. I think we can use all these functionalities to improve and make our experiences safer on dating apps, however I do believe people need drive the conversation more by asking many questions of the other person that would bring out the truth. I think people tend to let the other party drive the the conversation in the direction they want, rather than trying to be the ones to drive the conversations themselves. In other words, ask questions of the other person that require unique responses, if the two don’t match, or the question is completely ignored then it should raise a red flag. I sound like a shrink I know, but I would love to hear your thoughts as for me I think sometimes the best methods are the simple ones.
Hi Charis,
I am glad to hear that you also find Snapchat to be a safer means of verifying online identity. Like you I am also skeptical of users who do not show ‘real-time’ photographs of their faces and if their Snapchat score is particularly low. I will admit though that I do tend to hide my Snapchat map location as I am skeptical of having viewers being able to see where I live if I did not know them personally. I use Snapchat predominantly at home, and considering I live on acreage it would easy for another user to find out where I lived if I had that feature active. I will admit though, I am oddly cautious of users on dating apps like Tinder that do not choose to show their current location. I am not interested in seeing the particulars of where they live, but I would like to know that they are in a 50km radius of me. Do you think that having these location ‘pings’ help to eliminate things like fraud, identity theft and money scamming? Or does this make other users more vulnerable to these threats?
Look forward to hearing your thoughts.
Cheers,
Anna
Hi Julian and Charis,
Julian, you are perfectly right about letting the other person steer the conversation. I think that if someone is trying to scam money the conversation will veer there quickly. I remember seeing a Dr. Phil episode recently about a man who had been scammed out of 1 million dollars by an online stranger, and despite not having met the person and being a million dollars down in funds (yikes!), they still engaged with the scammer just to feel a connection with someone. The biggest lesson I picked up from this show was that scammers know what they are looking for in their targets. It is usually people who are willing to overlook the inconsistencies, the spelling mistakes and the lack of video chatting/consistent photographs. Some scammers even came out to say that they use spelling mistakes on purpose to weed out their targets more easily. Those who see through the facade will quickly stop engaging, saving the scammer time and effort. Here is the link to information and a quick video about this episode if you are interested:
https://www.drphil.com/videos/how-online-love-scammers-often-lure-in-men/
The videos on there also introduce another important aspect to online deception, which are the victims of identity theft that scammers also prey on.
Also, your points about always having a minority of users knowing how to manipulate the technology is a really good one. Without simply meeting in person it seems almost impossible to know if someone is real or not. Snapchat just adds another hurdle for the catfish to jump through, hopefully deterring the novice fraud. It also has video options and a voice recording function, which adds new layers to verifying user authenticity.
It makes me wonder, where do we draw the line on invading someone’s privacy just to prove that they are real? And are we putting ourselves in danger by giving away information freely, merely to prove we are being honest too?
Look forward to hearing your thoughts.
Cheers,
Anna
Hi Anna and Julian,
Again a lot of very interesting points were raised here!
I absolutely agree with you both that users should definitely take control of the power they can possess online and should steer the conversation more. This is a much better alternative than blindlessly allowing themselves to be a submissive to the conversation. This would surely ensure higher rates of deceivers being weeded out who are unable to steer the conversation towards topics that allow them to commit these fraudulent acts they thrive upon.
The Dr. Phil video you linked was certainly very insightful, Anna. It’s mind-blowing how technology communications have allowed such a platform for people to deceive one another to such a high degree!! I found it very interesting how deceivers online purposely allow themselves to communicate with poor spelling and grammar in order to fish out the weaker and more vulnerable online.
This discussion is making me feel almost a little hopeless and disheartened about the world of technology we live in. It is certainly true that the further technology advances, the more we pay the price. It is becoming evident that the limits we have to set and boundaries we have to push to test to see if the others we are communicating with are even real are becoming a bit out of hand. It’s such a shame that the amazing powers of technology that have developed to this point have also given individuals the will to abuse this power. It’s a curious thought to wonder how cat fishing and deception will develop… or if a suitable solution will be improvised before it can develop further!
Hi Charis and Julian,
I just realised that I misread Julian’s initial argument. Oops!
To expand on my original point, I would challenge the notion that users should steer the conversation when interacting with other online daters. So long as users have an awareness of catfishing, identity theft and money scammers when interacting online, then it could potentially save time and effort to let the other party steer the conversation. If a person’s intention is to ask for money, then it will most likely follow a sob story they will tell, so theoretically, the sooner they get the chance to lead the conversation, the sooner their real intentions will be revealed. Certainly you learn more about someone the more they talk, rather than by them silently listening. They may just tell you what you want to hear if you steer the conversation as your motivations, desires and fears become clearer for them. The potential catfish may create a false sense of comfort using the personal information users have volunteered to them. After all, how many different verbal tests are there that can prove someone is not a catfish? It would also allow users to avoid assigning positive attributes that the potential catfish does not actually have, known to Rosen, Cheever, Cummings and Felt (2008) as “Hyperpersonal perspective” (p. 2129). Also, as mentioned in the Dr. Phil video above, if messages are littered with spelling and grammatical errors in an attempt to weed out the vulnerable, then why not see how they lead the conversation, revealing how they choose to interact in their entirety?
I will admit though, steering them towards an app like Snapchat is probably beneficial, but beyond that, I am a strong believer that you learn more from listening than you do from speaking. I would be interested to hear what do you think about this.
Cheers,
Anna
Reference:
Rosen, L., Cheever, N., Cummings, C. & Felt, J. (2008) The impact of emotionality and self-disclosure on online dating versus traditional dating. Computers in human behavior, 24, 2124-2157. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2007.10.003
Hi Anna Charis,
I definitely take your point Anna about saving time and the need to increase awareness of catfishing. I guess the point I was trying to make about steering the conversation was about asking questions of what was being said by the other person to determine the legitimacy of the individual and spot the gaps in a story. If it was about money you are absolutely right that that would become clear very early on in a conversation, but sometimes it can be about something else such as being a drug courier without even knowing it. Take the Australian older lady who has just been sentenced to death in Malaysia for drug running. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-24/sydney-woman-sentenced-to-death-in-malaysia/9797076
A scam of this nature might not be so clear so early on as from what I gather this was months in the making.
Hi Julian and Charis,
Julian, the article you cited makes your point clearer for me and I can definitely see the validity of your argument. You’re right, the victim was groomed for two years. I think it all comes down to having a global understanding that online scamming is also evolving with Internet technologies (as we mentioned above). It seems Internet fraud is now being catered to individuals as a means of making them less predictable and more effective. What a horrific and sad story, one that I wasn’t aware of until your post. This is a prime example of how modern technology is failing us all.
Hi Charis,
This was a very interesting read with a lot of thought-provoking ideas presented. I really enjoyed how you enhanced your discussion with the inclusion of real life examples, especially the one about catfishing. Reading this actually made me feel a bit scared about how we really have no idea who we could be talking to online, even someone who we think we know very well, which is something I haven’t really thought of before.
The web allows for complete anonymity, even on platforms that seem to be genuine, like Facebook. As you pointed out, one’s identity on Facebook is generally what others believe to be their ‘true self’. Many people on Facebook accept friend requests from people they do not know in real life without realise the consequences. Often it is the young teenagers on Facebook that are accepting strangers’ friend requests as they want to appear ‘cool’ to their peers by having lots of Facebook ‘friends’. At this age, teenagers are very vulnerable and often do not consider their safety online. Do you think that Facebook should be focusing more on monitoring and deleting the profiles of potential predators rather than the profiles of innocent drag queens?
I have heard stories of pedophiles catfishing teenagers by pretending to be another teenager who wants to flirt with them online. I would be interested to hear your thoughts on how the anonymity of the web allows for pedophiles to trick children and teenagers.
Thanks,
Isabel.
Thanks for a great comment, Isabel. You brought up many valid points.
I would have to say I do agree with you that the online world we are mindlessly engaging in is becoming very scary. We are typically communicating and interacting with people online every day and the thought that these people we accept as ‘one thing’ could be something entirely different, is truly terrifying. It hurts my brain just thinking about it!
I absolutely agree with you, at your statement regarding the younger generation and their eagerness to appear ‘cool’ and well-liked online, even if this means accepting the dire consequences of befriending strangers online. I certainly think Zuckerburg should be targeting genuine dangerous individuals who have the potential to severely harm unsuspecting clients of Facebook, rather than targeting the drag community who are causing no harm but pretty much just self-expression…
Pedophilia is a seriously scary thought and consequence of online communications. It’s a topic that deserves a whole paper to itself, regarding deceptive behavior online! Especially to trick an age group that generally doesn’t know any better, is sick. After you mentioned Pedophilia online, I did a bit of research and found this article that talks about catching Pedophiles online.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2899114/Chilling-online-conversations-paedophile-hunters-posing-schoolchildren-men-trying-groom-them.html
It’s a captivating read, I’d be interested to hear some of your thoughts on the topic!
Cheers again for the comment,
Charis
Very interesting article you linked, and quite scary to think about how often conversations between a pedophile and a minor happen online. I think it’s great that members of the community are taking it into their own hands to catch these people when the police do not have enough time or resources. Hopefully soon there will be more systems introduced into all online platforms that can reduce the amount of conversations between pedophiles and minors even further. Additionally, young people should all be made completely aware of the risks of talking to strangers online. Most parents warn their children not to talk to strangers on the street, and this warning should be just as important in the online context as well.
Thanks,
Isabel.
I completely agree Isabel, I am very appreciative of the input you’ve contributed thus far! You’ve brought light to some really great points!
Cheers
Charis
Hi Charis,
Such a fascinating topic you’ve explored in your paper, as well as the subsequent discussion in the comments! One of the points I took was the quote you’d included that there is a strain between those who view online interaction as an opportunity to ‘perform’ a variety of perhaps fabricated roles versus those who see cyberspace as a new communication medium between real people.
In some of the other papers I’ve read throughout this online conference there has been a lot of discussion around self-presentation on social media, and the performance of the online self – and this may well be regarded as ‘false’, however when this is used in a way to perform a genuinely deceptive and false identity, it is unsettling just how convincing it can appear to others. There continues to be many tech-savvy online users who become targets of online scammers, fake influencers or catfishers who fabricate their identity and backstory for many years.
Do you believe there needs to be more awareness or education, perhaps earlier in school now that society is integrating technology from ages earlier than ever before? Would love to hear your thoughts.
Thanks for sharing your paper!
Cheers,
Teresa
Hi Teresa,
Thanks for the comment,
That’s a riveting point you’ve brought up!
I would happen to believe that schools should definitely start to integrate technology communications classes as well as teach students to be aware of the online realm. These classes could especially be beneficial to younger students who are still vulnerable and uneducated about the dangers of communicating online, and are still learning how to use such technologies. It certainly would be advantageous for these kids to be proactive and learn how to be aware of dangers online as they are learning how to use the online application itself.
I truly believe that the prime reason for deceivers online being able to thrive to the extent they do, is predominantly due to the limited education and unawareness so many partakers of social networks have. It seems as though even though deception online is growing so rapidly, there are still not sufficient teaching methods or ways to educate, not only just kids and students, but adults into being aware.
I absolutely think you are headed on the right track in thinking of appropriate solutions to deception online!
Charis
Hey there Teresa and Charis,
Must I say first and for most, I really enjoyed reading through your paper Charis, you addressed so many interesting issues! Your conversation above has intrigued me and I can’t help but agree with you both that schools these days have to integrate social realm sessions or classes so that the young and vulnerable are aware of what could be out there online. I do remember attending one of these (compulsory) talks from a professional that spoke about online predators and how they target young children through social media fake profiles.
In your paper you mentioned “This means anyone on the internet can be anybody or anything they wish to be.” which I totally agree with, and it still scares me to this day that unless users can see each other face-to-face, you will never know who you’re really talking to.
Cheers, Gulz.
Thanks for the Reply, Giuliano!
Thank you for your compliments and comments,
I agree that it is super scary that anyone online has the power to manipulate any identity they wish to shape to and then communicate this with others, and most of the time they go unsuspected….Very interesting to hear your own personal experiences regarding education of perceived predators online. In my schooling experience we received little to no education on predators online, we occasionally got very generic “be careful what you do online” talks, but nothing significant enough to actually influence how I interact online or to give me any insight into actually how dangerous the online realm is, and how frequent deceptive behaviours are! Do you personally believe this compulsory talk you received was something that has actually helped engrave your choices regarding the communications you make online? Or do you think more intensive focus should be drawn to this topic in schools and integrated into everyday learning!
Cheers again,
Charis
Charis
Hi Charis and Gulz,
I also just had the thought that it would probably also be beneficial to present these sorts of talks/education to older generations who are the complete opposite – those that haven’t grown up with technology and are just as vulnerable to deceptive individuals online that seek to take advantage of their lack of online awareness.
Cheers,
Teresa
Hello again Teresa,
I would absolutely 110% agree with that,
I believe we are pretty privileged to have grown up in an age where technology certainly is flourishing, and we have more resources thrown our way in order to understand certain aspects of the net that the older generations aren’t as familiar with.
Especially considering older generations do take up a substantial part of the market in online dating, which would be a pretty substantial targeted demographic for deceivers. I think that’s a great idea, how would you go about presenting this information to the older generations? I think a huge issue is a lack of resources actually being sourced out and distributed to these groups.
Thanks,
Charis
Hi again Charis!
I think it’s something that could actually be integrated with local government and by utilising local community facilities, perhaps at the local library or leisure centre – somewhere familiar and accessible, that they could do in the evenings. There are usually staff that are involved in coordinating events for community engagement and this could hopefully be an extension of that!
Cheers,
Teresa
Hello Teresa,
Yes I agree with you that this kind of set up could be a very reasonable solution to educating individuals on the online realm. However, what incentives do you think people would have to attend? I’m not sure about you, but I consider myself to be quite a busy person, and rather lazy at times…. I don’t know how inclined I personally would be to attend community events.
I think this kind of event would be really good at schools and parent student nights or something of the sort. Perhaps a location where individuals would be more ‘forced’ to learn about this topic than doing so by their own will. There are heaps of sources online educating individuals on the dangers of social networking and dating websites, and even so, many individuals still choose to not educate themselves. Perhaps if this access was more forced upon people, they would be able to learn! Just some thoughts!
Charis
Hi Charis!
I loved your paper and found it a very interesting read. I really enjoyed how you looked at the two different sides to the debate over holding multiple identities online.
The section that I found the most interesting was where you discussed Drag queens and how there was an uproar from their community when the idea of having multiple identities online was attacked. Have you ever seen Ru Paul’s Drag race? It is a very popular TV show in the United states from which many of the drag queens on the show become quite famous, especially through their different social media platforms. It makes me wonder how people who are against having multiple identities online, such as Mark Zuckerberg, would deal with the argument coming from social media influencers since they have such a large audience. Have you ever had to create multiple identities for yourself online? How do you think you would have felt if you were in these drag queens shoes.
-Nicola
Hello Nicola,
Thank you for the comments and insight!
I actually have only seen Ru Paul’s drag race a handful of times, but I am aware of the influence it has had within the entertainment industry! It’s a fantastically popular show at the moment. Which I think is great because it is giving the drag community a larger platform to voice themselves on.
I think it’s a really tricky line to draw, at what signifies a fake identity, a multilayered identity and a deceptive one. In terms of Drag Queens, certainly they feel their identity is multilayered, and the part of them that participates in drag is a huge part of what makes them who they are. I think this should be perfectly reasonable to express online. Like other Facebook users, they just want to let their friends and family know what they have been up to! Surely, Zuckerburg has some bigger fish to fry!
I’m not sure how Zuckerburg is coping with such a strong influx of people backing up the drag community, but I know they certainly aren’t backing down any time soon to fight for their right to express, nor, should they in my opinion! I was reading an article about the argument just now, and saw this quote from Ru Paul herself which I found to be interesting “In showbiz, there’s no such thing as bad publicity as long as they spell your name right, but it’s bad policy when Facebook strips the rights of creative individuals who have blossomed into something even more fabulous than the name their mama gave them.” (Colucci, 2014) I’d be interested to know what you think, regarding this sentiment!
Personally if I was in the positions of these drag queens I would be certainly feeling attacked and disheartened at the inability for me to express my identity and sense of self. Celebrities are allowed to flaunt stage names on social media platforms with no problems, why shouldn’t they be able to? Let me know what you think!
Cheers,
Charis
Colucci, J. (2014). What you need to know about Facebook’s battle with drag queens (update). Retrieved from https://www.engadget.com/2014/09/30/facebook-drag-queens-explainer/?guccounter=1
Hey Charis,
this was a really interesting read! I love how you explored and elaborated on what a catfish actually is, that example of the man whose life was ruined by a catfish was especially disheartening!
In my paper I discuss how using a false identity can educate the user on how others perceive and interact with people who are different from themselves, giving insight especially on how those in minority groups are treated. Your stance on catfishing is obvious, but how do you feel about using a false identity in this way?
I also mention how teenagers learn through action, and how although it may not be something that *should* be done, using a false identity to experiment with social boundaries can help teenagers learn about our society and the role they wish to play within it. I think this is very easy to debate as dangerous and enabling, especially when you consider the propensity some teens have when it comes to being controversial online (with things like cyber-bullying, flaming, and trolling). What are your thoughts?
Thanks!