Anonymous: The Hacktivist Social Justice Movement
When questionably unethical or illegal issues happen within the world, it creates a general unease among the public. This uneasiness is caused by the widespread broadcasting of these issues, such as rape, murder, or political unrest, and can sometimes instigate a desire within individuals for justice. Even worse than the issues that become broadcasted however, are those that are not broadcasted which the majority of the public does not know of. The amount of issues like this that occur without the general public knowing, such as corruption, is unknown, but merely thinking about it makes my skin crawl. Since the common civilian can feel useless when it comes to achieving legal consequences on a possible perpetrator, especially when not all questions are answered, the next best outlet to reach the masses becomes the Internet, especially social media. When most people use the Internet to obtain justice for others, the most common used outlet is blogs or petitions; however, the hacker activists known as Anonymous, use their computer intelligence to go about justice in a more shocking way. Anonymous is a collective in which self-proclaimed members manipulate the Internet through hacking in order to effectively combat those that they believe are hurting the common good. Even if their tactics aren’t always legal, rather than simply being upset over how bad the world and its people are, Anonymous is honorable in that they illustrate immediate action upon injustice that might otherwise slip by our legal system.
These so called “digilanties” (digital vigilantes) or “hacktivists” (hacker activists) are known for this swift action upon injustice all over the world. Generally speaking, the people that participate in this hacker collective are knowledgeable in different types of computer code and programming and will utilize these skills to employ attacks against companies or individuals that they believe are acting crude, unethical, or are potentially even engaging in illegal activities. When Anonymous sees something happening that they do not believe is just, such as the police brutality or political corruption, they start what is called an “operation.” This operation usually starts with a video informing the world as well as the chosen company, group, or individual that they will be starting their movement. To protect their identity during these videos, individuals of Anonymous also wear unsettling Guy Fawkes masks worn in the movie “V for Vendetta”, which has ultimately become their known identifier or symbol, while they lay their claims. The video is almost used as an intimidation tactic, as they usually follow the outlines of giving their target an ultimatum that they must do X or stop X or else Anonymous will not stop fighting until the target is forced to do so. When those on the receiving end of the ultimatum to do not comply, the collective begins their hacker quest to stop the identified injustice.
These hacker quests most commonly include methods such as DDoS attacks and “doxing.” DDoS attacks, or Distributed Denial of Service attacks, are usually used when Anonymous wants to take down websites. This attack, “floods a site with so much data that it slows down or crashes” (Kushner, The New Yorker). In the article, Kushner explained this kind of attack and that although it takes stamina to continue attacking, with Anonymous, it is as simple as organizing a group of hackers that will back the belief to continuously hack and overwhelm a target’s servers. Doxing is a different approach to an attack that usually consists of leaking e-mails and disseminating private information such as telephone numbers and personal addresses as well. This approach can be seen when Anonymous doxed Aaron Barr, the C.E.O. of a cybersecurity firm who reported Anonymous to the FBI and claimed he knew some of the top members of Anonymous (Kushner, The New Yorker). Not long after, Anonymous leaked some of his e-mails and information that revealed he had been using unlawful practices and Barr resigned soon after. This shows that the collective’s attacks are an effective effort to oust injustice.
The elusive entity of Anonymous is called a collective because it is not necessarily a designated group of people. As Kushner explained in the article The Masked Avengers, Anonymous “could be thought of as a shape-shifting subculture.” Although there are well known Anonymous members that battle on the front line of their attacks, essentially any person could merely decide today that he or she would like to become a member and create his or her own operation/video himself. There is no application process, no regular meetings, and no member fee. From my viewpoint, this is what makes Anonymous so great- it is not biased and doesn’t just have one agenda. On the other hand, it isn’t completely a free-for-all; the people who join Anonymous’ operations or start their own are still encouraged to act ethically and reasonably. This idea of structured operations promotes that people must only attack unethical issues with good reason rather than using Anonymous as an excuse to hack any company at random. However, when people do use Anonymous as an excuse to target the wrong issue, it could be argued that those people aren’t even a part of the Anonymous culture since they are not seeking true justice for the greater good.
With their efforts to try to make a better, more ethical world, these hacktivists could even be described as a communitarian group because they treat those that they hack as a means to an end. This means that they are looking to achieve a goal of widespread justice and positive change from their operations. By claiming, “We are legion,” at the end of every video and saying that they are “everyone and no one” on the Anonymous Headquarters website they are showing their allegiance to not just one individual or one group of people, but a multitude of people, and that they themselves are a multitude of people fighting for a unified cause of the greater good. This is why Anonymous’ actions could also be thought of as ethically viable and communitarian because it shows that Anonymous is focused on society as a whole, rather than an individual based society.
This action for a unified cause can be seen when Anonymous recently hacked and took over all webpages and social media sites operated by the white supremacist group, the Ku Klux Klan, on November 16, 2014. After taking over the KKK’s Twitter, @KuKluxKlanUSA, the page has donned the new byline “Under anon control as of 16 NOV 2014 09:11:47. You should’ve expected us,” for months. This action by the collective was prompted after threatening KKK flyers were allegedly distributed in Ferguson, Missouri.
Ever since police officer, Darren Wilson, shot and killed unarmed teenager, Michael Brown, in Ferguson, Missouri, Anonymous has shown their support in the investigation of possible race-based police brutality. The death of Brown caused constant protests since the date of the event, August 9, 2014, that occasionally would turn violent according to MSNBC (Lee and Sakuma). Because of these protests, the KKK distributed flyers in Ferguson stating that “lethal force” would be used against protesters (CBS St Louis). This was when Anonymous stepped in and took matters into their own hands, shutting down the KKK’s website completely and taking over two of the KKK’s twitter pages. Anonymous, like they normally do, then released a video containing a person in a Guy Fawkes mask and text-to-speech voiceover along with a written statement claiming that they are not attacking the KKK for the organization’s beliefs (since anonymous fights for freedom of speech), but rather because the organization has threatened “the brothers and sisters of Anonymous”- the men and women of Ferguson. Anonymous then called the KKK a bigoted “terrorist group” and used that statement as reasoning to why others should support their initiative. Anonymous’ hacking and ongoing investigation into possible KKK ties with Ferguson police was given the title Operation KKK or in social media terms “#OpKKK.” Anonymous would use the Twitter page to post serious statements regarding #OpKKK along with comical posts, such as a picture of a unicorn, assumingly to poke fun at the KKK (Altus, BBC News). Anonymous continues to have control over the Twitter pages however the posts have discontinued since December.
This is nowhere near the only time that Anonymous has taken over a website. In the past, Anonymous members have taken down the home pages of MasterCard, PayPal, Amazon, Visa in “Operation Payback” where they launched the attack due to the corporations withdrawal of donation to the website “WikiLeaks” which is now commonly known for its use by whistleblowers (Kushner, The New Yorker). Even every website of the whole government of Tunisia was once taken down when the hacktivists found out about the unethical governmental practices (Kushner, The New Yorker). This shows that they have actual power behind them, and even if they don’t create immediate results, they are at least generating conversation about the issue, which is something to help formulate change in itself. With foreign cases regarding government unrest, such as Tunisia, sometimes their website hacks will even include tips and information for protestors (Kushner, The New Yorker).
Although it is easy to side with Anonymous and support their efforts such as taking over the KKK’s social media and website, we must reflect on the ethical and legal issues involved when one group prevents another from accessing their right to freedom of speech. One issue is whether or not it is acceptable to take over the intellectual property of another group, even if Anonymous is trying to protect citizens from the threats of bigoted or corrupt people. If a group starts to terrorize others on social media or other Internet outlets, does that make it acceptable to shut down those sources entirely? For example, is there another way Anonymous can fight the hate and threats of the KKK or other organizations besides the use of illegal hacking and spamming? Another issue within Anonymous’ actions is the hindrance of free speech of other organizations such as the KKK, even if Anonymous may have described different groups as “terrorists” in their argument for a specific operation. There can be different arguments made for both sides, especially since America prides itself on freedom of speech including within the Internet. However, when threats against civilians are made, especially during a sticky situation such as the unrest within Ferguson, we can see the ethical validity in Anonymous’ argument.
Those that argue that Anonymous is acting unethically and unlawfully by taking over websites such as the KKK, will claim that Anonymous is infringing on America’s belief in freedom of speech as well as the alteration of intellectual property. Social media can often be regarded as intellectual property (Brody and Goetz, Bloomberg BNA) and when hacked, it is not only infringing on legal rights, but ethical rights as well. As can be read on the National Conference of State Legislature’s website, hacking of computer systems is illegal regardless of the cause for doing so because it is unauthorized tampering. Other than being illegal however, when it comes to the ethicality of the issue, one could argue that according to philosopher Immanuel Kant’s system of ethics, Anonymous’ actions are not ethical because the hacking could not be made into a categorical imperative (McCormick, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy). In other words, people could not constantly be hacking each other and taking over each other’s social media, regardless of the cause, because then there would be cyber unrest within the Internet. Abiding by the Kantian ethical principle, one may also argue that Anonymous is using the people and their property as a means to an end, social justice, instead of allowing people to be treated as a mean in themselves. Therefore by using Kant’s ethical principles it would be unethical to take over organizations websites and social media pages.
Even though in Operations like Op KKK, Anonymous took over the accounts to try to protect protesting civilians freedom of speech, they are also infringing on the KKK’s ability to act upon their freedom of speech. Anonymous claims that they are not against the groups like the KKK having the beliefs they do because a majority of their cases rest in fighting for freedom of speech or Internet; however, since Twitter is inherently defined as a place where individuals share their beliefs, ideas, and thoughts, they are preventing the organization to act upon that freedom to a full extent. Herein lies the paradox that Anonymous fights for rights, but apparently not for rights of people with what they called bigoted beliefs. Since this is not necessarily a legal argument, but solely an ethical one, we can approach this ethical argument through philosopher John Stuart Mill’s ethical philosophy. Since Mill was a big supporter of free speech and greatly opposed censorship, he would most likely argue that this prevention of any group’s ability to share their opinions freely on social media is unethical, and that all opinions, even the uneducated ones, should be allowed (Heydt, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy). According to this philosophy, the argument can be made that Anonymous has their right to practice free speech as long as it does not also prohibit others from practicing theirs.
Although using Mill’s ethical philosophy may have seemed to deem Anonymous’ hacking as a whole unethical, the fact that Anonymous is focused on attaining justice for the common good goes hand in hand with Mill’s ethical principle of utilitarianism (Heydt, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy). From this standpoint, we could argue that Mill would most likely agree with Anonymous’ mindset of keeping the focus of their intentions on justice. This is where the fact that the groups such as the KKK terrorize others civilians has an impact on why Anonymous is ethically a good part of society. Since the KKK, a group known for past violent crimes, threatened people in Ferguson, these common actions by Anonymous are more justifiable. Since Mill’s philosophy of utilitarianism urges others to do that which will promote the greatest good for the greatest amount of people, Anonymous was in the right by trying to prevent groups like the KKK from excelling (Heydt, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy). Doing the greatest good for the greatest amount of people is exactly what Anonymous is looking to do when they hack the websites of people who harm others. By hacking and unearthing information about unethical or unlawful people and groups, this information will ultimately help the greater good by informing the population.
This is why even if Anonymous is impinging upon legalities, their actions are indeed ethically viable because even if it means taking a certain group’s outlet for free speech or breaking the law, these actions are only to take down issues that are much greater and are hurting the common good. In today’s society, performing such bold actions such as cyber hacking is the best way to grab people’s attention. In this day and age, it is nearly the only way to be heard. The Internet acts as the new battle field where civilians are finally able to stand their ground and have a fighting chance at making a dent in combatting those who try to oppress us. The Internet also expands our reach, enabling ordinary citizens to send a message to other countries thousands of miles away, such as Tunisia, that other commoners are supporting the oppressed. It gets the intended message out that the oppressors shouldn’t always feel so confident and impenetrable. With billions of people in the world it is hard to make your voice stand out, so by doing stunts such as hacking the web pages of people who have done injustices, Anonymous’ voice is heard.
Although there are more legal, subtle ways to go about fighting injustices, such as creating blogs and forums, these things do not always catch the majority of the population’s attention. Anonymous has found a way to make people listen to their cause because if they aren’t listened to, they’ll take action. By having the power to hack the web, Anonymous is able to create a buzz and reach the masses with their case of injustice, whatever it may be. For example there is a case where Anonymous helped unravel the cover up of the rape of a 16-year-old high school girl by football players in Steubenville, Ohio (Kushner, Rolling Stone). Although Anonymous makes a point not have leaders, this movement started when a single man, Deric Lostutter, created a video claiming he would unearth all people involved in the cover up if they did not come forward themselves. This video gained a lot of attention rapidly and many people, including some still unidentified hackers, helped unravel the details of the case together and make public what happened (Kushner, Rolling Stone). During this operation, named “Op RollRedRoll”, people wanting to help further the operation would send Deric, then known as “KYAnonymous,” videos and tips and even helped to form rallies in honor of the victim that demanded justice. This shows the absolute raw power of the people that Anonymous embodies. Without Anonymous, the rapists would have never been punished and could have potentially never been told their actions were wrong. Essentially by creating Op RollRedRoll, Deric and other Anonymous members saved future potential victims from ever falling victim, thus helping create a better society.
Although Anonymous’ hacking tactics do not support Kant’s ethical principle of his categorical imperative, their tactics are efficient when it comes to helping others. Anonymous has a loyalty arising from shared humanity which means the collective of Anonymous strives to help those that are oppressed or those who have been done an injustice by communicating with the public truthfully and honestly information that most do not know. Although Anonymous’ research and exposition methods are far from being considered classic journalism, Anonymous still acts as a sort of watchdog journalist for the community, following the communitarianism ethical principle that society comes first. With its dramatic tactics, such as branding themselves with the notorious Guy Fawkes’ mask, Anonymous acts as a voice to the voiceless and fosters discussion within society about change. Whether people believe in what Anonymous brings to surface or not does not matter as long as discussion is being made. Without any focus on network ratings that other journalists have, Anonymous members are not concerned or bribed with employment stakes, forcing Anonymous to be solely focused on what’s good for the world’s society at large; this makes each individual’s contribution to Anonymous a completely selfless act of service to the community.
By acting selflessly for a cause, Anonymous’ illegal and drastic-measure sort of behavior is more of what we should see in the world today. According to Normative theories of the media: Journalism in democratic societies, “If justice becomes the fundamental value of American journalism, then the media have the goal of transforming society, of empowering individual citizens to acts in ways that promote political discussion, debate and change.” Anonymous has just that- the goal to transform society and promote change. If Anonymous did not go about issues as they do, hacking into websites and creating ominous videos that claim the demise of groups of people such as the KKK or those who covered up the Steubenville rape, many people would not be informed about the unethical injustice that happens in the world. Anonymous is currently the watchdogs of the world, and as they say- we should expect them.
This watchdog action is exactly what I have attempted to portray within the illustration I created. In this illustration, I took a piece of code from a picture of police brutality in the riots of Ferguson, Missouri. I show the code entering the Guy Fawkes mask, which is now the known symbol of Anonymous, and out of the mouth comes the word “CHANGE”, which as I have explained is what I believe is the heart of what these “hacktivists” are attempting to do. They are not only trying to change the way the world thinks, but change the way the world acts, which to me is an important aspect of that word. Many people passively say they want to “change” things, but when referring to Anonymous, the word change should not be considered as stagnant. This is why I included words such as “discrimination,” “terrorism,” and “corrupted governments” translated into binary code in the background of the illustration. I took words and phrases that Anonymous fights to rid the world of in able to show that extent of how they actively fight for a variety of causes currently plaguing our world. The words are translated into binary because it is one of the many computer languages that hackers recognize. This group of men and women see these extreme problems that need to be fixed and throughout the different operations have actively and selflessly promoted change.
This change they have promoted can be seen in the evidence of betterment of society. They don’t just hack to troll like some people will argue; they have had actual results in places where the typical legal system fails. Collectives such as this should not only be applauded for their efforts, but encouraged to continue keeping a citizens’ watch on those who remain higher up the ladder. Although Anonymous has taken upon some social justice issues too quickly in the past, such as initially blaming the wrong policeman for shooting Michael Brown, the collective recognizes that they are human and not infallible. Mistakes such as this however, still shows the fervor in which the collective is eager to use action and jump on an opportunity to promote change, which is an admirable trait and something that is not always present in government made justice systems that take years to prosecute.
Although Anonymous has a long way to go with people recognizing their importance, they have also come a long way as well. According to The Masked Avengers, back in 2008 when they organized a rally around the world against The Church of Scientology, the only reason the collective wore Guy Fawkes masks was because they wanted to keep the anonymity theme and those were the cheapest masks that were also easy to find online and accessible in other countries. This was merely five years ago and now most people will relate the mask not to the movie it originated from, but to Anonymous. This shows that people are indeed watching and listening their actions. I believe in the central reason Anonymous exists and continues to fight for what they believe to be ethical and just.
As I mentioned before, although many people try to argue that Anonymous is nothing but computer nerds with nothing better to do or criminals poking fun at the law, I see them as the new soldiers fighting on the front line. When unrest occurs, civilians feel as though they aren’t able to speak up for fear of scrutiny or punishment, and when we do speak up, most of the time our voices are not heard. The next best way to be heard is by force, but since physical force is not practical, the next best tactic is fighting through technology. Those that claim the hackers of Anonymous are just nerds with nothing better to do have severely underestimated the security and surveillance of the United States of America which Anonymous consistently dodges and bypasses. These “nerds” are not stupid; they are intelligent and know they are risking jail time and possibly even their life at some point by doing what they’re doing. But these men and women continue to fight and do what they believe is just for the initial prospect of what got them to join the cause in the first place: Change.
Sources:
Altus, Celeste. “Anonymous versus the Ku Klux Klan.” BBC News. BBC News Online, 18 Nov. 2014. Web. 17 Apr. 2015.
Brody, Peter, and Mariel Goetz. “Ten Things You Need to Know About Social Media and Intellectual Property in 2013.” Bloomberg BNA. Patent, Trademark & Copyright Daily, 30 Jan. 2013. Web. 20 Apr. 2015. <http://www.bna.com/ten-things-need-n17179872092/>.
Christians, C., T. Glasser, D. McQuail, and K. Nordenstreng. Normative theories of the media: Journalism in democratic societies. Champagne: University of Illinois Press. 2009. Print. 20 Apr. 2015.
“Computer Crime Statutes.” National Conference of State Legislatures. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Apr. 2015. <http://www.ncsl.org/research/telecommunications-and-information-technology/computer-hacking-and-unauthorized-access-laws.aspx>.
Heydt, Colin. “John Stuart Mill.” Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. N.d. Web. 21 Apr. 2015. < http://www.iep.utm.edu/milljs/>.
“KKK Warns They Will Use ‘Lethal Force’ Against Violent Ferguson Protesters.” CBS St Louis. CBS Broadcasting Inc. 13 Nov. 2014. Web. 17 April 2015.
Kushner, David. “Anonymous Vs. Steubenville.” Rolling Stone. N.p., 27 Nov. 2013. Web. 10 Apr. 2015.
Kushner, David. “The Masked Avengers.” The New Yorker. 8 Sept. 2014. Web. 22 March 2015.
Lee, Trymaine, and Amanda Sakuma. “Ferguson Protests Turn Violent.”Msnbc. NBC News Digital, 17 Aug. 2014. Web. 18 Apr. 2015.
McCormick, Matt. “Immanuel Kant: Metaphysics.” Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. N.d. Web. 21 Apr. 2015. <http://www.iep.utm.edu/kantmeta/>.
“Who We Really Are and How to Become Anonymous.” Anonymous Headquarters. N.p., 6 June 2014. Web. 22 March 2015. <http://anonhq.com/anonymous-who-we-really-are-and-how-to-become-anonymous/>.
