Understanding Anonymous
The members that make up the collective known as Anonymous are typically thought of as computer hackers. While some members do engage in hacking, the collective’s Internet forays are probably better thought of as a form of “hacktivism.” The hacktivist seeks to effect social and political change. In that regard, Anonymous has come a long way from its early days of Internet pranks and trolling. The collective has come to be symbolized by a mask bearing a facial likeness to Guy Fawkes, a conspirator involved in the Gunpowder Plot of 1605. The plot was an attempt to blow up the House of Lords and assassinate King James I of England and VI of Scotland. The mask is also featured in the movie, “V for Vendetta,” a movie that is quite popular with Anonymous members.
Anthropologist Gabriella Coleman has done a wonderful job of studying Anonymous from its earliest days. Coleman states that the group’s members are typically geeks and computer hackers and by using the term geeks, Coleman means persons that have “grown up on the Internet, on message boards, gaming, these sorts of things.” Since the group evolved on the Internet, and since the Internet started out largely free of censorship and provided a platform for the exercise of free speech, it makes sense that the group would place great value on free speech and be resistant to censorship. Anonymity and privacy are also valued by the group as protection mechanisms to avoid the group’s activities being restrained by law enforcement or other groups. Coleman noted that the group transitioned to political and social activisim in 2008, with their campaign against Scientology. In 2008, when the Church of Scientology attempted to force the takedown of a leaked Tom Cruise video promoting Scientology, Anonymous launched DDoS attacks and other hacktivist activities against Scientology.
After the conflict with Scientology, some members of Anonymous saw protest for social causes as a better use of their efforts that had previously been devoted to Internet trolling. This was illustrated by the cooperation between Anonymous and the Occupy movement. Chris Housh, one of the rare publicly known members of Anonymous had been an organizer of the Anonymous campaign against Scientology. At that time, he did not care about political or social change. However, he ended up linking with other Occupy protestors through their use of Anonymous IRC channels to get out the word about the protests. Housh stated, “I’ve gone from not caring about anything at all but myself to pretty much a full-time activist and I’m pretty happy with the transformation. It feels good to care about the world.” When the Occupy protests began in New York, some Anonymous protesters were nearby, protesting a Scientology site. The Scientology protest involved Anonymous members mocking everyone who left the Scientology buildings. The group at that protest saw the Occupy protesters as “deluded hippies” and challenged their claim to be Anonymous. The original Anons were pranksters, but now there are Anons who are attracted to the movement for moral reasons, rather than mainly for the laughs (known to Anonymous members as “lulz”).
Anonymous’ leap to hacktivism can be explained by social identity theory. Social Identity Theory asserts that one’s own group – the “ingroup” – may often be threatened when “outgroups” – groups regarded as standing in opposition to the ingroup – are perceived to be encroaching on the ingroup’s physical or psychological territory. The concepts of honor and shame and the mechanisms of challenge and response, as well as the limited good over which the ingroup and outgroup struggle, are also part of SIT. In the Scientology example, the efforts by the Church of Scientology, the outgroup, to censor the video encroached on the psychological territory of the ingroup, Anonymous. The attempt by the church to censor the video was interpreted by Anonymous as a negative honor challenge and led to Anonymous’ response to protect the limited good that they valued most, freedom of speech on the Internet. Similar examples of the honor challenge and response mechanism can be found in Anonymous raids in support of Wikileaks and in support of the Occupy movement.
Additionally, members of Anonymous who draw attention to themselves or claim to speak for the group are ostracized. This is yet another example of the honor challenge and response mechanism. If a member draws attention to himself or claims to speak for the group, then that is perceived by the group as a negative honor challenge. Anonymous’ response to that challenge is to expunge that person from the group.
Some of Anonymous’ actions are controversial and have even led to the arrest of some of its members. These actions have included Distributed DDoS attacks on such disparate targets as Stratfor, the Motion Picture Association of America, the Church of Scientology, Paypal, Bank of America and various law enforcement organizations. Conversely, Anonymous has also participated in more popular actions, such as Internet attacks against the Syrian government and against the distributors of child pornography.
The wide and disparate variety of targets adds a layer of complexity to the understanding of the group. This can be explained by the horizontal structure of the group. Anonymous is in essence a leaderless organization. Anyone can join the group and participate in its “raids.” This has led to the group’s popularity with other protest groups and a good deal of cross-pollination has taken place. The Occupy movement was one example of this.
Time will tell whether or not the efforts of groups such as Anonymous will lead to positive change. However, a continued study of the group might lead to a better understanding of the transformational impact of the information age and give us some possible clues to our shared future.
