Goodbye, anons? Radical transparency is about to upend the internet



In June, Texas Patriot, a prominent anonymous account supportive of President Donald Trump, announced during the height of tensions with Iran:

F**k it. If Trump takes us to war, I’m done with him and his administration.
I voted for:
NO WARS
No taxes
Cheap gas
Cheap groceries
MAHA.
What of these things has actually happened?
I’m pissed.

This message from a popular pro-Trump account seemed significant. Was Trump’s populist base turning on him?

In our current world, however, where plausible fake engagement can be created at an almost limitless scale, true anons will lose a great deal of their power.

But shortly thereafter, Right Angle News, another popular anonymous account, asserted that Texas Patriot was actually based in Pakistan. Yet another popular anon account contested this, saying that Texas Patriot is really an American originally from Texas who now lives in Georgia. Notably, most other major accounts weighing in on the controversy, from Proud Elephant to Evil Texan, are themselves anonymous, adding further to the hall of mirrors.

Either way, Texas Patriot deleted its own account shortly thereafter, perhaps suggesting that he or she had something to hide — or at least didn’t want the scrutiny.

The question of whether Texas Patriot is, in fact, a patriot from Texas or a bad actor in Islamabad is ultimately beside the point. As Newsweek wrote of the incident:

Social media has proved useful for galvanizing the MAGA movement, with popular accounts often reacting to political developments from Trump’s feud with X owner Elon Musk to Trump’s policy agenda. If it emerged that an account alleged to be American was actually based in another country, it would impact users’ trust.

And such trust is rapidly eroding, which will accelerate as ever more sophisticated fake accounts and bot farms are exposed.

The incident was just one of many in which major social media accounts were discovered — or at least suggested — to be run by someone far different from who they were purported to be. And it previews a shift that is just now beginning, which will fundamentally change how we interact with social media content.

Bots indistinguishable from humans

When it comes to who will rule social media, the age of the anon is ending. The age of radical transparency is beginning — and yet, if designed well, radical transparency can still include a substantial and valuable space for a large degree of online anonymity.

Several reasons explain the shift. Increasingly sophisticated artificial intelligence models and bots generate outputs that, in many cases, are already almost indistinguishable from humans. For most users, they will soon become fully indistinguishable (a fact confirmed by multiple studies that have shown that most people have a poor ability to tell the difference between the two). And almost certainly, bots guided with even a minimum of human interaction will become indistinguishable from actual humans.

Many of my best friends have had anon accounts. A few are still prominent anons. It’s also noteworthy that almost every prominent ex-anon I know personally, whether doxxed or self-outed, dramatically improved their profile and professional opportunities once they were no longer anonymous.

I am not anti-anon, however. I understand why some people, especially those expressing opinions well outside of the mainstream, need to be anonymous. I also acknowledge that anonymity has been a crucial part of the American political tradition since the revolutionary era. An internet that banned anons would be an internet that is much poorer. This is why the biggest current anon accounts will be grandfathered into the coming system of radical transparency, as they have actual operators who are known to enough people that they are recognized as genuine.

I know several big anon accounts like this. I don’t know who is running them, but I have multiple offline friends I trust who do know the account holders and vouch for them. Accounts of this kind, with credible, real-world validation, will continue to have influence. But increasingly, new big anon accounts will be ignored, even if they amass a large number of followers (many of whom are fake).

As these ersatz accounts become increasingly sophisticated every day, engaging with the truly real becomes ever more important. Fake videos and photos proliferating on social media merely add to the potential for deception.

Age of radical transparency

Even accounts run by real people will not be immune to the age of radical transparency. Some are partially or wholly automated — a way for a “content creator” to maintain a cheap 24-hour revenue stream. In the future, if you want to have influence, mechanisms will be in place to prove not only that it is you who are posting but that you are posting content that is authentic, with a proven real-world point of origin. Some have even suggested using the blockchain as a method of validation.

There should be a simple way of blocking the worst AI slop accounts, foreign bad actors who post highly packaged clickbait, or those who shamelessly steal content made by others. Most Americans would probably prefer not to engage with unverified foreign accounts when discussing U.S. politics. Certainly, I would be willing to pay for a feed that only showed me real, verified accounts from America, along with a limited list of paid, verified, and non-anonymous accounts from other parts of the world.

I am interested in having discussions with real people about real content and the real opinions they have. I want accounts mercilessly downrated if they produce inauthentic content presented as real. I want accounts downrated that regularly retweet unverified slop. If X, or any other online platform, can’t consistently provide that, I’ll look elsewhere — and so will many others.

Anonymity breeds toxicity

My desire for authenticity is not a left-wing attempt to police “disinformation” — that is, whatever the left doesn’t want said. It’s far more serious. It’s not about getting “true” facts but a feed that is filled with actual people producing their own content representing their own views — with clear links to the sources for their claims.

Anonymity has, naturally, always been accompanied by a slew of problems: It can lead to echo chambers or aggressive exchanges, as users feel less pressure to engage rationally.

The lack of personal stakes can escalate conflict, which is amplified by AI. Modern AI can generate thousands of unique, human-like posts in seconds, overwhelming feeds with propaganda or fake news. The increasing influence of state actors in this fake news ecosystem makes it even riskier.

RELATED: Slop and spam, bots and scams: Can personalized algorithms fix the internet?

  Vertigo3d via iStock/Getty Images

Anonymity also emboldens individuals to act without fear of repercussions, which often has downsides. The online disinhibition effect, a psychological phenomenon first described by psychologist John Suler in 2004, suggests that anonymity reduces social inhibitions, leading to behaviors individuals might avoid in face-to-face settings.

Everyone has met the toxic anon online personality who turns out to be quite meek and agreeable in person. One friend of mine who had an edgy online persona eventually closed her anon account (with tens of thousands of followers) and recreated her online presence from scratch as a “face” account. Her tweets are no longer as fun or spicy as they had been, but her persona is real — and presents who she really is. And she eventually landed a great public-facing job, partly based on the quality of her tweets.

Dwindling era of anon accounts

Anons could play a leading role in the old social media world where bots were mostly obvious, and meaningful provocations were, in large part, created by real people through anonymous accounts. In our current world, however, where plausible fake engagement can be created on an almost limitless scale, true anons will lose a great deal of their power. They will be replaced as top influencers by those who are willing to be radically transparent.

Truly transparent identities should include verifiable information, such as email addresses, phone numbers, or government-issued IDs for account creation. While such information does not need to be publicly shared, it should be given to the social media company connected to the account.

Raising the barrier for AI-driven impersonation, while not foolproof, deters malicious actors, who must invest significant resources to create credible fake identities.

For anons unwilling to trust their private information to one of the major online platforms, third-party identity verifiers dedicated to protecting user privacy could carefully validate their identities while keeping them anonymous from social media companies. Such third-party brokers themselves would have their prestige checked by the accuracy of their verification procedures. This method would still allow for a high degree of public anonymity, bolstered by a backend that guarantees authenticity.

A new internet age

In the future, pure online anonymity will not be banned — nor should it be. But in the coming age of radical transparency, a truly anonymous account — one whose owner’s real-world identity is neither known within i own trusted circles nor verified by a reliable third party — will have little to no value.

The next internet age will value not just what you say, but more importantly, that others know you are the one who is saying it.

Editor’s note: A version of this article appeared originally in The American Mind.

English Premier League employs online troll-hunters who seek convictions for 'nasty' comments or messages to players



England's top soccer league employs a group of researchers who are responsible for unmasking the identities of online trolls who allegedly harass players and seeking convictions from local governments if they believe the social media users have broken the law.

A team of seven people said they manage between 50-100 reports per week about online abuse toward English Premier League players, both in the men's and women's divisions.

Using tactics that were originally developed to identify online sources that were illegally posting clips of soccer games, the group is now seeking out individuals who send threatening or harassing messages to its league's players.

The soccer players have allegedly seen an increase in messages that include racism, misogyny, transphobia, or homophobia, the BBC noted. Interestingly, reports have shown that the vast majority of the messages do not come from England, however, meaning the league officials are pursuing cruel commentary from abroad.

The Daily Mail reported that 70% of abusive comments came from overseas, while the BBC's report had that number at 80%.

"We don't often see repeat infringers - the same person sending the same messages. We often see it as one outburst, rather than a real spiral of abuse aimed at one particular individual," said investigative group leader Tim Cooper.

"I don't know if 'troll' is a bit too polite a word for some of the people that send the abuse," Cooper said, adding that the group looks out for "trigger incidents" during games. The online sleuths pay close attention to controversial moments in games and admit to proactively looking for allegedly abusive words while referencing a list of terms, comments, and phrases.

When the group believes the comments or messages have elevated to the level of a crime, they seek convictions in the proper jurisdiction.

This happened in the case of a 19-year-old from Singapore who was convicted of harassing one English league player, Neal Maupay. Cooper said his team "instantly" jumped into action when they received word about abuse of Maupay.

They used public information, likely from a background-checking website, to link usernames, avatars, and accounts to find the man's identity. He was subsequently sentenced to nine months' probation, community service, and was forced to undergo psychological or psychiatric treatment.

"We wanted to get a message out there that doesn't matter where you are in the world, we will hopefully - if you send abuse - be able to find you and be able to take action," Cooper bragged.

Maupay has given multiple statements regarding online abuse and has publicized sample comments he received. In August 2023, Maupay complained about an anonymous account commenting, "Hi, I hope your mom is in grave" after his team lost, remarking that "no one should ever deal with this" in reference to the comment.

The player was one of the first reported athletes to refer his unwanted comments to league officials when he received threats that allegedly read, "Your family will be attacked later in the day just watch," and, "You think by reporting my account you're safe? I will kill you and your family."

 
Everton Football Club condemns all forms of personal abuse directed towards our players and their families or any Club staff on social media. \n\nWe stand firmly against such behaviour and are investigating the social media accounts that have targeted Neal Maupay. \n\nWe also\u2026
— (@)  
 

While some comments can breach the legal threshold for harassment, the league has understandably faced criticism over censorship and an overreach into social media commentary.

Cooper justified his team's actions by citing some comments as "really nasty abuse." The online investigator also alluded to the idea that some commentary should not be allowed to be posted online.

"We are not removing people's general thoughts or comments on a particular player, on a match or on the league itself," Cooper said. "We're dealing with stuff that's really horrible and shouldn't have any place online," he claimed.

 
\ud83d\udde3 \u201cRacism or abuse is not OK and we are fighting it\u201d\n\n@OfficialBHAFC\u2019s frontman Neal Maupay on reporting racist online abuse\n\n#NoRoomForRacism | https://t.co/iak8EK09Hc
— (@)  
 

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

HBO CEO admits using 'secret army' of fake Twitter accounts to troll critics who left negative reviews



Casey Bloys, the CEO of HBO, has admitted that he unleashed a "secret army" of fake Twitter accounts to troll entertainment critics who left negative reviews of the network's TV shows.

Rolling Stone published an article on Wednesday claiming that Bloys used fake Twitter accounts to attack critics who reviewed HBO shows negatively.

Bloys reportedly coordinated the online attacks with HBO's senior vice president of drama programming, Kathleen McCaffrey.

According to text messages between Bloys and McCaffrey reviewed by Rolling Stone, the two HBO execs discussed using a "secret army" of fake Twitter accounts to put pressure on any critics.

A Vulture TV critic disparaged HBO's "Perry Mason" TV series, saying: "Dear prestige TV. Please find some way to communicate male trauma besides showing me a flashback to the hero’s memories of trench warfare."

Bloys allegedly reacted by asking McCaffrey: "Maybe a Twitter user should tweet that that’s a pretty blithe response to what soldiers legitimately go through on [the] battlefield. Do you have a secret handle? Couldn’t we say especially given that it’s D-Day to dismiss a soldier’s experience like that seems pretty disrespectful … this must be answered!”

In June 2020, McCaffrey allegedly involved former HBO staffer Sully Temori in creating fake Twitter profiles.

However, Temori later filed a wrongful termination lawsuit against HBO after being fired in October 2021. Temori claimed that he faced retaliation and discrimination from the cable TV network after disclosing a mental health diagnosis to his bosses.

Temori's lawsuit alleges that he created "fake online accounts to respond to critics."

McCaffrey allegedly told Temori, "[Bloys] always texts me asking me to find friends to reply … is there a way to create a dummy account that can’t be traced to us to do his bidding?"

A troll account was created on Twitter by the name of Kelly Shepherd – an alleged Texas mom who is also a vegan, an aromatherapist, and an herbalist. The fake account used the pronouns of she/her.

In April 2021, the Kelly Shepherd account retaliated against an unfavorable review of Joss Whedon's sci-fi drama series "The Nevers."

The Kelly Shepherd account used identity politics to attack New York Times chief TV critic James Poniewozik: "How shocking that two middle aged white men (you & Hale) are s**ttng on a show about women," referring to New York Times TV critic Mike Hale.

Between June 2020 and April 2021 there were at least six instances of HBO executives siccing fake Twitter accounts on critics, according to the outlet.

— (@)  
 

Temori’s attorney, Michael Martinez, told Rolling Stone that HBO is a "very petty" company.

"First and foremost, I think [this lawsuit] is about HBO’s culture and how it fosters a dynamic of ongoing harassment and discrimination in the workplace," Martinez said. "They joke about people outside of HBO, they joke about people within HBO. … You suffer through some bullying until you can’t suffer any more."

An HBO spokesperson said the network "intends to vigorously defend against Mr. Temori’s allegations. We look forward to a full and fair resolution of this dispute. In the meantime, we wish Mr. Temori, a former HBO employee, well in his future endeavors."

On Thursday, Bloys issued an apology for weaponizing fake accounts on Twitter – now the X social media platform.

"For those of you who know me, you know that I am a programming executive, very, very passionate about the shows that we decided to do, and the people who do them and the people who work on them, I want the shows to be great,” Bloys said at a presentation of the network’s 2024 content, according to the Hollywood Reporter.

“So when you think of that mindset, and then think of 2020 and 2021," he continued. "I’m home working from home, spending an unhealthy amount of time scrolling through Twitter. And I came up with a very, very dumb idea to vent my frustration.”

"Obviously, six tweets over a year and a half is not very effective. But I do apologize to the people who were mentioned in the leaked emails, texts," the HBO CEO said.

“Obviously, nobody wants to be part of a story that they have nothing to do with. But also, as many of you know, I have progressed over the past couple of years to using DMs," Bloys added. "So now, when I take issue with something in a review or take issue with something I see, many of you are gracious enough to engage with me in a back-and-forth and I think that is probably a much healthier way to go about this."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Why Elon Musk Nuking X Headlines Is A Good Thing

Musk just saved a whole lot of X users from having to deal with the comments of the solid majority who don’t read articles before posting.

House GOP leader Kevin McCarthy trolls Democrats over their party's losses



House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) did a "quality" job of trolling Democrats on Tuesday for their 2020 losses in the lower chamber, to the extent that he even received a nod from a seasoned journalist who unintentionally prompted the GOP leader's display.

What are the details?

Politico's John Bresnahan, who has covered Congress for more than 20 years, tweeted a picture Tuesday showing House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) taking "a picture with Democrats not coming back next year after losing on Election Day."

Bresnahan reported that Hoyer was "telling (a) story about elections lost," and encouraging the ousted Democrats to "not lose heart."

In reaction, McCarthy posted a picture of himself beaming while strolling through the Capitol Building's Statuary Hall with no one else around, tweeting, "Here's a group photo of me with all the House Republicans who lost races this year."

Here's a group photo of me with all the House Republicans who lost races this year. https://t.co/hmXdK0TA0Z https://t.co/DypRSCts7K
— Kevin McCarthy (@Kevin McCarthy)1607472475.0

McCarthy took both praise and heat for the post, but Bresnahan replied, "Quality trolling."

What else?

Democrats maintained control of the House under Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) after Election Day on Nov. 3, but their majority was winnowed down.

USA Today reported earlier this week:

At least 10 Democratic incumbents fell to Republicans in the House, though the party clung on to control of the chamber. Aspirations to take the Senate majority seemed to wither as race after race was called for Republicans – even in states where Democrats polled significantly higher than incumbents.

While Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden has been roundly declared the projected winner in the race for the White House by mainstream media, President Donald Trump continues to contest the election results and the GOP is expressing optimism after performing well against Democrats in down ballot races.

Control of the Senate also remains up in the air, as the nation awaits the results of the two remaining seats in play that will be decided in Jan. 5 runoffs in Georgia between sitting GOP Sens. Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue, who are facing challenges from Democrats Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff, respectively.

Republicans currently carry the Senate 50-48, but if both Democrats win in Georgia and Biden is inaugurated, Democrats would control both chambers of Congress along with the presidency.

Alyssa Milano's family calls 911 on a teenager hunting squirrels with an air gun. Now she's lashing out at 'rightwing media.'



Actress and activist Alyssa Milano hit out at the "rightwing media" and internet "trolls" on Tuesday after she and her family went viral over the weekend for reportedly calling authorities to report an armed man in their neighborhood.

Judging by her storied social media presence, Milano, a vocal leftist, apparently supports defunding police departments across America.

What are the details of the incident?

Milano, in her latest Twitter update, said that her husband and neighbor called police over the weekend to report what they believed was an armed man, clad in all black, roaming the neighborhood with a gun.

The call brought in a massive police response, but authorities determined that the "man" was nothing more than a teen who was hunting squirrels with an airsoft gun.

The story went viral after the Daily Mail reported it, and many social media users pointed out the hypocrisy of Milano supporting the "Defund the Police" movement when her family was so quick to call authorities for help.

Despite Milano's assertion that her husband casually phoned authorities to see when they'd arrive, the Daily Mail reports that she and her husband "dialed 911 when they heard what they believed to be gunshots on their 1.39-acre property."

The outlet added, "[Milano and her husband] allegedly told the emergency hotline the sound 'scared their dogs' and made them feel like a gunman was nearby. A description was given to the officers of a suspect who was 'male, 40 years old, with long rifle.'"

A local resident told the outlet, "It turned out it was a neighborhood teen with an air gun shooting at squirrels."

The Daily Mail also reported, "The officers then had an impromptu meeting with some of the residents in the Bell Canyon community center, confirming what they dubbed, 'Squirrelgate.'"

A neighbor told the outlet that they weren't happy about Milano's conduct.

"She can tweet those things [about defunding the police] because at the end of the day she lives behind gates in a gated community," the source said. "She knows the police will come to save her. But what about all those people who don't have that luxury and live in unsafe neighborhoods? She obviously doesn't care."

The source added, "She uses her platform in hypocritical ways. Why not send your husband into the yard to find out what is actually going on before you call the police? I would guesstimate the response today from law enforcement cost taxpayers thousands of dollars."

So what is Milano saying now?

On Tuesday, Milano took to Twitter to defend her position, slamming the "rightwing media" in the process.

Milano shared a lengthy statement on Twitter, captioning it, "Apparently, rightwing media & trolls have decided that they should target me because my neighbor called the police after seeing a person dressed in black holding a rifle behind my home where I live with my young children and husband. Here is my statement and what really happened."

She proceeded to admit, however, that her husband did call 911 about the matter, and requested to know when law enforcement would be arriving on the scene to deal with the purported threat.

In her statement, Milano explained that their neighbor saw "a man dressed in all black, walking in the woods between our properties with a gun," so they reported it to authorities.

"We then received a call alerting us to the potential situation and that the officers had been dispatched," she continued. "My husband subsequently called 911 to check on when police would be arriving. While he was on the line, they arrived."

She added, "These are exactly the type of situations that police officers are trained for and should be responding to, and we will always support police having the resources they need for appropriate police actions.

“We'd love to see equally trained non-police professionals respond to addiction and mental health crises and non-violent events so that these brave officers can do the jobs they are so good at handling, as they demonstrated this weekend," Milano's statement concluded.

You can read her full statement here, and below.

Apparently, rightwing media & trolls have decided that they should target me because my neighbor called the police… https://t.co/PTzfCXxB9Q
— Alyssa Milano (@Alyssa Milano)1600807912.0