Hey guys! Well, have you ever looked into the comment columns on X (formerly Twitter), Instagram or TikTok? If so, chances are you've encountered a mix of hate speech, wild conspiracy theories, and dubious bot profiles. The net sometimes feels like the Wild West, only with more swear words and fewer hats.
Politics (again) has had enough. Ireland, under the leadership of Simon Harris (the Deputy Prime Minister/Tánaiste) to use the EU Council Presidency next year, for one Mandatory identity verification enforced on social media.
But is this the salvation of our culture of debate or the beginning of the end of digital freedom? Grab some coffee, we'll dribble it up.
What is Ireland planning? (The Harris plan)
In a recent interview with extra.ie Simon Harris said: He wants to put an end to the keyboard warriors. His argument: We have age limits and rules for everything in real life – why not online?
- Verification obligation: If you want to post, you have to prove who you are (e.g. through an ID check).
- Fight against bots: Anonymous troll armies are to be locked out.
- Child protection: Ireland is fond of the Australian model, which completely bans children under a certain age from accessing social media.
Harris says it's not censorship, it's censorship. Protection of Democracy. He himself was the victim of massive threats, and a woman was just sentenced to six months in prison in Ireland for threatening him and his family.
A look back: When Blizzard wanted RealID (The Ultimate Fail)
Before we celebrate politics, we must Blizzard Entertainment Speaking. They tried it at the end level in 2010 and it was a catastrophe of epic proportions.
At that time, Blizzard wanted to introduce RealID at the World of Warcraft Forum. Anyone posting something should automatically use their Real first names and surnames are displayed. The idea: When people come up with their real name, they behave better.
The result? It's a PR nightmare. A Blizzard employee wanted to prove how harmless this is, and posted his real name publicly. Sorry Bashiok, wasn't a good day for you back then. Within minutes, users had found out his address, phone number, photos of his house and the names of his relatives (Doxing). Blizzard rowed back in panic within a few days. The community had shown: Anonymity is often a necessary shield on the net.
Pro & Contra: The Two Sides of the Medal
The advantages: Why Harris might be right
Accountability: Who knows that his name sticks to a post, thinks three times whether he sends death threats.
Bot stop: Much of the disinformation spam comes from automated accounts. Without ID, no bot.
Child protection: Real verification would prevent 10-year-olds from ending up in worlds designed for adults.
The disadvantages: Why we need to be careful
Data protection nightmare: Do you really want Meta, TikTok or X to have a copy of your ID card? When these databases are hacked (and they will), identity theft is pre-programmed.
Danger to minorities: In authoritarian states or even on sensitive topics (LGBTQ+, whistleblowing), anonymity protects lives. Without pseudonyms, many important voices are silenced.
Danger of doxing: As the Blizzard example shows, trolls can use real names to track people in real life.
My opinion: A double-edged sword
Simon Harris is right when he says that the Internet must not be a lawless space. Hatred and incitement destroy the discourse. Enforcing mandatory identity verification on social media platforms may seem harmless at first glance as ‘Step 1’. But the associated, albeit not quite so obvious Obligation to use a clear name as was the case with Blizzard's attempt is a sledgehammer, Where a scalpel might be needed. A data leak later and swupps online profiles can easily be assigned to real people – with all sorts of consequences. Not so horny, sorry!
The problem is often not the anonymity itself, but that the platforms do not enforce their own rules and the prosecution on the net is too slow. When we sacrifice anonymity, we give up a piece of freedom that the Internet has only made great.
EN 
DE 
ES 
FR 
IT