How internet manhunts became mainstream

Social media and the law will have to handle this eventually

Alexandra Sahara

and

kate

Feb 01, 2021

4 minute read

☕ Coffee for pitches ☕

**An Instagram post from Shaun King picturing the face, name, and home city of a rioter at the Capitol on January 6th.**

THE QUESTION:

How on earth are internet manhunts legal?

SUMMARY/ TEASER:

It’s kind of like internet Batman.

On the internet, vigilante justice is as common as in comic books. With one click, post or share, anyone can become internet Batman.

People (i.e. Shaun King) will post images of someone, usually doing something inflammatory, and ask that the internet finds them. It’s called “name and shame,” or more commonly, doxxing. The intent is so that they can publish private information, like their name, location, or where they work as a form of shame and/or pressure on law enforcement to take some form of action. This is popular not just in the depths of internet forums, but a regular practice by accounts with hundreds of thousands of followers i.e. @PublicLandsHateYou, @gaysovercovid and @byefelipe.

Nowhere have we seen this as clearly as the Capitol riot on Jan. 6. In the weeks that have followed, rioters have been outed to law enforcement, and to their families, friends and communities, by social media vigilantes across the country.

There are clear pros and cons to the practice:

Pros: The harmful, possibly criminal, activity people engage in is highly publicized, so law enforcement/ their employers/ their community can execute consequences. For example, when @YesYoureRacist names Peter C. as a white supremacist protester at the Charlottesville protest and he is subsequently fired.

Cons: If a poster is wrong about who or what is happening, they’re not only liable for a defamation lawsuit, but their post can cause real damage to personal safety, like when users on Reddit misidentified two men in the Boston Marathon Bombing search, leading to their faces on the cover of NY Post and a nationwide witch hunt.

But the law and social media are different...

Because even if you’re not defaming someone, and you’re not a member of the media or law enforcement (who have their own special protections to publish this information), how is it that doxxing posts aren’t removed? Because don’t they violate the community and privacy guidelines by social media companies?

Hint: they definitely do.

THE ANSWER:

There’s actual legal trouble for people posting “name and shame” content. This falls under cyberstalking, intimidation, cyberbullying, obscene posting, computer abuse, interstate harassment or interstate abuse- all of which qualify as invasion of privacy, which usually hinge on something being newsworthy. That of course makes sense in cases like the Capital riot. But what about when someone like Shaun King publishes something he found on Reddit or Twitter, involving someone in their hometown? The line is a lot less clear.

And there’s trouble on social media too.

Doxxing, which can be as simple as just publishing someone’s picture and name, can get you thrown off of nearly every social media platform there is, since it violates their Community and Privacy terms (Facebook, Insta, Twitter etc). Thing is, their rules are relatively vague, and most are abundantly clear on what is NOT doxxing, but not what IS doxxing, meaning that the platform is the ultimate arbiter of what is and isn’t doxxing. Since that allows them to be as lax or strict as they like, it’s surprising that the accounts dedicated to only naming and shaming are allowed to exist at all.

Facebook and Insta's guidelines are just as vague as the law is when it comes to defining newsworthiness - so it really does become an individual issue for each post and each person.

THE BIGGER PICTURE & INTELLECTUAL PAYOFF:

Considering this is only a growing trend on social media, the conversation has shifted from “should people be allowed to do this” to “how accountable are the social media companies for allowing people to do this?” Now more than ever, these companies are taking action against accounts that violate their policies, the former US president included. Will pressure on social media accountability trickle down to name and shaming accounts? And ultimately, how extreme will that be?

WHAT WE DON’T HAVE ANSWERS TO YET:

How will enforcement of name and shame accounts happen? Who is the enforcer here? Because right now, it’s kind of hot potato between social media companies and the courts every time there is a new case. Is it a prosecutor who would need someone to present them with a case? Or is it really just in the hands of the tech companies who maintain these posts without removing them?