Is It Okay to Use a Fake Name? Your Thoughts?
— Tuesday, November 10th, 2009 —
Here’s the first question in our new Q&E Questions and Ethics project.
Dear Dr. Moore,
Sometimes I go on blogs and websites, in the comments section, especially in places that are taking shots that I know are not true about people I care about, and I’ll use a fake name. The point is just to get the information out there. “The statement you made about so-and-so isn’t true, and here’s why.” Is it okay for a Christian to sign up with a fake name? How about on sites hostile to historic Christianity where they’ve “banned” me because of my outspoken beliefs? Is it okay to go back on with another identity? I guess my question is this, it is okay to be anonymous or use a pseudonym as a Christian? Is that lying?
Anonymous (of course)
Okay, before I answer this question, why don’t you weigh in? Should this person send comments into the Web anonymously or under a fake number? How would you make that decision?
I’ll jump in with my own thoughts later. In the meantime, put your comments here in the comments section and remember, if you have an ethics question, to send me your new question to questions@russellmoore.com
40 Responses to “Is It Okay to Use a Fake Name? Your Thoughts?”
Trackbacks
- To use your name or not to use your name « Jack Of All Trades
- Moore to the Point by Russell D. Moore
I think saying that your name is John if your name is really Bruce is “lying”, regardless of which website you’re saying it to.
On a practical note, I would suggest that “sites hostile to historic Christianity” are entitled to ban whoever they choose, as is Dr Moore’s right on this blog, and the right of any site holding to orthodox Christian beliefs.
Getting the information out there is not the point here. Honouring God and obeying him is.
Reply
I would say no, they probably shouldn’t send comments under a pseudonym or anonymously.
The reason I say that is because Using our real names holds us to a certain level of responsibility for the things we say and do online; in my case, it causes me to hold off on hitting the “submit” button. If what I’ve written or said is not something that I want attached to my name, I’d be best to not post it at all.
Reply
I think commenting anonomously is ok, as long as the website you are visiting doesn’t have any ‘rules’ against it. Using a pseudonym is ok as long as it is obvious that it is not your real name. Just be sure you understand that your comments might not always be taken seriously if you comment anonomously or under a pseudonym.
If you have been banned from a site because of rude behavior or going against that site’s rules for commenting, then apologize and ask forgiveness.
If you have been banned because of the Truth, shake the dust from your fingertips and move on to the next site.
Reply
Yes and No.
No, I do not think Christians should use fake names when posting on websites or blogs. We identify ourselves as followers of Christ and should be ready with a kind but true word, willing to risk harassment and ridicule to stand for our beliefs, yet also willing to learn and be corrected when we are wrong.
Yes, if you use a pseudonym that is obviously fake or use anonymous so there is no possibility of people thinking you are claiming an identity that is not yours. I think this is appropriate. This way people know you are clearly hiding your name. When I read comments that are serious, yet someone is posting anonymously I read their comments differently then someone who is posting seriously under their real name.
Many blogs have a “no anonymous” posting policy. There you should not post under a fake name. On the other hand, some blogs could care less who you are and have created an environment where posting anonymously is welcomed and a common practice.
Personally, if I’m going to take the time to post a comment I always use my real name or link to my real identity. I value engagement with REAL people over REAL issues, and this can only be done if I post with my REAL name. The other is acceptable, but not worth my time (fake engagement in a virtual world).
Reply
I believe it depends upon the application and situation.
In some cases name recognition (either good or bad) can alter the course of others interact with each other. You may have heard something like: ‘If I had known so and so was in the room, I wouldn’t have…’
On the other hand, it is misrepresentation.
Reply
@Sanford Berenberg, our name can carry a lot of weight with it in the circles we live in. If ‘Al’ were comment on this list we would read his words and probably view them one way. Not knowing who ‘Al’ is would allow us to look at the words themselves.
If Dr. Albert Mohler commented on this list, we would see his response differently. His name carries his background, wisdom and experience. Some people would take his words as being correct because he is intelligent and respected, and others would reject his words because they have concerns about him and his beliefs and stance.
Being anonymous to get a point across allows us to get the point across without the weight of the name. Is the message in this case a sin?
Being anonymous to attack others from a well defensed position of anonymity is simply sinful.
I guess what I am saying is that it comes down to what is in our hearts and our motives.
Misrepresenting who you are = Unethical
Not disclosing who you are = Sometimes cowardly, but not inherently unethical. This does, as mentioned above, introduce more intense temptation.
Pseudonyms can be an entirely different matter. I have signed this comment with a nom de plume that hardly obscures my identity.
Reply
I love this question. Obviously people sometimes use fake names in order to deceive or mislead. An attempt at deception would make us want to quickly say it’s wrong. When we read about Rahab and the Spies, Abraham and his fake sister, David and his fake madness, something inside of us says, “that’s just wrong”. But before we blanket all attempts to conceal we must ask about our missionaries in closed countries or maybe closer to the original question the actors in Hollywood that change their name to something more savvy. What do we think about letting Mel Gibson tell us he is William Wallace for three hours? Is that an attempt to conceal?
I may have raised more questions than I am going to provide answers, but here is my attempt to help add to the discussion. It seems that Anonymous is trying to help spread the truth and for that I am thankful. Picking a user name on message boards like JT4506 seems to be common practice. This can be for security reasons and I believe wise. However, before I give the ok to fake names I think I must examine closely my motives. If a fake name helps me say things I wouldn’t say if people knew the real me, then I am probably in sin based on Jeremiah 9:4-6.
Reply
Well, for starters you shouldn’t lie! It’s a sin! Second, if you are going to stand up for something or someone, don’t be too ashamed to use your real name!
Reply
Not that it has any bearing on the rightness or wrongness of the issue, but in the nineteenth century, Southern Baptists commonly wrote anonymously or pseudonymously in Baptist newspapers.
While there are many good examples of this in the standard Baptist newspapers, my favorite pseudonyms come from the children’s periodical Kind Words. In this publication, John Broadus used such names as “J. Lovechild,” “Zerubbabel,” and “Theophilus.” (http://bit.ly/1F9T9Y)
I think there are good reasons to argue for writing under a pseudonym at times. For example, I believe a Christian doctoral student who was planning on doing missions in a closed country might justly choose to produce a dissertation under a pseudonym, especially if it is clear that the name is a pseudonym. In this case, it would allow the person’s academic work to be used by others, while also protecting their identity while they are on the field.
Reply
I really like Brad’s (#7) Comments–especially the last line and would add two words to the debate over using another name–Mark Twain.
Reply
I’d have to say “no.”
Reply
@Barack Obama, Mr. Obama, I’m afraid I’m going to need to see your original birth certificate before I can verify your identity.
@Barack Obama,
HILARIOUS!
If one is a Christian in a country like China and uses a blog to minister, then being anonymous might be necessary to protect your safety. There is no biblical requirement to be martyred unnecessarily. Both Paul and Jesus took both routes in that they often slipped away to escape violence when the time was not right to face it. No one criticizes Paul for being lowered in the basket.
On the other hand, if anonymity is used as cover for slander or to escape the consequences (short of death) of your words, then this raises issues of integrity. I am currently struggling with this issue personally in that I maintained a blog for many years in which I covered personal, religious and political issues, but stopped writing regularly when I became a commissioned officer in the U.S. Army. Should I reestablish an anonymous blog that will allow me to make commentary that might, at times, include my Commander in Chief? The conditions of my commission require that I show a loyalty to my chain of command as long as that chain is lawful in their orders.
I would like to blog again, but I do not want to bring unnecessary embarrassment upon the ministry of the Chaplain Corps, which seems to be constantly under threat of disbanding. I believe that I can make addition to the ministry of Christ through my blogging, but can I be arrogant enough to think that it is worth risking the larger corpus of ministry by U.S. Chaplains around the world? Is there a lack of integrity by being anonymous? I will be checking back to see the thoughts of others.
Reply
I signed up as MightyFowl, which had been my screen name for years. But I figured, after a week, that if I had something to say, I should be as honest about my name, as I’d people to think about what I had to say. Which leads me to my two comments:
1) It’d be wrong for me to use a pseudonym.
2) It’d be wrong for me to judge anyone else about that (Romans 14:4, anyone?).
Reply
Make that “… as I’d want people to think…”
Reply
Giving your name in the context of a blog/website is not just a ‘moral’ issue, it’s a gospel issue. Giving your name in Scripture is not just one of a title, it is your identity, character, and future (i.e. Isaac, Jabez, Peter, Jesus, etc.) When God reveals His name, he is revealing Himself for who He truly is; not just a cool nickname or generic title (Exodus 3:6, 13-15).
So when an angel appears to Joseph (Matt. 1:18-25) and Mary (Luke 1:26-33) and tells them to name their son ‘Jesus’, ‘for he will save his people from their sins’, it is not just his name but his identity as ‘Savior’. The name represents the person, who through Christ, has their name written in the Lamb’s book of life (Rev.13:8, 17:8, 20:12,15, 21:27).
Therefore, when we represent ourselves in the context of a blog, we must be truthful because we will give an account for every word spoken, written, or typed (Matt. 12:36, Heb. 4:13, 9:27). So as we make comments, may we show ourselves for who we truly are (or whose we are), not based on morality alone, but on our identity that is hidden in Christ.
Reply
Anonymous: definitely OK in my book.
Pseudonymous: good question. If it’s to impersonate someone else, definitely wrong. If it is an identity you have assumed consistently in some kind of stage name/pen name fashion, I don’t know that it’s wrong. Also, there can be good reasons for wanting to publish with an identity that can’t be traced easily in the offline world. For example, when I was in high school, my parents didn’t want me using my real name on mailing lists and discussion forums. So I posted using an abbreviated first name and my middle name (with their approval). In this case, though, it was barely a pseudonym.
I think the ethics on the pseudonym question boil down to whether it is being used to masquerade as someone you’re not or to control disclosure of your identity. That’s really difficult to judge, though, especially when interpreting another’s actions.
Reply
First, if you are breaking the websites on rules for posting it is always wrong. This should cover most reputable websites and blogs.
Second, there may be allowance for a site or situation to not use your real name but I’m going to guess this is the exception and not the rule.
Finally, if this is a frequent issue in your web browsing I would ask if you may be spending to much time on the web and not enough time with real people.
Reply
I think conflating this issue with missions in a closed country doesn’t do the initial question and context of its application justice.
The internet is a forum where it’s standard practice for individuals to conceal their identity for their own safety. If you had any idea what scam artists can do to build a profile of your beliefs and activities in order to steal from you, you might be a little more reserved in your online actions, too. (A good case in point for you to research would be how Twitter was hacked, http://bit.ly/2lYf9T.) So, at its most basic level, I think it’s perfectly fine for someone to post comments and interact with people online using a screen name that does not reveal their true identity. Furthermore, I think this is fine because most people understand this is acceptable behavior and a good practice to continue. It’s not unethical in this situation precisely because it’s the modus operandi. (Curious question above, also misguided for this same reason, I don’t see why Mel Gibson would be unethical to portray a historical William Wallace when anyone who sees him kicking butt knows he’s just pretending.)
So, is it “ok” to use a pseudonym as a Christian? Yes, but not in every situation. For example, I dare you to use a pseudonym on your tax return and see what happens. If you go join a church, using a pseudonym would be wrong (besides, how would you report your offering on your taxes… see above ; ). In fact, I’d probably say that unless you’re personally involved in a situation where people expect you to use a pseudonym (like the witness protection program or a masquerade), it would probably be deceiving to not use your real name. In this way, I think “real life” differs fundamentally from “online life.”
Now to hone in on this user’s question, I think my response would be more pastoral than direct ethical advice. Is combating FUD on the internet a worthwhile endeavor? Are you really getting a message across? Do people really not have access to the truth? Is this really the most effective way for you to witness for Christ? Are you operating out of a fear of man?
Because I can’t say the action itself is unethical (posting online under a pseudonym), I’d address these deeper issues. If the individual posts online everywhere else with his/her real name but when defending and confirming the truth uses a pseudonym, I’d press in there. If they’ve already been banned from a public forum and want to continue harassing people, I’d press in there. If they really do think this is a worthwhile way to spend time, I’d press in there. Honestly, internet arguments about religion are almost worthless, and that’s just the nature of the internet. Obviously, this isn’t universally true, but in most cases, especially if you’ve already been banned from a site, you’re casting your pearls before swine. Spending that internet argument time constructively ministering to your church or community would have much much bigger dividends.
Reply
Can’t we be and shouldn’t we be as wise as serpents, as long as we do not lose our love-like innocence? Wasn’t Rahab commended for hiding the spies?
I would do my best to honor the greater commandment (ie. defending the truth of my neighbors reputation) before I would honor the lesser commandment (i.e. do not bear false witness).
Reply
I think anonymity is usually wrong, unless you’re a persecuted Chinese Christian, or the like. It is especially wrong when making controversial statements for which you should be held personally responsible. There are ways, however to be semi-anonymous, but still accountable. For example, anyone who really wants to know who I am can click my so-subtle pseudonym, and with a little effort, find out who I am and even email me to tell me what an idiot I am.
Reply
If you really believe half the postings on the web call me I have some property to sell you. What I dislike is people who use different names to cover themselves. If they consistently use the same name I know who to skip over when I read.
Reply
I think the makings of a complete answer are already posted. I wanted to add one thing and highlight some that have been mentioned.
I’ll add that it’s impossible to be anonymous on the internet unless you put a lot more effort in than altering your name. Your service provider tracks your use of sites, the pages you request to load are logged, when you load a site it bounces around innumerable servers to determine where you want to go, your IP address is saved by the blog/site you comment on (as it is saved in your provider’s records). So what is the use of being anonymous on the internet?
So “Barack Obama” up there has IP address 216.180.***.** (** for partial security), from gnpcb.org (Good News and Crossway), Wheaton IL (a place, may we say, “Between Two Worlds”).
I’ll highlight that (in no particular order) 1) the rules of the site should be followed (with reference to #3), 2) your motives should be well investigated, 3) the human authority under whom you serve (i.e. government, SBTS, etc.) needs to be obeyed with the next point in mind, 3) there is a hierarchy of God-given commands which needs to be investigated in situations where your comment is forced (by what means an internet comment would be forced I don’t know), 4) your integrity needs to be kept. In all the name of the Lord Jesus Christ must be exalted and God glorified if nothing else!
With all this I see no need for anonymity on the internet unless you are anonymizing someone else to protect them.
Reply
I would have to say no, it’s not appropriate for a Christian to withhold one’s name. The context of Matthew 18 is the confrontation of sin, but the greater principle is that person-to-person communication is preferred.
I had a pastor who referred to that as the “sin of the unsigned letter” and he wouldn’t even read them. I’ve had a couple unsigned notes in ministry, and I just smile and throw them in the trash can.
The only exception is for security reasons or if revealing one’s real name would bring harm (much like how missionaries in closed countries). But I really doubt leaving a comment on a blog is a security issue.
Reply
I use my own name whenever possible.
Several Christian websites have banned me for my ideas. I then post with another name , anonymous email, and encrypted software.
several examples:
Between the Times… Nathan Finn/ Danny Akin
Misssioscapes Marty Duren and Southern Baptist Examiner(threatened)
As a free software advocate the right to manage the internet exists only by the IP holder. This is usually not commentators right. For example if you post on Google blogger you are using Googles IP rights. Google does allow you to ban people but ultimately they still own the rights.
Lastly why do Christians continue to bind people.
see this video by Desiring God ministeries.
http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/justintaylor/2009/10/28/why-make-it-free/
Reply
A couple more points I intended to make…
The freedom that Admin allow on a website is a direct reflection of Grace in ones life.
This applies to the GCR too….and why I am less and less supportive of the effort. ie Danny Akin and others who have said that some meetings would be closed door sessions.
be Open GCR!
Lastly I agree with what Ryan has said in post # 19 above.
Reply
wow, talk about kicking an ant bed.
Reply
I find it interesting that this dialogue began from a question about using a fake name for interaction on the internet. There was a day when sitting down face to face would have been a more common way to talk through various issues. Now, we can blog, twitter and interact online with people who have no face, no personality, no tone or gesture. Just words typed by an online identity. Taking away the actual name seems to be one more step to becoming less and less personal in our exchange of ideas.
The question behind the question is the issue that I think needs to be addressed (as others have pointed out as well). Why is the fake name used? If it is used to conceal sin, it is wrong. If it is used to forward the Kingdom, that to me is a different issue.
Reply
The question I would have to answer is whether the purpose is to deny our identity in Christ because of fear of man? If so, then Scripture teaches it is wrong. Peter did not deny his “name” at the trial of Christ, but he did deny being a follower, or even knowing Jesus.
On the other hand , Fanny Crosby who wrote over 8,000 hymns used over 100 pseudonymns because publishers didn’t want any one composer to dominate the hymnal. She used “fake names” and one could argue; “To God be the Glory”
Reply
I’d have to say it’s best to represent yourself honestly and openly in all circumstances. Jesus would never even use a pseudonym since He had nothing to hide. Of course, this is a “do as I say, not as I do” statement. I have a deep aversion to many of the folks I have listed on my website. I know it’s wrong, but I honestly don’t care.
Still, this is a straightforward issue. Truth is not obviously not relative, so we must strive to do what Christ would do.
Reply
One of the most disturbing things I see online (especially it seems with newspapers) is anonymity. All too often anonymity is used to make baseless, sometimes harmful, accusations. If a position is worthy of defense or proclamation, it is worthy of being presented in the first person. –Ken Askew
Reply
Good Question, but with all situations where we struggle with the ethical coin toss, it’s really always a matter of the heart…………….plain and simple.
Reply
I think it is fine to use a user name on the web, isn’t no different than using a handle on CB Radio. I started on the net at a time where the advice was to never reveal your real name and I do believe that is sound advice
Reply
I say no. It was stated above that our name is our identity. My name is now Tracy uiou Theou because of my salvation through Christ. Why should I want to hide that from anybody anywhere? The descriptions above about Rahab, Jesus,and Paul are just that-descriptions, not prescriptions. The real questions are what is my heart desiring and who am I trusting? What is my heart desiring when I blog? What is my heart desiring if I become offended at being banned? What is my heart desiring if I continue to blog covertly? Does God need my undercover twitter to share His gospel? Who am I trusting if I believe I must go black-ops to write? Am I trusting more in the providence of God, who has spoken before through a donkey, or am I trusting in the pseudo-protection of a pseudonym?
Reply
Dr. Moore;
Before this gets completely off track…I call for the question!
Reply
I have no problem whatsoever with Anonymous postings or Nom de Plumes. As one person has already indicated, religious figures of the past used pseudonyms, etc. As long as it is evident that the name used is not real, then there is no problem. To demand that Christians used their real name is rank Phariseeism. What a lot of you people fail to realize is how spammers, loonies, and others can track you down on the Internet if you just throw your name out there haphazardly. If you wish to remain a private citizen and not a public figure, then not using your real name is understandable.
My additional thoughts on this matter …
http://biblicalmanhood.blogspot.com/2008/05/anti-anonymous-craze.html
Reply