Digital Deception

Assignment 2 Option 2: It depends

Nyberg and Vrij provided some basic tenets of lying and deception. We understand the showing, hiding, passive and aggressive aspects of deception. We've taken courses that let us discuss computer mediated communication. Carlson and Rowe delved further to tell us more about deception online, a wholly different monster in my opinion. How and why would digital deception be different--it depends.
Looking at the four basic requirements of a lie: a statement, a speaker's belief that a statement is false, intention to lie, and character of the person being lied to (or relationship/context), I can't help but place digital deception outside those parameters due to the medium through which deception occurs.
First of all, as Alex mentioned, the number of people being deceived by a single message, such as a virus, is unconfirmed. According to Rowe, an overall conclusion about digital deception is the general difficulty confirming any information about the participant. Who actually sends viruses anyway? We usually have no idea who the "speaker" is to determine any of their intentions, benign or malicious, before actually finding out.
Additionally, the most troublesome for me is the character of the person being lied to in context: Is it simply anyone who happens to be vulnerable? Is it anyone who is unaware of the dangers of offering private information like a credit card number?
Another point that Kristen brings up is if there's a sender, a false belief, and a receiver then there's deception. What then of an email encoded with an unknown attached virus? People forward messages all the time, sometimes even forward them without opening them. Email could very well allow a deception to occur WITHOUT a falsehood ever intended from the sender. This is just one example.
In her post, Lauren touched on Carlson's views that apply to the perspective I hold that deception online is "new wine in new bottles." Carson et al focus on the importance of the chosen medium, in this case specifically the internet. The most relevant aspect of this model is the idea that "deceivers will be most successful when they use media that afford and elicit high levels of social presence"(p.20). This implies that deceivers choose a particular medium to reach their desired end, and richer media bring them more success in their deception. In my mind, if different media clearly result in different degrees of attained falsehood, the deception is new. It's not just new bottles. The deceivers tailor their lie differently to fit their medium. Digital deception is more like serum in a vial than wine in a bottle.

posted by Jenna @ 2:48 PM