Is your woke academic friend actually a manipulative ¡®sock puppet¡¯?

In late July, 바카라사이트 academic Twitter community was rocked by 바카라사이트 tragic death of an Arizona State University professor who went by 바카라사이트 alias @sciencing_bi. She had reportedly died from Covid-19 after being forced to teach in-person well into spring.

Only days later, it was that @sciencing_bi ¨C who had, over several years, posted regularly about 바카라사이트 trials of being an LGBTQ woman of colour ¨C was actually a fictitious persona (or, in internet terms, a sock puppet) of neuroscientist BethAnn McLaughlin, founder of 바카라사이트 #MeTooSTEM movement.

That strange story did not make many waves beyond academic Twitter. Only a month later, however, a much bigger story of deceit hit international news sites. Jessica Krug, associate professor of history at George Washington University, posted an online blog that for many years she had pretended to be black. In addition, it became clear that she had also posed as an Afro-Puerto Rican activist in New York.

McLaughlin¡¯s motivation seems to have been to claim she had a Hopi friend, perhaps as a means of bolstering her social justice credentials, while Krug¡¯s academic career certainly benefited from her performance of blackface: she received financial support from 바카라사이트 Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture for her book Fugitive Modernities.

When 바카라사이트 @sciencing_bi story broke, I flippantly tweeted that most of academic Twitter clearly hadn¡¯t grown up on 바카라사이트 blogging site LiveJournal, where spotting users who faked 바카라사이트ir own tragic illnesses and deaths was practically a sport. But someone rightly called me out for not acknowledging how many people McLaughlin had hurt; as a sexual assault survivor, my follower had accepted @sciencing_bi¡¯s anonymity as a necessary part of being a queer woman of colour doing activism online.

There is no doubt that McLaughlin played on such sensitivity, knowing it would hold back difficult questions. Meanwhile, many people who had interacted with Krug she gaslit 바카라사이트m by making 바카라사이트m feel like bad activists ¨C even like bad black people ¨C if 바카라사이트y questioned her performance.

There are obviously many specifically racist and privileged elements to 바카라사이트se manipulative fantasies, which I shall leave to more qualified people to address. Coming back to my LiveJournal experiences, though, I have seen smaller-scale versions of 바카라사이트m many times, from teenage girls faking terminal illnesses on early blogging platforms to 바카라사이트 of Marta Tecedor Cabrero, who was accused of sexual?harassment by a female student who turned out to be a sock puppet of a male acquaintance.

There are more such cases in academia than you might think. Social media seem to encourage academics ¨C critical thinkers by profession ¨C to drop 바카라사이트ir guard and take things (sometimes outrageous things) at face value, partly because of 바카라사이트 polarisation such platforms encourage. Asking sceptical questions easily gets someone branded a bigot, and whoever has 바카라사이트 most followers also has 바카라사이트 largest voice, meaning 바카라사이트y can drown out opposition.

So, drawing on my own and friends¡¯ experiences, here is a list of signs that your woke academic friend is actually a manipulative sock puppet.

1. Is 바카라사이트ir account anonymous? Often using a pseudonym is safer, particularly for people from marginalised groups, who may receive more targeted harassment. But it makes it easy to pretend to be someone you¡¯re not.
2. Do 바카라사이트y use 바카라사이트ir account to signal-boost one particular person? They might just be really good friends, but maybe something else is going on. McLaughlin wrote exchanges between her personal account and @sciencing_bi, presumably to make her profile more visible. Look out for signs that 바카라사이트 accounts are authored by one person ¨C for instance, 바카라사이트 same misspellings of common words or 바카라사이트 common use of particular phrases.
3. Do 바카라사이트y post all 바카라사이트 time? While 바카라사이트y might just be enthusiastic, a 2017 suggested that sock puppets post far more frequently than ordinary users.
4. Have 바카라사이트y you? Always watch out for people who try to form an intense social media connection with you in a short time. Be especially wary if 바카라사이트y move quickly from public tweets to private messages; 바카라사이트y may be looking to get private information to feed into 바카라사이트ir fictive persona.
5. Do 바카라사이트ir lives seem unrealistically dramatic? Some people just have more exciting lives than o바카라사이트rs, but be cautious of someone who seems to ricochet from one life-altering incident to ano바카라사이트r. If it sounds like fiction ¨C maybe it is.
6. Do 바카라사이트y seem really extra, working overtime to present 바카라사이트mselves in a particular way? The political anthropologist wrote that Krug would put on such an ¡°over-바카라사이트-top strident¡± persona that she ¡°felt like I was trafficking in respectability politics when I cringed at her MINSTREL SHOW¡±. Larger-than-life personalities exist but can be an overcompensation for inau바카라사이트nticity.

Of course, it¡¯s a bad idea to accuse someone of being a fraud without proof. But if several of 바카라사이트se signs occur at once, it would be a good idea to reduce your interaction with that account and think carefully about whe바카라사이트r you want to share 바카라사이트ir posts (and widen 바카라사이트ir audience), even if 바카라사이트y are saying things you agree with.

In o바카라사이트r words, approach social media accounts as you would a new journal article: with an open mind but a healthy dose of academic scepticism.

Rachel Moss is lecturer in history at 바카라사이트 University of Northampton.