Raise your hand if you have ever felt personally victimized by Yik Yak. Well, you are not alone.

Seventy-two women’s and civil rights groups announced a campaign last week to rally the federal government to pressure colleges to protect students from harassment through anonymous social-media applications like Yik Yak.

For better or for worse, Yik Yak has gone viral on college campuses since its launch in 2013. Essentially, the app allows users to access a feed similar to Twitter that accepts anonymous posts from anyone within a set geographical radius. Users post locally relevant thoughts and observations for each other to “upvote” and “downvote.” Co-Founder Tyler Droll describes the app as a virtual town bulletin board — if only it were as wholesome.

Anonymous social media users say the darndest things. On college campuses’, Yik Yakers ruthlessly post racist comments, reinforce nasty stereotypes about fraternities and sororities and spread rumors about individuals by name for everyone in the area to see. Anonymity isn’t known to bring out the best in people.

Universities would do well to prohibit Yik Yak. Many colleges’ decisions to ban the app from campuses should not be considered censorship. Prohibiting the app sends a symbolic message to students that bullying still isn’t cool — even for 20-somethings.

Some posts on the social network pose real dangers to campus communities at universities across the country. The student senate at College of Idaho decided to ban Yik Yak after seven students felt personally threatened. At San Jose State and University of North Carolina, bomb threats and racists posts led students to petition for a ban. At Kenyon College, anonymous accounts used the app to threaten women who lived and worked at the campus women’s center.

Some colleges have banned the app and requested that Yik Yak restrict access to the app on school grounds. In the past, Yik Yak has instituted “geo-fences” which disable its use at some high schools and middle schools. Still, it should be noted that colleges cannot truly enforce a complete ban of the app since it is available in the app store and students are not inhibited by “geo-fences” when off campus.

The app has been a matter of controversy at Syracuse University, too. After a particularly disturbing racist post via the app, Olivia Johnson, SU’s NAACP chapter president, wrote that Yik Yak “creates a hostile environment for students of color and only increases tensions between minorities and white students.”

Despite some agitation over the app, Yik Yak has not become such a pervasive or dangerous issue as to require urgent action. Still, SU would likely not regret publically renouncing the app or taking preventative action to limit its use.

Some people see banning the app as a suppression of free speech. They feel uncomfortable with the idea of censoring conversation by eliminating a platform for communication. Critics believe, legitimately, that colleges would do better to target the root of negativity itself, rather than the means of expression.

In a perfect world, we would cure every insensitive mind. However, in real life, it isn’t that easy. One does not simply fix ingrained prejudice, stop threats of violence and cleanse graphic minds. Rome wasn’t built in a day.

In the meantime, as we wait for young people to grow up and become more empathetic, society could do without a platform for comments too indecent to attach a name to.

The app contributes more to hurting feelings than to facilitating social commentary. At the end of the day, if we want less prejudice and harassment, then we should decrease the number of outlets available to broadcast it.

Alison Gala is a senior public relations major and Spanish minor. Her column appears weekly. She can be reached at aegala@syr.edu and followed on Twitter @alison_gala.

Published on October 27, 2015 at 12:08 am