A journalist posts a photo, his account is locked. An ICE agent’s name surfaces after a shooting, and suddenly, it’s a privacy violation. The word “doxxing” is being thrown around like confetti at a parade, but what does it really mean anymore?
Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, a Republican from Florida, recently accused journalist Seth Harp of “doxxing” a Delta Force commander and leaking classified information, even making a criminal referral to the Justice Department. This came after Harp shared a photo and online biography of a U.S. military officer the day the U.S. government kidnapped Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro. X (formerly Twitter) swiftly locked Harp’s account and demanded he delete the post.
When Does Naming Someone Become Doxxing?
Think about the last time you saw someone’s name in a news report. Was it doxxing? Probably not. But the line is blurring, and that’s the problem.
In fairness, Luna isn’t alone in her confusion. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security insists that ICE agents are being “doxxed” when they’re simply identified while performing their duties. Luna issued a subpoena to force Harp to testify about the incident, something that press freedom groups have called an attempt to intimidate reporters.
“I have made a motion to subpoena Seth Harp before Congress to face accountability for leaking classified intel about Operation Absolute Resolve, including doxxing a Delta Force commander,” Rep. Luna tweeted on Jan. 7. “The media has gotten away with too much for too long, and I’m sick of it. Bring him in.”
Gizmodo reached out to Harp, the author of the The Fort Bragg Cartel: Drug Trafficking and Murder in the Special Forces, who clarified, “It is not ‘doxxing’ to identify by name government officials involved in breaking news events. Actual doxxing is publishing someone’s nonpublic personally identifying information, such as their social security number, home address, home phone number, personal email, the names of their family members, or photos of their house.”
Harp acknowledges that “true doxxing can be a crime,” depending on the circumstances. “For example, 18 USC s. 119 criminalizes publishing restricted personal information about certain government officials, informants, and witnesses with the intent to incite a crime of violence against them. There are state laws against doxxing as well,” Harp continued.
Harp believes that Rep. Luna’s use of that term is actually inspiring actual doxxing behavior against the journalist. “It was deeply irresponsible of Rep. Luna to throw around allegations of ‘doxxing’ in her wild accusations against me, when all I did was identify by name a highly ranking military officer at the center of a major breaking news story, which is inherently newsworthy information that the public has a right to know,” Harp wrote. “Ironically, her hateful rhetoric has incited scores of internet trolls to actually doxx me, by publishing my address, phone number, pictures of my house, my parents’ names, and pictures of their house, together with threats to commit acts of violence.”
What Information Is Considered Doxxing?
Standards of privacy change, but consider this: not long ago, a physical phone book was delivered to every house, containing names, numbers, and addresses. Harp didn’t even share an address or phone number. He shared biographical information from a public website. Sharing the identity of a high-ranking military member isn’t doxxing.
The Weaponization of Anonymity
It seems some confuse the meaning. After Renee Good was killed in Minneapolis by an ICE agent, Gizmodo asked the Department of Homeland Security for confirmation that the agent involved was named Jonathan Ross. DHS said that confirming the identity would be doxxing.
“We are not going to expose the name of this officer. He acted according to his training,” DHS said, explaining that he is a “longtime ICE officer who has been serving his country his entire life.”
The email also described him as an ICE deportation officer with 10 years of experience and included a long list of requirements he had to meet to get an ICE Special Response Team. Local news outlets reported that Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s description of a previous incident with Ross in June, where he was dragged by a car, is probably what allowed the Star Tribune to identify him from court documents.
DHS went on to insist that naming the agent was an act of doxxing, while claiming that their officers were under threat:
DHS will never confirm or deny attempts to dox our law enforcement officers. Doxxing our officers put their lives and their families in serious danger. Our law enforcement officers are on the frontlines arresting terrorists, gang members, murderers, pedophiles, and rapists. Now, thanks to the malicious rhetoric of sanctuary politicians, they are under constant threat from violent agitators. They are facing a 1,300% increase in assaults against them, a 3,200% increase in vehicular attacks against them, and an 8,000% increase in death threats against them. Publicizing their identities puts their lives and the lives of their families at serious risk. The Star Tribune should be absolutely ashamed of themselves for their reckless behavior, and they should delete their story immediately.”
But is it doxxing to simply identify a federal agent involved in a high-profile event? The ease with which the term is weaponized is concerning. Doxxing, in this environment, has become a tool to silence reporting. It’s as if anonymity is a shield, protecting actions from scrutiny.
Is It Illegal to Reveal Someone’s Identity?
People magazine reported that Ross lived in Chaska, Minnesota, but even that isn’t really doxxing. If reporters couldn’t describe basic biographical information in news stories, accurate reporting would be impossible. There’s no law that criminalizes identifying the city where an ICE agent lives.
Ross reportedly told his neighbor in Chaska that he worked as a botanist, which suggests he was afraid of being judged for working as a member of a secret police force. ICE and its sister agencies, like CBP and Border Patrol, are acting outside the law. It’s important that we at least have their names so that they can be held accountable one day.
“The public has a right to know the names of the government officials who work for us,” Harp told Gizmodo. “That is part of basic accountability in an open society governed by the rule of law.”
The traditional definition of doxxing—revealing private information with malicious intent—is being stretched. Like a rubber band pulled too tight, the word is losing its original meaning. This distortion undermines legitimate concerns about privacy and online safety.
The question remains: who gets to decide where the line between public interest and personal safety truly lies?