Since when is free speech a stand-alone freedom, with no responsibility attached? Most cyber bullies believe it to be their God-given right. Most have yet to learn "there ain't no free lunch", and our society encourages this denial. We could extrapolate on that for days, but we'll confine our comments to this single topic. And, all our readers say, "thank you".
Just ask Heidemarie Schnitzer, who believed exactly that. Many have asked why Heidemarie was allowed to remain online, and will surely return once her online access is restored. David Caruso chose not to pursue the matter, (1) due to the international complications and (2) her identity was known; any suit would have asked for website closures. To what end?
Heidemarie didn't restrict her venom spewing to her own websites. She spread it throughout the internet and included not only David, but his family, co-workers and friends. Had she not sent death threats, she'd still be here; taunting, harassing, perfecting her sockpuppetry. She remains the trolling expert. We've seen hundreds of internet trolls; none compare to Heidemarie.
Just ask Google, who was sued by a bully victim and was forced by a Canadian court to reveal the name of the bully. We presume the intent is to pursue a civil suit for defamation. Unless the media keeps a vigilant eye, we may never know the outcome. It ceases to be newsworthy unless it's sensational or salacious.
That cloak of anonymity that we've written about so often isn't quite as protective as many perceive; however, because most victims cower instead of facing their bully, it's assumed there will be no repercussions from their actions.
Says Google, "We also take great care to respect privacy concerns and will only provide information about a user in response to a subpoena or other court order," the company said. "If content is found by a court to be defamatory, we will of course remove it immediately."
Google will only remove defamatory material from Blogger when "the material has been found to be defamatory by a court, as evidenced by a court order," according to Blogger's terms of service.
Self policing is the only way to insure a troll-free or bully-free site. We all know which sites are which. Those who enjoy their leisure time online avoid the troll-ridden sites. Without diligent moderators, these sites soon become a joke, attractive only to the perverse, and eventually implode. The sooner, the better.
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=1910409
http://www.theweek.com/article/index/99722/Liskula_Cohen_and_free_speech
Just ask Heidemarie Schnitzer, who believed exactly that. Many have asked why Heidemarie was allowed to remain online, and will surely return once her online access is restored. David Caruso chose not to pursue the matter, (1) due to the international complications and (2) her identity was known; any suit would have asked for website closures. To what end?
Heidemarie didn't restrict her venom spewing to her own websites. She spread it throughout the internet and included not only David, but his family, co-workers and friends. Had she not sent death threats, she'd still be here; taunting, harassing, perfecting her sockpuppetry. She remains the trolling expert. We've seen hundreds of internet trolls; none compare to Heidemarie.
Just ask Google, who was sued by a bully victim and was forced by a Canadian court to reveal the name of the bully. We presume the intent is to pursue a civil suit for defamation. Unless the media keeps a vigilant eye, we may never know the outcome. It ceases to be newsworthy unless it's sensational or salacious.
That cloak of anonymity that we've written about so often isn't quite as protective as many perceive; however, because most victims cower instead of facing their bully, it's assumed there will be no repercussions from their actions.
Says Google, "We also take great care to respect privacy concerns and will only provide information about a user in response to a subpoena or other court order," the company said. "If content is found by a court to be defamatory, we will of course remove it immediately."
Google will only remove defamatory material from Blogger when "the material has been found to be defamatory by a court, as evidenced by a court order," according to Blogger's terms of service.
Self policing is the only way to insure a troll-free or bully-free site. We all know which sites are which. Those who enjoy their leisure time online avoid the troll-ridden sites. Without diligent moderators, these sites soon become a joke, attractive only to the perverse, and eventually implode. The sooner, the better.
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=1910409
http://www.theweek.com/article/index/99722/Liskula_Cohen_and_free_speech
3 comments:
Nicely said, Dojo. As one who has had to deal with playground bullies, I know the fallout from a loud-mouth strutter often hurts more than a black eye. A bully-free playground requires the same amount of diligence that a troll-free website does.
And isn't it a shame how countries who do not exercise 'freedom of speech' have citizens who know how to use our freedom to their advantage? The Heidi's of this world seem to delight in spewing forth their unguarded rhetoric where they know there will be no accountability for their actions.
As a soldier, our son is fighting to preserve all of our freedoms. While many verbalize their support for the troops, they are busy voting their rights away. We want too much and give too little as we have become a nation of whiners --- "and that's the way it is"
(thanks both to the late Tim Russert and Walter Cronkite).
While many verbalize their support for the troops, they are busy voting their rights away.
Are you trying to set me off on another tangent? It's sad (and frightening) that we've created a society that believes these to be God-given. We are clearly a nation of whiners. "May I have more, sir" has become "give me more".
The school yard/internet analogy is perfect. Both require constant diligence, though the school yard bullies often outgrow their aggressions as they mature (with proper channeling). Those that don't simply find a new playground, and we got em.
How can anything free be "stand alone" when we share a planet with others. As Heidi found out, no man is an island. It is a pity that it requires a court ruling to expose cyber bullies and worse. In many ways, the "libertarian in me is (also) uneasy. Yet we do have responsibilities to each other and where THAT freedom is abused, there ought to be a process for accountability. Pity the owners/moderators of blog sites can'tbe a little more responsible themselves, if not bloggers.
But of course, this opens up a can of worms doesn't it. The fine lines of such decision-making will push us further to reflect on human behaviour and social acceptability vs individuality. Not neccessarily a bad thin either.
Post a Comment