And the Slippery Slope Award of the Day Goes To …
Missouri Sen. Scott Rupp, for his recently introduced bill that seeks to end cyberbullying in the wake of the tragic "MySpace suicide" of Megan Meier, the Dardenne Prairie girl who hanged herself after being the target of hateful messages on the popular social networking website.
First, the details of this case are harrowing, and should provide an excellent cautionary tale to parents in the age of Web 2.0. Now, more than ever, it is essential that attention be paid to what children do and have access to online (the Washington Post has an excellent discussion about this topic).
The problem I have with Sen. Rupp’s bill, though, is that it sets a dangerous precedent for online regulation. The Internet is an entity that has grown and changed lives largely because of anonymity. This anonymity brings freedom in cyberspace, allows a shield of privacy to protect users from having their lives put on display for the entire world, and protects online residents from the actions of others. After all, a law that punishes a "cyberbully" could be applied to the wrong user of a guilty account, because it’s difficult — if not impossible, in many cases — to prove whether a given users was the one at the keyboard, or whether it was a bystander unaware of the harm being done.
Sen. Rupp’s bill has the good intention of attempting to right a new and unfamiliar wrong, but I cannot agree with his remedy. The Internet may be the greatest common good that the modern economy has ever seen, and any attempt to manage it with a political agenda will bring far more harm than benefit.
The Internet is a new territory and needs to have some regulation. While anonymity may make you bolder, it also cloaks you from the consequences of your own actions. If we expect our children to be aware and accountable for what they do, whether in cyberspace or down the street, we need to lead by example and remove the cloak when it is necessary.
Believe me I appreciate the value of anonymity as a privacy and a security measure but we need to balance that against the devastating consequences that such inhibition can lead.
Everyone has to be responsible for what they do online in that the consequence to others should never be dire and should gravitate towards following the Golden Rule
Comment by Michele Whiting — December 21, 2008 @ 9:35 p.m.
Anonymous speech is a fundamental First amendment right. It needs no regulatory balance.
Comment by Eric D. Dixon — December 22, 2008 @ 2:30 a.m.