A blow to Cyber Bullies
I got this from one of my friends on Facebook. Thought I would share it here.
THE name Nicola Brookes may not mean much to you right now but it soon could. The actions of this unassuming forty something mother may change the internet, and how some people use it, for ever ( Read more... )
THE name Nicola Brookes may not mean much to you right now but it soon could. The actions of this unassuming forty something mother may change the internet, and how some people use it, for ever ( Read more... )
"PEOPLE who lead full and productive lives do not become trolls but those who are dissatisfied, and who have mental health issues, often do."
That should be in a field with cows cos it's bullshit.
The majority of trolls/bullies are actually quite well self adjusted and even happy. Mentally ill people are actually twice as likely to be victims and no more likely to commit such acts than anyone else.
The mythos that a bully/troll online or elsewhere is inherently a unhappy person who is mentally ill is a myth told to make victims feel better in the fact of victim blaming and the fact society does not properly tackle bullying.
The worse bullies are usually those who think of themselves as "good" people because such people often delude themselves into believing their bullying is righteous and just and somehow isn't actually bullying.
Naming or shaming trolls/bullies is not censorship or a free speech issue.
Firstly, why it isn't censorship:
Censorship involves completely censoring someone, and not letting them have their say, bullies who are named and shamed are still free to have their say, naming, shaming or prosecuting a bully doesn't prevent them from speaking. Only the government can censor someone entirely because only that have the power to do so.
Why it isn't a free speech issue:
As pointed out before, naming, shaming or prosecuting a bully is not censoring them or removing their right to freedom of speech.
However freedom of speech:
Does not protect hate speech and abusive postings, libel/defamation/slander IS hate speech as defined by the law.
Does not grant anyone a license to do or say whatever they like without consequences. Freedom of speech guarantees you can say stuff, it does not guarantee that what you say will never bite you in the arse.
Freedom of speech is a law that guarantees that only the government cannot censor you just because they don't like what you say. It is not a license.
Lastly and most importantly free speech =/= apply to private entities or on private property. Facebook and other such sites? Private property, not public land, so freedom of speech doesn't apply to them.
Also not all countries have freedom of speech, the UK has freedom of expression.
So basically the only way it could be considered a freedom of speech/censorship issue is if people don't actually understand what freedom of speech law is or how it works.
Reply
In a lot of organizations, bullying/trolling/abusive behavior is actually rewarded by management and so the person sees themselves as successful.
The "freedom of speech" is also a limited "right" and not absolute. Hateful, slanderous or abusive speech can and should be punished.
Reply
Agreed
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment