Death Threats against Bloggers Are NOT "Protected Speech" |TODAY|

Submitted by dan. on 2007-04-09 21:49.
Crime Prevention | Restorative Systems

As I type this, I am supposed to be in San Diego, delivering a workshop at the ETech conference. But I'm not. I'm at home, with the doors locked, terrified. For the last four weeks, I've been getting death threat comments on this blog. But that's not what pushed me over the edge. What finally did it was some disturbing threats of violence and sex posted on two other blogs... blogs authored and/or owned by a group that includes prominent bloggers. People you've probably heard of.

I do not want to be part of a culture--the Blogosphere--where this is considered acceptable. Where the price for being a blogger is kevlar-coated skin and daughters who are tough enough to not have their "widdy biddy sensibilities offended" when they see their own mother Photoshopped into nothing more than an objectified sexual orifice, possibly suffocated as part of some sexual fetish. (And of course all coming on the heels of more explicit threats).

This was posted by Kathy Sierra, whom her website describes as "interested in the brain and artificial intelligence since her days as a game developer (Virgin, Amblin', MGM). She is the co-creator of the bestselling Head First series (finalist for a Jolt Software Development award in 2003, and named to the Amazon Top Ten Editors Choice Computer Books for 2003 and 2004). She is also the founder of one of the largest community web sites in the world, javaranch.com."

This is one of a number of incidents in which the supposedly self-regulating nature of the Internet has been questioned. In response to the controversy around Sierra's experiences, Ross Mayfield writes:

This is a real test of the blogosphere. Our culture and openness.. . There are core issues at stake:

Being safe is something most everyone can agree is a right. Most of this is governed by laws in our respective jurisdictions and our jurisdictions tend to respect each other when it comes to violence and threats, where there is the rule of law... .
Being anonymous on the web matters... . But trusted brokering of these identities is, again, underdeveloped, in communities, the private and public sector. Today one with means can attain anonymity, but others with means can reveal, such as a law enforcement officer with an ISP search warrant or more empowered agencies... .
Being open on the web matters. Transparency is good. Society values it more every day and it the underlying force field of the blogosphere. But it is rare to hear horror stories of being too closed, and frequent for being open... .
Being free with speech is both what makes us great and makes us go too far. Not only do we each have speech as a widely understood right, but the power to publish that we don't understand. When speech crosses over into action, or the threat of it, rules are largely in place.
Dave Pollard points out that there are problems with self-regulation:

Ross (and others in this debate) lament that as the Internet/blogosphere is largely a self-managed system, we should be able to police ourselves, and not have to turn to authorities (real or Web-based) to mediate the dispute. That's the same view that has prevailed in all frontier communities, and it's admirable, but probably a bit idealistic. I think there is a point at which communities may reluctantly have to admit self-management failure and bring in a mediator, one with or without enforcement tools. Mediation online is in some ways more problematic than face-to-face. But the issue of who, and how, to mediate when these conflicts arise is one that others can comment on more ably than I can.