Online Violence

First Amendment absolutists don't condone death threats

I am a First Amendment absolutist and I would like to read, amid the discussion of how the Delete key should be wielded, some more nuanced discusssion than I have seen on just where anyone believes the line should be drawn in censoring the Web, blogs or any other speech.

Certainly the words and images directed at Kathy are hateful and abhorrent. If a law has been broken, the accused should be prosecuted. Let's do keep in mind, however, that that person is the one who created and posted the words and images.

Beyond that, I don't see what can or should be done publicly. In case anyone hasn't noticed, anonymous abusers are not the sort of people who "own their words." There are bad people in the world. They do bad things. Bad things happen to good people.

And it multiplies the violation when good people respond in kind.


liza's picture

| |

Are blogs like prison?

This is blogging's own Stanford Prison Experiment and and it's both humbling--and it sucks.


liza's picture

| | |
Syndicate content

Visit our sponsors

Fill up our coffee fund

BlogAds

Visit our sponsors

Get our Digestifs du jour

Nibble daily on our brainy goodness with our daily syndication digest. You'll receive an email with a list and links to the previous day's posts.



Powered by FeedBlitz

culturekitchens

The Publisher
Liza Sabater

Daily servings of political dissent
culturekitchen

Grassroots News and
Activism for New Yorkers

Daily Gotham

Feminist Bloggers
Network

BlogSheroes

A new kind of vouyerism
Voogling

Art + Code + Philosophy
Potatoland.blog

Got any dirt, tips, leads or money for us? Then drop us a line or two at editors [at] culturekitchen [dot] com or use our general contact form to reach everybody in the editorial team ASAP.


Member's articles and stories

More stories

Who's online

There are currently 2 users and 1586 guests online.

Online users

Words to live by

Sometimes I want to scream.
I’d like to say, “From now on, hats can be left on in the building, and food is welcome in all classrooms. Now, can we just move on, for Pete’s sake?”
But I don’t. . .

We’re arguing about power. About consistency. About priorities. We’re trying to discuss the Big Issues, but we’re afraid to name them.
So we bicker about minutiae.

We fall into the safe arguments that no one will ever win but that will surely fill the time allotted, ensuring that we can return to our classrooms, departments, and homes. . .

If we’re actually going to talk about why kids need to eat in class, then we may have to break the silence surrounding the issues of poverty and inequity.

We don’t really want to
do that. We prefer to stay safely ensconced in our ignorance, putting mountains of energy into talking about nothing at all. . .

(So) kids stay hungry, continue to lack basic
supplies, and, most important, fail to get a sense of what it is to recognize and be able to use their power as citizens. They don’t learn how it feels to exercise power wisely because we refuse to show them.

They learn to pour their energies into petty battles rather than real civic engagement.

In this era of increasing political partisanship, isn’t it time for us to teach our students that looking deeply into the well of our own shortcomings is the way to solve them? How long will we maintain the charade of infallibility, our blameless collective personae?

The greatest gift we can give our students, and ourselves, is the acknowledgment that things aren’t OK — and won’t be OK, even if we build a school in which no one wears a hat indoors, everyone has a pencil, and neither Snickers bars nor apple cores can be found outside the cafeteria.


— LAURA THOMAS, Antioch Center for School Renewal director and core graduate faculty member, Keene, New Hampshire - Editorial Projects in Education, Vol. 17, Issue 02, Pages 50,53-54.


Subscribe Buttons

Feed IconGoogleDeliciousYahoo!BloglinesNewsgatorMSNFeedsterAOLFurlRojoNewsburstPluckFeedFeedsAdd KinjaMultiRSSrMailRSSFwdBlogarithmSimplify