“Without Freedom of thought, there can be no such Thing as Wisdom; and no such thing as public Liberty, without Freedom of speech” Benjamin Franklin (Franklin, 1706-1790)
Online computer communities have been experiencing many cases that are very controversial involving The First Amendment to the Constitution which guarantees the Freedom of Speech. Due to the fact that Computer Mediated Communication is becoming one of the most common forms of communication, we need to find a way to maintain openness without allowing a freedom that we hold dear to be limited. After reading the article in the Yale Law Journal, “Anonymity, autonomy, and accountability: challenges to the First Amendment in cyberspaces, I would like to discuss a case involving a male only bulletin board that operated within the journalism department of the Santa Rosa Junior College in California. While discussing this case, I would like to explore the way in which the case was handled, as well as the fact that we have allowed our Freedom of speech to be infringed upon. (Journal, 1995)
The faculty advisor, Roger Karraker of the college’s student newspaper, the Oak Leaf, established the bulletin board in response to student requests. The bulletin board was available to only ten males and was intended to be operated under a pledge of confidentiality. “One of the male participants broke the pledge and informed two women of derogatory remarks made about them on the board. Because no women were involved in the bulletin board conversation, however, the women who were allegedly harassed were not participants on the board.” (Journal, 1995) In response to the conflict, students and newspaper staff came to Karraker’s aid to “defend the fundamental right to freedom of expression.” Since these ten men were talking online in confidence, it stands to reason that this should be considered no different than a private conversation that has taken place. However, in this case “the Office of Civil Rights of the Department of Education directed the college to promulgate guidelines of appropriate conduct for users and to notify the users of their right to be free from harassment on the basis of race, color, national origin or disability and to be free from retaliation for protesting such harassment.” (Journal, 1995) In addition, Karraker was forced to take an administrative leave as a result of complaints about sex discrimination on the board
.
This case disturbed me for a many reasons. First of all these young people need to find out who they are, which is a journey in itself. Sometimes young men, as well as young women need to discuss their likes and dislikes on the road to self discovery. I believe that the College and the Office of Civil Rights of the Department of Education should have supported these young people’s right to speak freely in what should have been a private bulletin board. Furthermore, I believe there should have been some type of punishment or consequences for the man who broke the pledge of confidentiality, which in turn had devastating consequences and ruined the lives of many people. Colleges are responsible for preparing young people to be successful in the world. Conflict management is an extremely important part of this preparation. The man that violated the confidence of his peers, hurt two young women, and was responsible for destroying the career of his faculty advisor, should have been guided and mentored into handling the situation in a more effective manner. Obviously, everyone involved in this situation would have been much better off if the two women would not have been informed about what was said about them.. Also, it is concerning that the man that broke his pledge of confidentiality and caused this entire situation, was allowed to walk away from the situation without his life being affected in any way. He should have been required to deal with the consequences of his actions. Instead, other people’s lives were ruined and our Freedom of speech was infringed upon.
In conclusion, this is just one of a few cases discussed in the Yale Law Journal’s article, “Anonymity, autonomy, and accountability: challenges to the First Amendment in cyberspaces”, that have been very controversial and challenging given that we have not formulated a plan or new legal norms to govern the Networld. In the future, I hope that we can begin to handle these controversial situations with more success. I leave you with a quote from the Yale Law Journal, “The [Santa Rosa Junior College incident] casts a pall over computer communication, which is still in its infancy. E-mail is fast replacing back fences as the place to exchange ideas and gossip. Its content should be treated just as tolerantly as any other speech, or we risk limiting a freedom we cherish. Colleges cannot censor every student’s E-mail. Nor should they be expected to try. Our schools have no obligation to offer electronic forums for chat. But once offered, speech on these electronic grapevines should be as free as the words we speak.” (Journal, 1995)
References
Franklin, B. (1706-1790). Freedom of Speech Quotes. Retrieved 01 30, 2011, from Thinkexist.com: http://thinkexist.com/quotes/with/keyword/freedom_of_speech/
Journal, Y. L. (1995, May). Anonymity, autonomy, and accountability: challenges to the First Amendment in cyberspaces.(Emerging Media Technology and the First Amendment).
No comments:
Post a Comment