3 ms·

Is it right to jail someone for being offensive on Facebook or Twitter?

dotcoma 12y ago
in a dictatorship, perhaps so.
k-mcgrady 12y ago
If you post something offensive and direct it at someone I'd say it's harassment and you could be taken to court. Just saying something offensive though, undirected, should not be an offence. Or at least it should be a new category of offences not deserving of jail time. I seriously doubt it the people who got jailed for certain tweets walked up to a policeman in the street and made the same comment they would get the same punishment.
- mpyne 12y ago
  > I seriously doubt it the people who got jailed for certain tweets walked up to a policeman in the street and made the same comment they would get the same punishment. That's true, but there's a difference between being offensive to the government and being offensive to people. The government is supposed to be able to take that kind of punishment (which is, after all, why these related rights are enshrined in the very first Amendment of the U.S. Bill of Rights). So I'd caution about focusing attention on offensive speech only on how it applies when that speech is directed against government and its agents, or society as a whole, since the possible kinds of damage would be different if directed against individuals.
  - k-mcgrady 12y ago
    I agree, I should have made my point clearer. I suppose a better analogy would be the person shouting the tweet in a public place where a police officer was present to witness it. They aren't directing the offensive comment at anyone. In that situation I doubt an arrest would be made.
- 6d0debc071 12y ago
  In theory, speech in the UK has for some time been subject to tight controls even outside the internet. Section 4A of the Public Order Act 1986, as modified in 1994, states that 'A person is guilty of an offence if, with intent to cause a person harassment, alarm or distress, he— uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting, thereby causing that or another person harassment, alarm or distress. ... A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale or both.' (Above text somewhat abbreviated.) There's also section 5, which is more or less the same offence but without intent, which has a fine (level 3) as it's penalty. I believe the latter is the one more commonly used. But it strikes me that much of the day to day interactions people have with the legal system are subject to what you might call a policeman's 'give a fuck' level, rather than being a reflection of their potential powers from statute.
mistakoala 12y ago
A really easy one: no.
zxcdw 12y ago
What about situations in which someone deliberately tries to cause misery to those suffering a loss? A prime example would be a family losing a child and someone just deliberately mocking and teasing them over it. What can you do? How can you prevent this? How should society act and take a stance about this? Obviously the "But free speech!"-camp doesn't even try to solve the problem at an individual level. What other options are there, apart from punishment of the perpetrator?
- k-mcgrady 12y ago
  Harassment. If you are directing the negative comments at someone in particular I think you would be charged with harassing that person.
  - hga 12y ago
    Exactly, or at least in the US we have laws to deal with harassment, although they'll vary from state to state. However the "directing" part is as I understand it critical. I.e. saying something in isolation, that won't through some mechanism come to the attention of the targeted party, doesn't qualify.
- blauwbilgorgel 12y ago
  That is why I am conflicted about all this. Two cases where this is iffy: Azhar Ahmed prosecuted for treason on Facebook for the statement: "All soldiers should die and go to hell" [1] and Joe Lipari getting a visit from a SWAT team for quoting Fight Club on Facebook as a joke [2]. On the other hand you have vicious griefer groups which stalk memorial pages like hacker groups do old Joomla installs. These are organized groups who will drive people to suicide by massive cyberbullying campaigns, then gloat about it online, for as much relatives to see. Real unadulterated meanness. They don't seem to get arrested as much as the people who will say stupid stuff under their real names. And complaining to Twitter or Facebook about these groups seems futile. In the case of blatant racism or harassment these forums have a responsibility too: They could remove it, say it is against their TOS and no complex or biased legal system would have to get involved. In my opinion it is a form of malignant spam and is to be treated as such: employ filters, community feedback and manual reviewers to solve it as a spam problem. Spammers, like griefers, will continue. [1] http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/libertycentral/2012/mar/15/azhar-ahmed-treason-army-facebook-comments http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/libertycentral/2012... [2] http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/414/transcript http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/414/t...
ipince 12y ago
Well... Is it right to jail someone due to bullying? what if it's only verbal bullying? What if the bullying caused the victim to hurt him or herself? What if you threaten to kill somebody? I don't know. I want to answer "no" to the title's question, but it seems more nuanced than that. I think the distinction of a targeted comment vs a "general" one is an important one to make. I'm curious on what the law is for similar actions outside of social media..
gte910h 12y ago
Harassment laws should be enforced on twitter as much as anywhere else. "Generally, criminal harassment entails intentionally targeting someone else with behavior that is meant to alarm, annoy, torment or terrorize them. Not all petty annoyances constitute harassment. Instead, most state laws require that the behavior cause a credible threat to the person's safety or their family's safety. - See more at: http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-charges/harassment.html#sthash.pMyFFct5.dpuf" http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-charges/harassment.html... "I'm going to rape/kill/etc you" should probably end up with you in front of a prosecutor in many states.
daveqr 12y ago
No. Next question?

in a dictatorship, perhaps so.

If you post something offensive and direct it at someone I'd say it's harassment and you could be taken to court. Just saying something offensive though, undirected, should not be an offence. Or at least it should be a new category of offences not deserving of jail time. I seriously doubt it the people who got jailed for certain tweets walked up to a policeman in the street and made the same comment they would get the same punishment.

mpyne 12y ago
> I seriously doubt it the people who got jailed for certain tweets walked up to a policeman in the street and made the same comment they would get the same punishment. That's true, but there's a difference between being offensive to the government and being offensive to people. The government is supposed to be able to take that kind of punishment (which is, after all, why these related rights are enshrined in the very first Amendment of the U.S. Bill of Rights). So I'd caution about focusing attention on offensive speech only on how it applies when that speech is directed against government and its agents, or society as a whole, since the possible kinds of damage would be different if directed against individuals.
- k-mcgrady 12y ago
  I agree, I should have made my point clearer. I suppose a better analogy would be the person shouting the tweet in a public place where a police officer was present to witness it. They aren't directing the offensive comment at anyone. In that situation I doubt an arrest would be made.
6d0debc071 12y ago
In theory, speech in the UK has for some time been subject to tight controls even outside the internet. Section 4A of the Public Order Act 1986, as modified in 1994, states that 'A person is guilty of an offence if, with intent to cause a person harassment, alarm or distress, he— uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting, thereby causing that or another person harassment, alarm or distress. ... A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale or both.' (Above text somewhat abbreviated.) There's also section 5, which is more or less the same offence but without intent, which has a fine (level 3) as it's penalty. I believe the latter is the one more commonly used. But it strikes me that much of the day to day interactions people have with the legal system are subject to what you might call a policeman's 'give a fuck' level, rather than being a reflection of their potential powers from statute.

mistakoala 12y ago

A really easy one: no.

zxcdw 12y ago

What about situations in which someone deliberately tries to cause misery to those suffering a loss? A prime example would be a family losing a child and someone just deliberately mocking and teasing them over it. What can you do? How can you prevent this? How should society act and take a stance about this? Obviously the "But free speech!"-camp doesn't even try to solve the problem at an individual level. What other options are there, apart from punishment of the perpetrator?

k-mcgrady 12y ago
Harassment. If you are directing the negative comments at someone in particular I think you would be charged with harassing that person.
- hga 12y ago
  Exactly, or at least in the US we have laws to deal with harassment, although they'll vary from state to state. However the "directing" part is as I understand it critical. I.e. saying something in isolation, that won't through some mechanism come to the attention of the targeted party, doesn't qualify.
blauwbilgorgel 12y ago
That is why I am conflicted about all this. Two cases where this is iffy: Azhar Ahmed prosecuted for treason on Facebook for the statement: "All soldiers should die and go to hell" [1] and Joe Lipari getting a visit from a SWAT team for quoting Fight Club on Facebook as a joke [2]. On the other hand you have vicious griefer groups which stalk memorial pages like hacker groups do old Joomla installs. These are organized groups who will drive people to suicide by massive cyberbullying campaigns, then gloat about it online, for as much relatives to see. Real unadulterated meanness. They don't seem to get arrested as much as the people who will say stupid stuff under their real names. And complaining to Twitter or Facebook about these groups seems futile. In the case of blatant racism or harassment these forums have a responsibility too: They could remove it, say it is against their TOS and no complex or biased legal system would have to get involved. In my opinion it is a form of malignant spam and is to be treated as such: employ filters, community feedback and manual reviewers to solve it as a spam problem. Spammers, like griefers, will continue. [1] http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/libertycentral/2012/mar/15/azhar-ahmed-treason-army-facebook-comments http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/libertycentral/2012... [2] http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/414/transcript http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/414/t...

ipince 12y ago

Well... Is it right to jail someone due to bullying? what if it's only verbal bullying? What if the bullying caused the victim to hurt him or herself? What if you threaten to kill somebody? I don't know. I want to answer "no" to the title's question, but it seems more nuanced than that. I think the distinction of a targeted comment vs a "general" one is an important one to make. I'm curious on what the law is for similar actions outside of social media..

gte910h 12y ago

Harassment laws should be enforced on twitter as much as anywhere else. "Generally, criminal harassment entails intentionally targeting someone else with behavior that is meant to alarm, annoy, torment or terrorize them. Not all petty annoyances constitute harassment. Instead, most state laws require that the behavior cause a credible threat to the person's safety or their family's safety. - See more at: http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-charges/harassment.html#sthash.pMyFFct5.dpuf" http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-charges/harassment.html... "I'm going to rape/kill/etc you" should probably end up with you in front of a prosecutor in many states.

daveqr 12y ago

No. Next question?