Free Speech? Or Merely Picking Fights Online? What Should Be Done?

Lamorinda Patch has grown increasingly concerned by the level of vituperation expressed on its pages and taken steps to dampen it. Some feel we've gone too far, others feel we haven't gone far enough...


Depending on whom we speak with in the course of a week Lamorinda Patch has either, a.) created a valid, vetted and worthwhile forum for discussion of neighborhood issues, or, b.) single-handedly reversed the ideals of the Founding Fathers and set the concept of Free Speech back 100 years.

We prefer the former description, of course, but have been accused of the latter more than we can count. Some of our readers seem to think the First Amendment gives them the protection to say whatever they wish, as often as they wish, and with as much venom as they wish. Many others tell us they are tired of this salty few, and that their invective keeps less confrontational or thick-skinned users off the site.

, we do not wish to be placed in the role of censor here at Lamorinda Patch -- having other things to do and trusting our readership (an educated bunch if ever there was one) to play nice. As it turns out, that may have been a naive notion on our part and now, it seems, others are getting ready to take the fight against cyber intimidation a step further.

A new bill passed recently in Arizona would send those who "annoy or offend" neighbors in online comment threads to jail for as much as six months. House Bill 2549, which enjoyed bipartisan support, passed in the state's legislature and is awaiting one final vote on a minor "technical change" before it goes to Gov. Jan Brewer.

The language of HB 2549 immediately sent the eyebrows of First Amendment advocates into high arch.

It states that, if passed, it would be a class one misdemeanor for anyone to "terrify, intimidate, threaten, harass, annoy or offend" through electronic and digital devices. Precise definitions of what would be considered annoying or offensive were not included, though Patch readers have submitted examples of their own in the recent past.

Free Speech advocates are requesting that Gov. Brewer take another pass at the legislation, but Arizona Rep. Steve Farley, who co-sponsored HB2549, said its intention is not to stifle free speech, but to protect victims of stalking and cyber-bullying.

"It doesn't mean that the person is instantly going to be fined or put away," Farley told ABC News. "But if the judge determines it relates to other circumstances in the case then they can use this as another tool to make that decision."

To date, 38 states have enacted legislation against electronic bullying, according to the Cyberbullying Research Center.

"I'm a defender of the Constitution like anyone else, but the First Amendment doesn't give you the right to harass or terrorize someone," said Justin Patchin, the center's co-director.

It's a fine line Lamorinda Patch would prefer not to walk, but it appears that most communities have their share of firebrands happy to touch off enmity and spite between neighbors and, while the vast majority of comments are well-written and well received, Lamorinda is not exempt.

Despite admonitions and warnings and, in extreme cases, actual deletion of and found to be so by Patch, it also appears that some users feel compelled to keep slinging mud despite our use of the DELETE key.

What do you think, Oh Gentle Patch Reader? Should Patch forums be left alone, with some posters free to engage others in a no-holds-barred form of cyber mud-wrestling? Should we run the risk of being criticized for playing cyber-sheriff and take even more steps to keep our active comments boards free of invective? Or should we follow Arizona's pending model... with a real-world pillory ready and waiting for those who cannot -- or will not -- conduct themselves civilly on the Internet?

Sue Haas April 10, 2012 at 04:01 PM
I take it this is the kind of thing you're seeing?: Seeb keeb 7:10 pm on Monday, April 9, 2012 Hang him, like I said before u deleted my comment. I thought this was the internet.
DanglingParticiple April 10, 2012 at 04:45 PM
Why are you not a "people"? Whenever you leave a comment, it doesn't show in the new "What People are Saying" box. It doesn't seem very nice not to count you as a "people". Well, I, for one, support your peopleness.
Fritz 'Congodog' Stoop April 10, 2012 at 04:47 PM
As King Narcissus used to say, "Its nice to be nice."
Fritz 'Congodog' Stoop April 10, 2012 at 05:21 PM
King Narcisse (sic) was a real character and a piece of East Bay historical esoterica, Circa 1950s. King Narcisse was the 'Leader' of Mount Zion Holy Temple in Oakland, CA. and was a wonderfully flamboyant character that was driven around (mainly in the Lakeshore area) in a golden Coupe deVille. Whenever and wherever he arrived, his driver would pile out and roll out a runner of brilliant red carpet to keep the good king from soiling his (also) golden footwear as he entered his destination. The motto (for lack of a better word) of the Mount Zion Holy Temple was, "It is Nice to be Nice." When the King departed, as he waited for the carpet to be rolled up, he would beam a huge, electric smile and exclaim, "It is Nice to be Nice!" Really can't argue with that. As I was raised in the ghettos of Piedmont, the King and his message were fascinating to me, so, at about age 11 or 12, I ventured one Sunday to the Temple, the only pink face in the crowd. The experience was extraordinary, bordering on unbelievable. My nerves were immediately set at ease as I was warmly welcomed and invited to a seat up front. The service was as uplifting and all-encompassing as any I have ever witnessed to this day. By the end I was standing, swaying, singing and clapping loudly along with the all the others in the vibrating building. I returned many times in the next few years. It was indeed, nice to be nice.
Claire Voyance April 12, 2012 at 03:01 AM
First and foremost, the RIGHT of Free Speech does NOT apply to this website because there is no governmental conduct. However, regarding the SPIRIT of Free Speech, the ONLY post that should be prohibited is a post that violates a criminal law (e.g. threat) and/or civil law (e.g. defamation). Whether profanity should be permitted is debatable. If you don't like what someone else posted, ignore it or respond to it. (or start your own website)


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »