by StarmanSkye » Thu Mar 13, 2008 7:34 pm
Consider just SOME of the innane, hypocritical implications:
This bill ostensibly intended to hold web-posters accountable for their comments specif. to eliminate bullying is being put before the SAME Congress (well, some different people thru the years, but the same mindset) that has consistently compromised on principle and hid their more contemptable, controversial decisions behind an anonymous 'voice' vote, have repeatedly allowed themselves to be intimidated, browbeaten, and bullied by a virulent and increasingly self-aggrandizing Bush Executive Office into passing repressive and fiscally-irresponsible legislation ranging from an illegal grant of war-declaring authority to the President on the basis of outright lies, fabrications, exaggerations and distortions, approved the Patriot Act without even reading let alone debating it, consistently approved funding for the illegal war-crime conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, failed to censure or otherwise discipline chief Administration officials for their failure to appear and testify before duly constituted Congressional Committees investigating alleged malfeasance, obstruction of justice, unauthorized disclosure of classified information and other crimes, to refusal to hold Pentagon, Justice and Telecom officials responsible for complicity in illegal spying on Americans and covering-up evidence of the crime, and so on and so forth.
Besides -- Aren't there already mechanisms in place to address the issue of inappropriate or abusive comments? Namely, oversight provided for specific websites where monitors will arbitrate, censure or ban a poster for violating the site's terms of use?
I can see this kind of repressive, impractical measure being framed as an example of 'liberal' nanny-state legislation, where the state is interfering with free speech to protect and defend the poor, helpless and inept average web-surfer against the big, bad cruel world of bullies and opportunists. When actually, this bill would primarily benefit the rightwing PTB elites by seriously reducing the web's potential for political/economic criticism and public debate on their many crimes, frauds and abuses.
But I can't imagine this bill would ever get out of committee in the form given -- it's much too impractical, unworkable and controversial. I can imagine a huge vocal and outraged backlash as website owners/managers grapple with the impossible task of ensuring all registered users' names and addresses and email addys provided are accurate and up-to-date. And besides, without well-defined criteria of what constitutes 'bullying' and a process to abitrate disputes, what would be the value of requiring posters use their real full name? So, there's another level of oversight bureaucracy that will be required which SOMEONE will have to pay for (unless it gets funded through the website fines?)
I can imagine the development of a whole new cyber-industry of Web-poster registration-guarantee services, if not just websites requiring user-fees to pay the cost of staffing registration-verification. I can also imagine booming litigation by victims seeking damages for claimed bullying incidents. Consider the possible implications of arguing or defending that "Damn, but is that a stupid idea!" is not bullying, but "Gosh, are you ever stupid!" is;
But: would the US have authority to require foreign-owned websites' compliance and levy fines? If not, what about Canada and Mexico, or could they be covered by special agreement between the nation's leaders? If the US didn't have total internet authority, I'd expect the foreign website-hosting business to expand. If the US DID have worldwide internet oversight, I'd expect creative, resourceful web-owners and managers to create and make use of cost-effective alternatives, ie. setting their sites up on anonymous servers, through dummy-front shells and via insulated peer-networks.
But yeah, I'd have to go-along with shaking my head in *shocked!* disbelief at the proposed 'solution' to bullying by requiring everyone to post their 'real' names on the web.
I betcha some neocon genious will propose this would also be an invaluable boon in fighting the Global Warrr on Terrrror.
"In the interest of public safety we propose that this is what you can do to better let us help you help us keep you safe."
Last edited by
StarmanSkye on Thu Mar 13, 2008 7:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
