Is calling someone a "skank" cyberbullying? A Manhattan judge says it is, and has ordered Google to reveal the identity of an anonymous blogger who called a local woman a skank (among other things) on a Blogspot blog like this one.
It's funny what happens to a word once it has been delineated as "not okay." I now have the irresistible desire to start calling out skanks left, right and center, even though it's not a word I use regularly. (This is why I kick ass at Taboo until I start actually looking at the card.) But there are many compelling reasons why a blogger would want to write anonymously, not all of which have to do with discrediting other people.
According to PC World, the plaintiff claimed in court that the blog was affecting her ability to get work -- and since she was a model, allegations about her age could I guess be considered as a professional attack. (Every article about this case mentions her profession, which teeters on the stiletto heel of relevance if you ask me.) But if you follow that line long enough, an author could claim a negative review on a blog was affecting her or his livelihood. I don't typically write posts that say "Author Ainslie Copper is a hack, her mother dressed her funny and her books should be burned," but if I say "Get Ainslie Copper's books out of the library, don't waste your money on buying them," that is adversely affecting her business.
Anyway, I find this troubling in a way I can't articulate, but it seems impossible to enforce, particularly since it appears in this case the commenters were also participating. (And you people are always going on about literary skankeration, good lord.)
3 days ago
4 comments:
Emily Bronte is a skank!!
This is the credited response.
As far as cyberbullying goes, the tone of the comments seems to matter far more than the effects do, so the plaintiff's strategy in claiming damages seems ill-advised (since legal precedent (see the painter James Whistler's lawsuit) protects critics to, well, criticize). Free speech is protected by the Constitution, but namecalling is not. (Please go ahead and cc: this to all those people chanting at town hall meetings.)
Maybe she should have stuck to a claim that could be proven in court. To pick on my imaginary author again, if I say "Author Ainslie Copper is a total Amazon whore," that would be hard to defend. But if I say "Ainslie Copper paid $20 for every positive review on Amazon," that can be proven. (Note to everyone reading this site: Not a lawyer! Very much not a lawyer.)
So if this blogger had said, as appears to be the case, "This woman is a woman of loose morals because she went after my boyfriend, and she lied about her age on occasions X and Y," the case might have gone differently? But wait, that takes all the fun out of anonymous Internet attacking!
Post a Comment