Interesting article on Buzzfeed today. Isabella Sorley was convicted in 2013 of "sending malicious messages, under section 127 of the Communications Act 2003."
Her views at the time she sent the tweets are markedly different from those she holds today. Today, she draws a distinction between free speech and threats:
āThreats are wrong. Thereās a difference between free speech and threats. Free speech, if youāre just going to moan about something, if you said āpeople deserve cancerā, thatās free speech.
āBut as soon as you talk at someone and say āyou deserve cancerā, thatās different. Threats and free speech are completely different. I know a few people say this is a free speech issue but itās not ā threats have always been wrong, no matter if itās on social media or itās face to face.
This Is What It s Like To Go To Prison For Trolling - BuzzFeed News
Ignoring the fact that saying "you deserve cancer" is not a threat, what do people think about this distinction? European countries are known for protecting free speech up to a point, but that protection seems to cover less than in the U.S.
I handle Social Media for my company and recently had to seek legal opinion on some Facebook activity. Without going into detail, that opinion stated: ..."defamation / libel / slander is tricky and even more so for public figures...". So does it matter who the individual is that is being attacked? Does everyone deserve equal treatment?
In the case of the article, a feminist writer and a Member of Parliament who were campaigning for women to receive more recognition were threatened with rape. Does it matter that the threat was on twitter? Would it be different if the threat was made face to face? What about a if it was in a letter sent to her home? Or by phone? Where is the line?
Her views at the time she sent the tweets are markedly different from those she holds today. Today, she draws a distinction between free speech and threats:
āThreats are wrong. Thereās a difference between free speech and threats. Free speech, if youāre just going to moan about something, if you said āpeople deserve cancerā, thatās free speech.
āBut as soon as you talk at someone and say āyou deserve cancerā, thatās different. Threats and free speech are completely different. I know a few people say this is a free speech issue but itās not ā threats have always been wrong, no matter if itās on social media or itās face to face.
This Is What It s Like To Go To Prison For Trolling - BuzzFeed News
Ignoring the fact that saying "you deserve cancer" is not a threat, what do people think about this distinction? European countries are known for protecting free speech up to a point, but that protection seems to cover less than in the U.S.
I handle Social Media for my company and recently had to seek legal opinion on some Facebook activity. Without going into detail, that opinion stated: ..."defamation / libel / slander is tricky and even more so for public figures...". So does it matter who the individual is that is being attacked? Does everyone deserve equal treatment?
In the case of the article, a feminist writer and a Member of Parliament who were campaigning for women to receive more recognition were threatened with rape. Does it matter that the threat was on twitter? Would it be different if the threat was made face to face? What about a if it was in a letter sent to her home? Or by phone? Where is the line?
