Do you have a right to privacy (and to call Obama a "nigger?")

Kitty Pryde

i luv you giant bear statue
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 7, 2008
Messages
9,090
Reaction score
2,165
Location
Lost Angeles
You might be right about that, but there's a problem with the alternatives you mention: They would be legal consequences.

Only the legal system can impose a sentence of community service. Anti-hate classes can only be imposed after a finding of wrongful action or behavior.

The whole point here is that the Constitution forbids any government agency from punishing someone for speaking their mind, especially politically. No matter how offensive or heinous the speech is, as long as it does not cross certain hard lines -- treason, incitement to violence, serious threats (as opposed to idle mouthing off), libel/slander, advancement of a crime -- then it is legal and there is nothing the government can do about it, including sending the offenders off to sensitivity classes. And remember, school officials are mostly government employees. They can't do it, either.

Social consequences are the only possible consequences for speech like this. This is protected from government interference. It is left up to society to sort it all out. It does that by social dialogue. In some cases, the dialogue runs along the gist of "Rawr, nigger White House bad, grrr!" versus, "Shut the fuck up, you racist turds." Or in this case, "OMG, check out <Name> being a racist turd."

Sure, we can debate whether the particular reaction of outing them by name and location this way went too far. Personally, I think it did go just one step too far, not because they shouldn't be outed but because they are or may be minors and publishing (or republishing) their identities could be a problem.

But it would be worse, not to mention unconstitutional, to go with punishments such as community service instead.

Did you read my post above about Acceptable Use Policy? Schools absolutely can and do police speech. Students sign an agreement that they won't use computers/phones/etc to do things that break school rules. Then schools can punish students (minors or not) for violating school rules in their text messages, facebook posts, Tweets, Youtube videos, and emails, both on and off campus. And most schools have rules preventing bullying and hate speech. They can prevent students from wearing a t-shirt with a statement on it that offends them, on campus. At the school where I work, a kid reported for Tweeting those things on his own time could be suspended or otherwise lose privileges.
 

muravyets

Old revolutionary
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 21, 2011
Messages
7,212
Reaction score
974
Location
Massachusetts, USA
Website
www.facebook.com
Did you read my post above about Acceptable Use Policy? Schools absolutely can and do police speech. Students sign an agreement that they won't use computers/phones/etc to do things that break school rules. Then schools can punish students (minors or not) for violating school rules in their text messages, facebook posts, Tweets, Youtube videos, and emails, both on and off campus. And most schools have rules preventing bullying and hate speech. They can prevent students from wearing a t-shirt with a statement on it that offends them, on campus. At the school where I work, a kid reported for Tweeting those things on his own time could be suspended or otherwise lose privileges.
But a few points:

1) Policing use of school tools and property is not the same thing as policing speech.

2) Schools policing speech that is not expressed via school tools and property is controversial and not settled as acceptable policy.

3) Disciplinary action for violating a code of conduct agreement with the school is not the same as an imposition of a community service sentence. Remember that Cricket18 was seemingly connecting two examples of bigotry, the OP story and a story about an adult anti-Semite. This would appear to be broadening the conversation beyond just these teens, to cover social responses to offensive speech in general.
 

JoyceH

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 16, 2012
Messages
357
Reaction score
35
Location
Virginia
Website
joyceharmon.wordpress.com
They were not saying this in private, they were screaming it in a crowded public space, so what privacy rights are being violated?

Exactly. And 'kids' ought to know that - they've never even lived in a world without an internet. They know darn well that something posted to Twitter or Facebook can wind up with a global audience. Or if they don't know that, they need to learn, fast.
 

AncientEagle

Old kid, no need to be gentle.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
2,090
Reaction score
513
Location
Southern U.S.
Poor, poor racists.

It's not like they posted on private twitter accounts, where only their BF and GF could see it. Or their Facebook pages, where more than 500 people could see it. I mean, really, who is that stupid? Putting your name, school, phone number, etc... on your Facebook page, knowing that employers and schools will indeed scour those pages in the future to see if you are a viable employee. Knowing that the military scours those pages completely, knowing that the POTUS is head of the military, and that this will probably kill your chances for ever being anything but enlisted. Knowing that everything is forever on the internet and that nothing can actually be deleted off of Facebook.

But they're not that stupid, right?

I admit, plenty of teens are stupid. I would know. So are plenty of young adults and elderly and middle aged. Teens grew up with the internet. I grew up with the internet. Being young is no excuse for being an absolute fucking idiot.

I monitor every single thing I post on the internet that could someday be connected back to my real name. If they didn't want to be "outed" (which they weren't. they posted this under their real names in public for godsake) they could've made fake names like the Hunger Games idiots like "imnotaracisthoe" or "123niggasuckdick".

It isn't that hard. Really. Quit defending these dumbasses. I am their age. I know better. And I know other teens who know better. They are just the stupid of the bunch.

If I had people on my FB page doing the same thing (and I don't, fyi) I'd hang them out to dry, too. If you connect it to your name, your problem. Maybe their parents should've taught them better.

This is not like the story where the underage girl sent a singular picture of her boobs to a grown man and HE posted it for the world to see. This is a bunch of idiot racists opening their stupid mouths on their public pages to impress their idiot racist friends. Nothing more, nothing less.

Shame and intimidate them more, please. Let them do some community service or something. The internet is no more private than screaming it in front of everyone in the lunchroom. And how would that go down? We're essentially saying that because it was posted on the internet, it's less of an offense?

Cyberbullying is just as bad as regular bullying. Twitter and Tumblr and Facebook are no less public than screaming it down a hallway. People need to learn that. If some idiot shouted "You blackies only voted for that nigger because he's like you" in my school, he'd have been given detention. They just had the privilege of being stupider and shouting it to the world.

Free speech has no legal consequence. That's it.

Let's get the definition of bullied. Because if these idiots are being bullied, I need a good laugh. Poor racists being bullied because they called a black man a nigger. Now that is something new.

ETA: If someone said that to me IRL, I'd fuck them up. These "kids" are getting off easy.
This is a long quote, but it's worth re-reading.
I went back and forth, feeling strongly on all sides of this issue. Then I read TheBloodfiend's comment. Eloquent, to the point. I agree with it. Bloodfiend, have you thought about being a writer?
 

K.L. Bennett

A floopy flolloper
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 28, 2012
Messages
801
Reaction score
247
Location
The High Plains, baby!
Dammit, once again Don and I agree completely on something. Ruined my whole day.

caw

I quite like it when I agree with Don. It makes me feel sensible and smart and stuff. :D

I can't say it any better than Mura and thebloodfiend and others have said it. I wouldn't have personally done what the creaters of that tumblr site did, mostly because I'm not one of those people who knows how or cars to invest the time, but I don't see how anyone's right to privacy was violated here.
 

shadowwalker

empty-nester!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 8, 2010
Messages
5,601
Reaction score
598
Location
SE Minnesota
Racism = valid opinion now? Really?

Yes, it is. It might be stupid, hateful, disgusting - but one person's opinion is just as valid as another's. It's opinion.

I know - it's awful that people don't always think the way they should. One day we'll have a pill or maybe genetic engineering so everyone believes as you do - or maybe as Romney does - or perhaps it should be the way Obama does - or maybe some Tibetan priest - or that atheist on the corner - or...
 

missesdash

You can't sit with us!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 5, 2011
Messages
6,858
Reaction score
1,092
Location
Paris, France
Yes, it is. It might be stupid, hateful, disgusting - but one person's opinion is just as valid as another's. It's opinion.

I know - it's awful that people don't always think the way they should. One day we'll have a pill or maybe genetic engineering so everyone believes as you do - or maybe as Romney does - or perhaps it should be the way Obama does - or maybe some Tibetan priest - or that atheist on the corner - or...

"Obama is a nigger monkey" isn't even an opinion.

But all opinions aren't equally valid. The most valid opinions are those that are based on actual knowledge of the subject, opinions that can be backed up with facts. Some opinions aren't valid at all precisely because they're based in ignorance.

Unless you're using some alternate definition of the word "valid."
 

ULTRAGOTHA

Merovingian Superhero
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 17, 2011
Messages
2,467
Reaction score
313
Yes, we (in the US) have a right to privacy. Good thing, too. I don't want all the things I say and do with my spouse out there in public. Nor my medical records.

Yes, we have the right to call the President of the United States whatever we want.

But saying racist things on Twitter and Facebook is not private. It's more public than shouting them over the intercom at a Superbowl game. I disagree with outing these idiots to their school, but it isn't and oughtn't to be, either illegal or immoral. Just a bit schmucky. Tell their parents instead.

That said, I hope a government school will not bring government-backed sanctions against school children's speech on the internet. Their peers are free to shun them for their utterly craptastic behavior.
 

Opty

Banned
Joined
Jul 8, 2006
Messages
4,448
Reaction score
918
Location
Canada
"Obama is a nigger monkey" isn't even an opinion.

But all opinions aren't equally valid. The most valid opinions are those that are based on actual knowledge of the subject, opinions that can be backed up with facts. Some opinions aren't valid at all precisely because they're based in ignorance.

Unless you're using some alternate definition of the word "valid."

Agreed. Having an equal right to voice an opinion does not in any reasonable way equate to the content of those opinions having equal validity.
 

shadowwalker

empty-nester!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 8, 2010
Messages
5,601
Reaction score
598
Location
SE Minnesota
But all opinions aren't equally valid. The most valid opinions are those that are based on actual knowledge of the subject, opinions that can be backed up with facts. Some opinions aren't valid at all precisely because they're based in ignorance.

Unless you're using some alternate definition of the word "valid."

Apparently I am. I use valid to mean that one person's opinion is no better than anyone else's. What's a 'valid' opinion on economics? On political agenda? On religious beliefs? Are an atheist's opinions valid because they're based on known facts, while a religious person's are not because they're based on faith?

Opinions are people's conclusions based on a variety of things - facts, experiences, observances. Thus no one's opinion is any better, any more valid, than anyone else's. That doesn't change just because you disagree with the opinion.
 

Opty

Banned
Joined
Jul 8, 2006
Messages
4,448
Reaction score
918
Location
Canada
Apparently I am. I use valid to mean that one person's opinion is no better than anyone else's.

Well, that's not what "valid" means so perhaps you should choose a different, more appropriate, word. If we're just going to make up our own definitions and interpretations of words then public discourse becomes pretty much an exercise in futility.
 

RichardGarfinkle

Nurture Phoenixes
Staff member
Moderator
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 2, 2012
Messages
11,138
Reaction score
3,082
Location
Walking the Underworld
Website
www.richardgarfinkle.com
Apparently I am. I use valid to mean that one person's opinion is no better than anyone else's. What's a 'valid' opinion on economics? On political agenda? On religious beliefs? Are an atheist's opinions valid because they're based on known facts, while a religious person's are not because they're based on faith?

Opinions are people's conclusions based on a variety of things - facts, experiences, observances. Thus no one's opinion is any better, any more valid, than anyone else's. That doesn't change just because you disagree with the opinion.

Do you distinguish informed opnion from uninformed opnion?
 

icerose

Lost in School Work
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
11,549
Reaction score
1,646
Location
Middle of Nowhere, Utah
I think going to the length the website did was ridiculous, aside from the one where there was a clear threat. People have the right to say what they want without being shamed or bullied.

That being said, Twitter is public. And some of these tweeters could have thousands of followers, many who already know much of their personal info.

I think this is the hardest part about freedom of speech. We're allowed to say what we want, without consequence. I was in Vegas years ago with my husband. There was a man in the casino, hefty and bald. Tattooed over his entire head was a giant swastika. I was aghast. As a Jew, even more so. But he had the right and there wasn't a damn thing I could do about it.

Heh, sorry. No. The first amendment does not protect you from responses of others. The first amendment protects you from being imprisoned by the government for your speech. It absolutely will not and should not protect you from society.

Freedom of speech doesn't mean "saying whatever you want without consequences."

I think this whole thing is an excellent lesson in you can say whatever you want, but you can't control how people react to it. They can't pick and choose who responds to them and how. That's something you face any time you state on opinion here and everywhere else.

ETA: I'm late to the convo. Dang it.
 
Last edited:

missesdash

You can't sit with us!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 5, 2011
Messages
6,858
Reaction score
1,092
Location
Paris, France
Apparently I am. I use valid to mean that one person's opinion is no better than anyone else's. What's a 'valid' opinion on economics? On political agenda? On religious beliefs? Are an atheist's opinions valid because they're based on known facts, while a religious person's are not because they're based on faith?

Opinions are people's conclusions based on a variety of things - facts, experiences, observances. Thus no one's opinion is any better, any more valid, than anyone else's. That doesn't change just because you disagree with the opinion.

Nah.

A medical opinion, for example, is generally more valid when given by a doctor than it is than when given by a drunk on a street corner.

An opinion is supposed to interpret given information and facts. If a person has incorrect information, their opinion is useless.

But to get back to the OP, which of those would you consider "opinions"
 

thebloodfiend

Cory
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 2, 2011
Messages
3,771
Reaction score
630
Age
30
Location
New York
Website
www.thebooklantern.com
But to get back to the OP, which of those would you consider "opinions"

Meh... well, one of them was:
"All you blackies only want Obama bec he is black. Bet you know nothing about him. Learn some shit. Then decide who you want. Not by color."
Not true, but I guess it's kind of an opinion. Maybe. Even if it's false. The rest is just wrong.

Does that idiot really think that by learning more about Obama compared to Romney, us "blackies" would change our minds? Really? Taking race out of the picture I still wouldn't have voted for Romney.
 

missesdash

You can't sit with us!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 5, 2011
Messages
6,858
Reaction score
1,092
Location
Paris, France
Meh... well, one of them was:Not true, but I guess it's kind of an opinion. Maybe. Even if it's false. The rest is just wrong.

Does that idiot really think that by learning more about Obama compared to Romney, us "blackies" would change our minds? Really? Taking race out of the picture I still wouldn't have voted for Romney.

I also doubt he'd be up there if he'd said "African Americans vote for Obama because he's black and not because of his policies."

I don't expect someone who would post such idiocy to realize the difference, but in his case, it wasn't his opinion that got him called out, it was his offensive slurs.
 

DancingMaenid

New kid...seven years ago!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
5,058
Reaction score
460
Location
United States
I think there can be some expectation of privacy on the internet, in that there are situations where you should be able to assume that you'll have privacy (but of course, you should be aware of the fact that your privacy may not be completely safe).

Posting publicly to Twitter is not one of those situations, and I think it's important for people to realize that. With Twitter, it can be very easy to feel like you're talking only to your friends, or shouting into a void. It certainly feels like I'm shouting into a void when I tweet. But unless your Twitter is locked, anyone can see what you post. Which is something I'm reminded of whenever I tweet something about my cats and, lo and behold, some account with a name like "CustomCatToys" starts following me a half hour later.

I also think that having people react negatively when you say something reprehensible is an appropriate consequence, so I don't have too much sympathy for these kids. And blatant racism is something that we should be outraged by, I think.

However, I'm not really comfortable with the kids being punished by their schools. I don't believe schools should be able to discipline students unless they're on school grounds/using school technology during the offense, or the offense relates to school. I'm not comfortable with kids having to sign agreements that dictate how they can behave in their own time.

I think having people see you as a racist should be punishment enough.

If it were up to me, I'd have zero privacy in society. Everything would be disclosed: Your finances, medical history, school grades, criminal records, buying habits, internet sites visited, etc. Everything. Even thoughts. A world where it's impossible to lie.

I'm tired of a world populated with phonies who people think are nice when they're not.

You're focusing only on the nefarious purposes of privacy. There are other reasons why people cherish privacy. For example:

- Safety. Even if we lived in a world where being open books was the norm, there would still be some nefarious people out there who would be inclined to use that information for dangerous purposes. Not just identity theft, but violent crime and stalking. I like knowing that if someone googles me, it's very hard to find specific information like my home address or phone number, because it makes it harder for someone to stalk me.

- Privacy helps maintain necessary boundaries between different relationships and parts of our lives. You don't have to be ashamed of looking at porn to prefer that your mother or child doesn't know exactly what you enjoy getting off to (and when, and how). A little mystery goes a long way in maintaining relationships.

Apparently I am. I use valid to mean that one person's opinion is no better than anyone else's. What's a 'valid' opinion on economics? On political agenda? On religious beliefs? Are an atheist's opinions valid because they're based on known facts, while a religious person's are not because they're based on faith?

Opinions are people's conclusions based on a variety of things - facts, experiences, observances. Thus no one's opinion is any better, any more valid, than anyone else's. That doesn't change just because you disagree with the opinion.

But not all opinions are equally valid. My opinion about the best restaurants in my town is more valid than the opinion of someone who's never been to my town. A lawyer's opinion about a legal matter is probably more valid than that of someone who's never studied law.

And sometimes opinions are flat-out wrong. I could say that my opinion is that the moon is made of cheese, but modern scientific knowledge contradicts this.
 

Celia Cyanide

Joker Groupie
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 1, 2005
Messages
15,479
Reaction score
2,295
Location
probably watching DARK KNIGHT
So, their responsibility changes because they were louder and reached more people?

Actually, I would argue that it does. Twitter is VERY public. Unless you have your tweets protected, anyone can look at your feed, even if they don't have a twitter account. And if you're talking about the President of the United States...forget about it. No matter how many followers you have, people are going to see it. Its much different than just saying something at school or home.
 

Williebee

Capeless, wingless, & yet I fly.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 11, 2007
Messages
20,569
Reaction score
4,814
Location
youtu.be/QRruBVFXjnY
Website
www.ifoundaknife.com
Actually, I would argue that it does. Twitter is VERY public. Unless you have your tweets protected, anyone can look at your feed, even if they don't have a twitter account. And if you're talking about the President of the United States...forget about it. No matter how many followers you have, people are going to see it. Its much different than just saying something at school or home.

Could you follow up on this a bit, please? How does it change the individual's responsibility for their own statements? Note, please, I'm not asking about the difference between something said in private vs. something said in public. (I think) you are saying that the degree of public changes the stater's responsibility for what they said. If I got that wrong, my apologies.
 

icerose

Lost in School Work
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
11,549
Reaction score
1,646
Location
Middle of Nowhere, Utah
Could you follow up on this a bit, please? How does it change the individual's responsibility for their own statements? Note, please, I'm not asking about the difference between something said in private vs. something said in public. (I think) you are saying that the degree of public changes the stater's responsibility for what they said. If I got that wrong, my apologies.

If I tell my family that I think we should all take up arms and kill homosexuals (for example) and go on a rant on how it should be done and how they are ruining the country, I would probably get some very strange looks and quick withdrawal from my family.

If I tell that in public and stir up other people and someone who listened to me and did what I was telling them to do, then yeah, I have a hell of a lot more personal responsibility for my words.
 

missesdash

You can't sit with us!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 5, 2011
Messages
6,858
Reaction score
1,092
Location
Paris, France
I think I get Willie's argument? A bigger audience may mean more consequences and that people are more likely to hold us responsible, but we are always (with the exception of things like mental disorders and coercion by others) 100% responsible for what we say.

Who else would be responsible for it?
 

Williebee

Capeless, wingless, & yet I fly.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 11, 2007
Messages
20,569
Reaction score
4,814
Location
youtu.be/QRruBVFXjnY
Website
www.ifoundaknife.com
If I tell my family that I think we should all take up arms and kill homosexuals (for example) and go on a rant on how it should be done and how they are ruining the country, I would probably get some very strange looks and quick withdrawal from my family.

If I tell that in public and stir up other people and someone who listened to me and did what I was telling them to do, then yeah, I have a hell of a lot more personal responsibility for my words.

But again, that's the difference between private and public. I'm wondering if Celia has a take that allows for different levels of "public" and different responsibilities for same. As I respect Ms. Celia a great deal, I'm betting I can learn something here. :)
 

nighttimer

No Gods No Masters
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Messages
11,629
Reaction score
4,103
Location
CBUS
I don't see any home addresses and phone numbers posted on that tumblr. The only "personal information" I see is the same stuff they have on twitter, where they posted this racist bullshit.

Yes, but if I have your name and school or job, it doesn't take a private investigator to find out where you live, your phone number and anything else so I can subject you to some harassment. To my understanding it was the creator of the Tumbir page that posted pictures of the posters and their personal information.

Much of what we think is private or anonymous really isn't and the Internet leaks information like a sieve.

The thing is, these kids put their own name and picture attached to their images. It's not like someone hunted down their information, it was right there, out in the open.

My understanding is that the creator of the Tumbir account added the information of the poster for the purpose of holding them up to scorn.

There are no legal consequences if I say to my friends that I hate Jews, or blacks, or gays unless there is a threat-a clear and present danger.

Most of the tweets that the OP cited were, to me, bigoted statements, but hold no threat, other than the one about hunting down the president.

Back to what the OP said, I agree with him. Going to those lenghts to call out racists is unfair. Sadly. Whether they pass it in a note, say it at the town hall, or tweet it, it is their right.

Cricket18 is spot on. The sentiments expressed by the posters are ugly and abhorrent, but I'm sure a Constitutional scholar (like the president) would be quick to say they fall under the cloak of protected speech.

One person said they had the right to be racist. I concur. You do have the right to hate anyone for any reason and express that sentiment whether on Facebook, Twitter, a blog or a billboard.

As writers we know how much words matter and we take responsibility for our words. I'm not sure most of these teens understand this. They aren't a public figure like a Donald Trump, Ted Nugent or Victoria Jackson melting down over the prospect of another four years of Obama. Are they dumb asses? Yep, and once those words are out there in the world, it's our right to call them dumb asses.

Naming names in the way the Tumbir page does is a cure as bad as the disease.