Last year a man currently referred to as "Mr. X" tweeted something so appalling about Minnesota Representative Michele Bachmann that I don't wish to repeat it here. It was a horrible thing to publish and circulate--all you need to know to understand the following post is that the published tweet referenced the author's desire to use a machete on Bachmann's person.
Investigation and legal procedures began. Was Mr. X's tweet "a threat" (and therefore the proper subject of criminal prosecution) or merely some kind of appalling "joke" (wrong, possibly fodder for some kind of civil lawsuit, but an improper basis for a criminal charge)?
That's the "big" issue, for the prosecutors. But there's another big issue for "Mr. X." Until prosecutors and a grand jury actually decide that his tweet was indeed a criminal "threat"--not just a "joke"...
...does "Mr. X" have a right to maintain his internet anonymity? In other words, can the government compel Twitter to disclose his real name to law enforcement and prosecutaion, and should that real name be disclosed to the public? Can they do that, if it has not yet been determined that "Mr. X's" machete tweet constitutes a "threat?" A crime?
If you're a person who uses a pseudonym when publishing comments or communications on the internet or Twitter...
(CONTINUED)
If you're a person who uses a pseudonym when publishing comments or communications on the internet or Twitter--you probably already understand instinctively that there are legitimate and common sense reasons for using a pseudonym.
You have a First Amendment right to express your opinion, but other citizens may hold that opinion against you. One of the main reasons for using a pseudonym is fear of threat or reprisal for an opinion you might have posted or tweeted. Someone who doesn't like you --may refer someone with authority over you (your boss, your teacher, etc.)--to your post or comment or tweet. And that person with authority or impact on your life-- might take action against you--fire you, refuse to hire you, pass you over for promotion, "hold your opinion or comment against you, etc.)
Similarly, there are "bad" reasons to use a pseudonym in digital media. As Mr. X and his machete comment make clear, internet anonymity can be used to shield oneself from accountability for what one says.
Presumably Mr. X would never have published his remark about taking a machete to Rep. Bachmann if he knew his identity as the author would be revealed. We can presume that, because up until now Mr. X has been fighting like hell to keep his identity a secret.
But now a decision has been handed down. A court has ordered that Mr. X's identity can be revealed, even if it has not yet been determined that his "tweet" constituted a threat and crime...
I read the court's decision, which you can find on the Internet. (The decision is called: In Re Grand Jury Subpoena No. 11116257, U.S.D.C, District of Columbia, Misc. No. 11-527 [RCL])
For an interpretation of what the decision means and how it might apply to those of you who use a pseudonym on the internet, I suggest that you read a brief article that appeared in a magazine called "Corporate Counsel." (The link is below.) Corporate Counsel is published by a lawyer's media group that is so powerful that it actually owns the domain name "www.law.com." I would take the arguments in their article seriously, whether or not you agree with the conclusions.
Those conclusions suggest that your ability to remain anonymous on the internet may not be a real as you think it is. No matter what you are promised, no matter who promises to respect your privacy. For example: if the decision holds--and a prosecutor decides that you might have committed any kind of a crime, and that possible crime is worth investigating--it is possible that your identity will be publicly identified to employers or neighbors or friends or enemies...and that these will then be able to read all of the posts and comments and articles you've sent in, over the years, under that pseudonym.
The First Amendment does give some protection to a right to anonymity. Anonymity is important in a representative democracy--but anonymity is not protected if you're using it as a "cover" for criminal behavior. And this decisions suggests that your anonymity may not be protected if it is merely alleged that you have engaged in criminal behavior.
To put it another way: even if you weren't intending or making a threat--even if you were just joking, and a judge and a jury would agree that you were just joking...the prosecution could reveal your identity to the public, exposing you to retaliation for any or all of the political opinions you attempted to express anonymously...and the prosecution could do that without ever convicting you of any crime.
How about that, boys and girls? What would your employers and co-workers and potential employers think of that, all that stuff you thought was going to be anonymous forever?
Read what this Mr. "Corporate Counsel" guy says. It doesn't go as far as what I've just told you--but it definitely goes in that direction.
One thing we can all agree on (unless some of you are sociopaths.) What "Mr. X" did, was horrible. It's horrible to refer to any woman in the way that Mr. X did to Rep. Bachmann. It's worthy of investigation because of the violent nature of the comment and the fact that Bachmann is an elected official (and in fact a presidential candidate.)
And--though this is certainly the least of it--Mr. X did Michele Bachmann a political favor by gaining her the sympathy of nearly every woman across the political spectrum--left to right.
Now Mr. X is squirming, apparently fearing (correctly, in my opinion) that revelation of his identity and this behavior will ruin his life or at least his reputation.
Forward this next part of this post to anyone you know who's writing hateful shit anonymously:
In this age (post-Lenny Bruce, post-Howard Stern, post-South Park) an "outrageous" sense of humor is more acceptable than ever.
But those guys put their names on their work and take the consequences, the hate mail, the threatened lawsuits, etc.
If,on the other hand, you decide to write and publish hateful shitt about people--anonymously or under a pseudonym, so you can avoid consequences...
...well, it may be that you won't remain anonymous. And maybe there's some justice in that...
LINK:
http://www.law.com/...