Yet again another lazy journalist who jumps on the bandwagon.
"...unjustified statements about a woman whose only crime is to write humourless advice on letting babies cry". If you took the time to do your research before writing your column you'd find that Gina Ford's book does not teach mothers to let their babies cry. When will journalists stop making cheap digs to embellish their stories.
Libby Purves, use your brain. You've written an interesting article which is let down at the end. What a shame.
Joe Bloggs, London,
I think the problem is the perceived anonymity. Yes there does seem to be ways for folks to hide their identity but this could be changed with certain technological enhancements. I have spent much time on message boards and know the filth and intellectual irresponsibility would never happen if these people knew that we knew who they were in real life. We should be proud to be allowed to express our opinions and solutions on such a forum without hiding. As for identity security this also requires attention (opportunity for you smart types). There should be no way a person could be harmed by just entering personal data on a computer. If that data is "used" then it should require the permission of the real person. There are biometric means of establishing we are who we are. Also the wiki-dilution of fact could be checked with the behind-the-scenes addition of original source links behind every cut and paste for serious research. Asking for honor on the internet is noble.
Rich Rosenthal, Mesa, AZ
The internet was a brilliant idea, now the criminals are close to degrading the security of all financial transactions to the extent that using the internet will soon be an unreasonable gamble. Furthermore, the veracity of much of the information now available is of very dubious quality - particularly Wikipedia yet it forms the basis for many lazy journalists, consequently the truth will be indecipherable in future.
ferg, leatherhead, england
Good article and lots of true to life things. Check out celebrity forums and fan club. The worst of the lot are women laden ones. Humanely was mentioned by someone else. Yah that would be nice.
Doug, Toronto,
Technology changes social conventions. Gentlemen used to send a carriage to a funeral if they couldn't attend in person. Today sending a car would be silly, because they are too commonplace. Similarly email means that, for the first time, it is cheaper to send a message than to read it, with huge changes for the acceptability of mass mailings. There are also changes due to the fact that internet acquaintances are, generally, known only online. For instance pedantry that would be intolerable face to face is, on the technical newgroup comp.lang.c, highly valued. Similarly, it is OK for Private Eye to be sued for libel, it is an occupational hazard for them, but the public won't tolerate random people being prosecuted for things they post in chatrooms.
Malcolm McLean, Bradford, UK.
I'm very often disappointed by how rude and obnoxious people are on discussion forums. Most of these forums are frequented by reasonably intelligent people, some with good arguments, some with poor arguments. Most of these people would happily have a debate in a pub without being rude and obnoxious on the first response. Yet the feeling of anonymity means they leave their inhibitions behind. The social control seems to be lost.
By all means have a vigorous debate, but people shouldn't write what they wouldn't want to say to someone face to face.
Alex, Tunbridge Wells,
The internet is like any other tool: it can be used for ill or for good. People should use it with care and humanely.
James, Jacksonville, Illinois U. S.
As enshrined in UK and even EU legislation freedom of speech brings with it responsabilities and duties. Unless of course you believe that freedom of speech should mean the right to say anything (even if a lie, untrue and likely to cause harm or offence). For example, how would you feel it if your street was littered with notices saying you were a child abuser? Is there really a difference in the impact of your words if they are in the "real world" or on-line where millions have instant access to those words? Unless you can prove it to be true, responsible people know you can't write and publish that Brand ABC or person XYZ is (for example) a criminal. As Libby reminds us, on-line or off-line, there isn't a difference, but it's too easy think there is.
Rory Jenkins, Perranporth, Cornwall
The vast majority of Internet users are not professional IT people and are also not 'power users'. They are not taught it and they learn by trial and error. Even many IT professionals have a limited understanding of the internet, and the worst security breaches occur in corporate settings where they won’t admit it for fear of the consequences.
People on the net are like people in Big Brother, they forget where they are and engage in conversation with people they like or argue with those they don't, in the same way they would at home or in the pub. Everyone should realise that is how message boards and chat rooms are an ignore them. They are not he same as publishing libel in The Times (say) and people should lighten up. Your argument is mostly to protect the wealthy with the forces of our insane libel laws, and restrict freedom to question.
neil Murphy, cromer,
This article was long overdue, thank you Libby. As an avid Internet user there is a lot happening there which needs some regulation, especially to protect those who do not yet have the know-how to protect themself. I don't think victims of scam and fraud are just being careless on their part. They just haven't learnt to sort the wheat from the chaff. I remember being caught in a couple of scams in my first year because the emails looked so plausible. Having learned my lesson, it is easy to spot them. Everyone has a learning curve and needs time to manouvre that curve, but it is time the Internet doesn't give you.
However we have to stop behaving like ostriches and acknowledge that this brand new world is a real world. Just because we cannot project ourself inside of it doesn't mean it cannot affect our lives negatively. Yet it is such an awesome place of information and opportunity, when it is understood. I am glad I am able to use it in my lifetime....true global domination!
Elaine Sihera, Maidenhead, United Kingdom
...And after we've cleaned up the 'net, we can then work out how to herd cats and turn lead into gold. In other words - it won't happen, and if it were to, the very chaos which Libby rails against would go, sucking out the vitality of the 'net. Freedom does alas mean people will abuse their privileges, but look at China and Iran's censorship of the 'Net for 'moral reasons' to see where this thinking will lead.
Alexander Hay, Winchester,
Congratulations, Libby. I agree with every word.
Barry, Wallington, UK
I couldn't fail to disagree with you less, maybe he was in need of help, who knows, were living in a world, where there is unrestricted media, meaning that it takes more and more to shock the world!! People forever mention they want to kill themselves over the internet for attention, he was edged on to do it, and he did. It happens it's life, if I see a guy on top of a building, and he's pissing about, I would "shout jump if your going too" maybe some of these people people need help, maybe they just need a reality check.
Adam Webb, Milton Keynes, UK
Here is a very easy and common sense solution: ban the privilege of anonymity and introduce compulsory verifiable registration for all users. It works. The downside is reduced traffic for certain ISPs but a cleaner internet for decent citizens ...
London IT manager, London,
As a keen online player of World of Warcraft, a game which attracts 8 million players of all nationalities, I have found it to be a safe, caring environment. Anyone who comes out with abuse, or who behaves badly, quickly finds themselves ostracised by their friends, or reported to a game master for serious abuse, either of the game or fellow players. All ages play this game and the older members tend to guide the younger, rasher element into the etiquette of proper game play. There are few problems. We have a good laugh, we share quests and fight together, and occasionally help each other out online with problems. From the Norwegian on sick leave from the Norwegian army who had been shot six times in the chest in Iraq, to following the romance and pregancy of my daughter who cemented her relationship with her boyfriend through this game, all sorts of people are online, and their real characters shine through their avatars. And, as I say, largely self regulating.
Alison, Margate, UK
Yes, people should behave online, but any new laws, even if they do not seem draconian, will help the rich and powerful to suppress criticism of themselves (even criticism that happens to be factually true, well deserved or both), while doing nothing for ordinary people. Just like the libel laws.
Philip Cronin, Bedford,
Yet again another lazy journalist who jumps on the bandwagon.
"...unjustified statements about a woman whose only crime is to write humourless advice on letting babies cry". If you took the time to do your research before writing your column you'd find that Gina Ford's book does not teach mothers to let their babies cry. When will journalists stop making cheap digs to embellish their stories.
Libby Purves, use your brain. You've written an interesting article which is let down at the end. What a shame.
Joe Bloggs, London,
I think the problem is the perceived anonymity. Yes there does seem to be ways for folks to hide their identity but this could be changed with certain technological enhancements. I have spent much time on message boards and know the filth and intellectual irresponsibility would never happen if these people knew that we knew who they were in real life. We should be proud to be allowed to express our opinions and solutions on such a forum without hiding. As for identity security this also requires attention (opportunity for you smart types). There should be no way a person could be harmed by just entering personal data on a computer. If that data is "used" then it should require the permission of the real person. There are biometric means of establishing we are who we are. Also the wiki-dilution of fact could be checked with the behind-the-scenes addition of original source links behind every cut and paste for serious research. Asking for honor on the internet is noble.
Rich Rosenthal, Mesa, AZ
The internet was a brilliant idea, now the criminals are close to degrading the security of all financial transactions to the extent that using the internet will soon be an unreasonable gamble. Furthermore, the veracity of much of the information now available is of very dubious quality - particularly Wikipedia yet it forms the basis for many lazy journalists, consequently the truth will be indecipherable in future.
ferg, leatherhead, england
Good article and lots of true to life things. Check out celebrity forums and fan club. The worst of the lot are women laden ones. Humanely was mentioned by someone else. Yah that would be nice.
Doug, Toronto,
Technology changes social conventions. Gentlemen used to send a carriage to a funeral if they couldn't attend in person. Today sending a car would be silly, because they are too commonplace. Similarly email means that, for the first time, it is cheaper to send a message than to read it, with huge changes for the acceptability of mass mailings. There are also changes due to the fact that internet acquaintances are, generally, known only online. For instance pedantry that would be intolerable face to face is, on the technical newgroup comp.lang.c, highly valued. Similarly, it is OK for Private Eye to be sued for libel, it is an occupational hazard for them, but the public won't tolerate random people being prosecuted for things they post in chatrooms.
Malcolm McLean, Bradford, UK.
I'm very often disappointed by how rude and obnoxious people are on discussion forums. Most of these forums are frequented by reasonably intelligent people, some with good arguments, some with poor arguments. Most of these people would happily have a debate in a pub without being rude and obnoxious on the first response. Yet the feeling of anonymity means they leave their inhibitions behind. The social control seems to be lost.
By all means have a vigorous debate, but people shouldn't write what they wouldn't want to say to someone face to face.
Alex, Tunbridge Wells,
The internet is like any other tool: it can be used for ill or for good. People should use it with care and humanely.
James, Jacksonville, Illinois U. S.
As enshrined in UK and even EU legislation freedom of speech brings with it responsabilities and duties. Unless of course you believe that freedom of speech should mean the right to say anything (even if a lie, untrue and likely to cause harm or offence). For example, how would you feel it if your street was littered with notices saying you were a child abuser? Is there really a difference in the impact of your words if they are in the "real world" or on-line where millions have instant access to those words? Unless you can prove it to be true, responsible people know you can't write and publish that Brand ABC or person XYZ is (for example) a criminal. As Libby reminds us, on-line or off-line, there isn't a difference, but it's too easy think there is.
Rory Jenkins, Perranporth, Cornwall
The vast majority of Internet users are not professional IT people and are also not 'power users'. They are not taught it and they learn by trial and error. Even many IT professionals have a limited understanding of the internet, and the worst security breaches occur in corporate settings where they won’t admit it for fear of the consequences.
People on the net are like people in Big Brother, they forget where they are and engage in conversation with people they like or argue with those they don't, in the same way they would at home or in the pub. Everyone should realise that is how message boards and chat rooms are an ignore them. They are not he same as publishing libel in The Times (say) and people should lighten up. Your argument is mostly to protect the wealthy with the forces of our insane libel laws, and restrict freedom to question.
neil Murphy, cromer,
This article was long overdue, thank you Libby. As an avid Internet user there is a lot happening there which needs some regulation, especially to protect those who do not yet have the know-how to protect themself. I don't think victims of scam and fraud are just being careless on their part. They just haven't learnt to sort the wheat from the chaff. I remember being caught in a couple of scams in my first year because the emails looked so plausible. Having learned my lesson, it is easy to spot them. Everyone has a learning curve and needs time to manouvre that curve, but it is time the Internet doesn't give you.
However we have to stop behaving like ostriches and acknowledge that this brand new world is a real world. Just because we cannot project ourself inside of it doesn't mean it cannot affect our lives negatively. Yet it is such an awesome place of information and opportunity, when it is understood. I am glad I am able to use it in my lifetime....true global domination!
Elaine Sihera, Maidenhead, United Kingdom
...And after we've cleaned up the 'net, we can then work out how to herd cats and turn lead into gold. In other words - it won't happen, and if it were to, the very chaos which Libby rails against would go, sucking out the vitality of the 'net. Freedom does alas mean people will abuse their privileges, but look at China and Iran's censorship of the 'Net for 'moral reasons' to see where this thinking will lead.
Alexander Hay, Winchester,
Congratulations, Libby. I agree with every word.
Barry, Wallington, UK
I couldn't fail to disagree with you less, maybe he was in need of help, who knows, were living in a world, where there is unrestricted media, meaning that it takes more and more to shock the world!! People forever mention they want to kill themselves over the internet for attention, he was edged on to do it, and he did. It happens it's life, if I see a guy on top of a building, and he's pissing about, I would "shout jump if your going too" maybe some of these people people need help, maybe they just need a reality check.
Adam Webb, Milton Keynes, UK
Here is a very easy and common sense solution: ban the privilege of anonymity and introduce compulsory verifiable registration for all users. It works. The downside is reduced traffic for certain ISPs but a cleaner internet for decent citizens ...
London IT manager, London,
As a keen online player of World of Warcraft, a game which attracts 8 million players of all nationalities, I have found it to be a safe, caring environment. Anyone who comes out with abuse, or who behaves badly, quickly finds themselves ostracised by their friends, or reported to a game master for serious abuse, either of the game or fellow players. All ages play this game and the older members tend to guide the younger, rasher element into the etiquette of proper game play. There are few problems. We have a good laugh, we share quests and fight together, and occasionally help each other out online with problems. From the Norwegian on sick leave from the Norwegian army who had been shot six times in the chest in Iraq, to following the romance and pregancy of my daughter who cemented her relationship with her boyfriend through this game, all sorts of people are online, and their real characters shine through their avatars. And, as I say, largely self regulating.
Alison, Margate, UK
Yes, people should behave online, but any new laws, even if they do not seem draconian, will help the rich and powerful to suppress criticism of themselves (even criticism that happens to be factually true, well deserved or both), while doing nothing for ordinary people. Just like the libel laws.
Philip Cronin, Bedford,
- 1
- 2
Next