Beware of uttering your views on the Internet because the slightest sounds might set off and avalanche of abuse. According to Danielle Citron’s “Hate Crimes in Cyberspace”, the Internet is anything but a haven for free speech. Controversial posts or an angry ex can snowball a negative comment to a expansive team of flamers who will burn your life down until it’s nothing but ash. Anonymous got it exactly right: protect your identity and learn how to become smoke so no one can grab ahold of your life. Citron’s statistics on Internet abuse and its prevalence with certain identity groups only affirm the rampant discrimination that has become clear over the last couple of decades. The Internet has done a lot to reveal problems all over the world and bring people within clicking distance of each other. However, as history has shown countless times over, we’re not a species that plays nicely with each other. It comes from our indelible trait as humans: judgement. Reminiscent of the witch hunting days, there seems to be a number of Internet residents who jump at the idea of defacing someone they believe to be immoral or a hazard to society.

Young adults (18-29), who tend to have more integrated online profiles than any other segment, tend to experience various elements of online harassment. Not surprisingly women and minorities find themselves susceptible to more extreme forms of harassment such as tampering withe their real lives. Men are more greatly affected by more surface level harassment such as negative comments, which are not equally as harmful but can become so. With law enforcement seemingly incapable or unwilling to deal with cyber misconduct there are few non-invasive solutions to sever cases of harassment. The threat starts to feel like it come from everywhere and it may as well be so due to the anonymity of Internet profiles. After reading Citron’s article it seems that there is vast potential for one individual’s harasser to multiply when their comments convince others looking to pick a fight. Online vigilantes are too easily misdirected and convinced of someone’s immorality or danger to others on the Internet. Slut shaming, gay bashing and cyber bullying are not fair forms of judgement but are a part of human interaction regardless. The Internet’s trove of information that only seems to increase and now penetrate to our personal lives have consequences.

Citron believes that the law itself has not adapted its jurisdiction to the Internet and should do so before cyber harassment becomes a commonplace occurrence on the wild wild web. I would tend to agree that there is a wealth of attitudes and comments that help define hate speech. I would also agree that they need to be stopped before comments turn into action and action turns into ruined lives. A good example would be online MMOs that tend to incorporate an admin-algorithm method in order to curb trollers and hate on the video game; censoring swear words whose only function is to articulate hate and using the reporting system to point admin attentions to particular cases. There is no perfect algorithm that would effectively solve such issues but we can reach a heuristic solution through a combination of efforts. This would include using a wordflilter to block surface level hate via swearing; mandating every website with peer to peer messaging to dedicate funding towards user report reconciliation and admin staff; having legislature that covers jurisdiction over cyber hate; and equipping traditional law enforcement to dedicate man power to reports of cyber harassment that have potential of penetrating to people’s actual lives. A preventative measure that is always the most effective cumulative solution is education: teaching Internet safety, etiquette and consequences from a young age. Without proper provisions and safeguards, the imperfection of humanity could cause the Internet to be a place of rampant suspicion, fear mongering and witch hunts out of disagreements: much like the world we live in today.