Critical Analysis

Critical Analysis
Andrew Keen ‘s “Douse the Online Flamers” is an interesting essay based on- in my own words “online bullying”. In my own judgment the essay was convincing in terms that examples were giving as to mentioning different cases about “online bullying”. Keen presented evidence which had me engaged in the essay even more.
Keen is proving a point and informing the reader about whether posting things online anonymously should be supported by the First Amendment or if there should be legal consequences. Advising that on the internet someone can be who they say they aren’t. Today many people are posting hurtful things on the internet about other people and now-a-days it’s getting hard to figure out someone’s real identity. In the first paragraph he writes “Today, too many anonymous Internet users are posting hateful content about their neighbors, classmates, and coworkers; today, online media is an increasingly shadowy, vertiginous environment in which is it becoming harder and harder to know other people’s real identities.” he supports this by providing examples with three cases mentioned in the essay. My questions are “Should any anonymous content posted online be supported by the First Amendment?” then asking “Should there be legal consequences and to what extent?” and finally “What other solutions are there?”
To go back to the first question, “In Missouri, the St. Charles County Board of Aldermen passed a law making Internet harassment a misdemeanor punishable by up to $500 fine and ninety days in jail.” I do believe in punishing those who post harmful things on the internet anonymous or not. It’s convincing to me that this is happening every day and more than likely all over the U.S. Will it need to take more than a dozen of suicides in order to finally punish someone? People are taking their lives due to what gets posted about them online. That’s not fair to them or their family. I understand the First Amendment but I don’t believe that it should be used as a “back-up” to protect what others post online.
To give my thoughts on the second question with the three cases I read I do agree with Keen when he said “… the U.S. Supreme Court soon might need to the civic value of anonymous speech in the digital age.” If someone commits suicide due to another person posting mean things anonymous about that one person, why shouldn’t he or she get punished? Yes, it’s not murder but what about those individuals’ family members? There are many things that the Supreme Court does need to reconsider. First, how should the punishment be? What should it be? It’s going to be hard to get rid of all the people posting mean things about other people. It’ll be like trying to get rid of a certain population knowing you can’t due to there being so many of them. You can’t keep your kids off the internet now-a-days the kids of this generation have access to everything by just using their cell phones.
To finish, I strongly believe in punishment when doing something wrong. The First Amendment can and cannot be used all the time. It can because maybe someone had a reason to post mean things on the internet, on the other hand it can’t be used when posting mean things about someone online intentionally. I’m not agreeing with “be mean if someone is mean to you” that’s not the case. Some children are raised that way and it affects those around them. Either way it is people should be punished for every wrong doing. Maybe that’s how some of these kids or adults will learn to finally be nice and not blame it on “I’ve been picked on all my life I did it due to self-esteem issues” to me that’s not an excuse.