The first one was about a family who's daughter borrowed her fathers Porsche and drove into a telephone pole at one hundred miles an hour, she was killed instantly so when the police took photo's of the scene they also took photo's of the corpse (I assume they'd get her to medical aid before snapping some shots if she was alive). Somehow the photo's were leaked onto the internet and from then on a large (in their opinion) web drama appeared, essentially people took the photo's and as some of the Internet Community posted them everywhere and made fun of the girl calling her a "spoiled rich brat who deserved it." That was the main story.
Some others included a business recruiter who's name and everything was used in a blog insulting her and potentially truly hurting her career, another was of a blogger who had photo's of her edited and posted everywhere which turned into a storm of finding everything about her including her Social Security Number.
Anonymity on the net has always been a concern for people, whats gonna happen when you get a enormous number of the worlds population just talking in anonymity? Sure there are causes for problems but sometimes people read into them too much, I would wager money that a large percentage of the people talking about "The glories of Pedophilia" as was said in the article that most of them have not actually molested a child.
The net allows people to make your own "persona" you might be a hardened badass or maybe a spoiled rich kid with an obsession with watches (
Now that statement seems hypocritical to me seeing as lets take the Photo's of the dead daughter, are they hurting the family? Yes of course but not psychically just emotionally and frankly nearly anything and everything that someone truly loves will be hurt by that. When a Holocaust survivor walks by a Nazi rally, won't (s)he be hurt by the memories and suffering (s)he suffered at the hands of that form of ideology? Yes of course but you wouldn't find it in your rights to tell them that they have to stop their rally, Freedom of speech and thought is a basic principle of my countries and a large number of other countries basic principles.
Also the amount of online users who would actually be that cruel is really a small percentage, sure you'll have the youtube comment or the SGW message telling you that your a bad person, a nerd, or that the sender w1ll r4p3 y0ur f4m1ly. Now the daughters photo's are a sad case of the internet gone wrong, but honestly most people would actually just think that in the privacy of their own home. Essentially what your asking is that you be able to live in quiet indifference unknowing of people's true thoughts. Now of course them posting photo's of their dead daughter is terrible to the extreme but what are they going to do if they find the people? Sue them? the likelihood of those people being anything but your average joe working in the cubicle or some teenager looking for laughs is high and more then likely this will only spur more attacks on the family.
Now the article did say some good things such as in Zimbabwe the internet helps people complain about the government and with the anonymity it gives their able to avoid the punishment, death, by the government. As for the blogger woman if you put your real name, register the website in your name your gonna have problems, its the way of life. Essentially what people are asking in that article is to say whats on their mind to a public audience and not receive any haters. My only question to them is, would you state the same opinions in a loud speaker in time square? Probably not.
Any opinions? I'm sorry I'd link the article but sadly forbes requires online membership to view articles, if anyone does and wants to copy and paste it please feel free.


