A Blog About Making Culture
Threatening to Kill Blogs
April 9, 2007
Five years ago, I got my first death threat for something I wrote on my blog. The same week, some of those readers called my boss and tried to get me fired. A number of others publicly asserted that I supported terrorism. All because they felt that's the appropriate way to respond to one of my blog posts that they didn't like.
It gets worse -- the Wall Street Journal's website chimed in later that week, maligning me by mocking words on my site, despite the fact that they were actually those of a commenter, not my own. Because the WSJ doesn't call its OpinionJournal site a "blog", some thought that carried the full weight and credibility of their print paper, and didn't realize that even a theoretically responsible bastion of journalism could participate in a blogosphere pile-on.
Three years ago, I ended up in the middle of another online fracas; No death threats this time, but perhaps that was because this had to do with my job and not my personal blog or politics. Still, the incident featured numerous threats of violence, against both me and my coworkers, usually in the form of "they ought to be beaten" coupled with an unabashed reveling in the fact that those making the threats were participating in an angry mob.
Conduct Unbecoming
With that context, it's not surprising to me in the least that the New York Times is finally covering the story of how we're dealing with the profoundly unkind place the blogosphere can sometimes be. Now, I should be clear: Though I may have been less certain in the past, I know in retrospect I was never in any real danger from any of these incidents. But it's hard to articulate the visceral, emotional impact of hearing a total stranger, especially an anonymous total stranger, wish you ill. This is true even if your rational mind knows it's likely just an empty threat.
The first incident I was describing was the result of criticisms I made on my site about the community on a political blog. Perhaps appropriately, one of the main points of contention on that site was whether mainstream muslims do enough to disavow and denounce the actions of the radicalized fringe of extremists. Interestingly, as far as I've seen in the half-decade since, there's never been a similar debate about whether to denounce the radical fringe of web communities.
But it's not limited to any one site, and the blame can't be placed on any one community online. When the company I worked for stirred up passions three years ago by changing the license on a software product, many of the responses that were angry took on a strikingly personal tone. Interestingly, the personal nature of the attacks was more vehement because we were a small company whose principals were known and could be addressed personally; People in corresponding positions in faceless multi-billion-dollar corporations, whose actions are theoretically much more far-reaching and potentially nefarious, are shielded from the vitriol by the sheer anonymity of their enterprise. Instead of being rewarded for being approachable, we are punished, whether in a personal or professional context.
There are countless recent examples to pick through, too:
- Sweetney, one of the most popular blogs in the parenting community, was the victim of a site dedicated to disparaging mommybloggers. The incident, which involved some horrible images that were created by modifying photos of innocent children, galvanized the entire parenting blog community for days. Though these parenting sites often have more readers than popular technology/media bloggers, they are less frequently covered in mainstream press. As a result, the dramatic debates that ensued didn't end up with prominent stories in traditional media, and many who have participated in the debates over the past few weeks are unaware of the incident.
- Even American Idol contestants have faced this issue: Chris Sligh, a former contestant in the current season, got death threats on his blog after posts that some perceived as slights against the show. "He attributes his toning down the jokes in recent weeks to hate-postings on his blog, telling reporters, 'I think it kind of scared me, quite honestly. I had people who were telling me that they hoped I’d die...'"
- And of course Kathy Sierra's ordeal, which has had such an impact on her life and work that she's reached a crossroads with what to do in her career going forward.
Mend it, don't end it
Now, after those examples, it's important to point out that blogging has changed millions of lives for the better. At the same time, we've been ignoring the cost it exacts on many of its most dedicated practitioners and proponents.
Because, regardless of the circumstance of any of my own anecdotes, what's instructive here is the pattern: Threats, often violent threats, are a common part of public discourse in the blogosphere. Now, they're common in other parts of the web, and on public streets and at shopping malls and schools, as well. But this is the medium that I give a damn about, and it's the medium I want to help as much as I can.
Every single person I know who has a significant public web presence has been threatened at some point, and nearly every woman in that group has faced an online threat of sexual violence.
The solution requires all of us who care about this medium to first acknowledge the truth of this situation, recognize that this is our community's responsibility, make explicit that this behavior is unacceptable, and enforce consequences for transgressions. In short, we need to encourage accountability.
And here's the challenge -- every significant effort to encourage accountability raises the hackles of the libertarian core of the technology community. Most of these people are apologists for those who resort to violent threats in lieu of reasoned debate. You will find this group falsely describing accountability as censorship, regulation or "political correctness". They will deliberately conflate the issue of accountable speech online with some infringement on the right to free speech, or will misrepresent the effort as a requirement to "only say nice things". And they will disparage those who suggest such measures as feminine or weak, using euphemisms and slurs that reveal their inherent misogyny.
Where we go from here
I'm an imperfect ambassador for this message, and I'll be the first to admit it. I've worked on the effort to create technological solutions, supported those who've spoken up about the issue, and spoken about this concern myself to nearly the point of exhaustion. But I've been ill-tempered and flown off the handle a number of times myself -- I'm sure that, having written this, someone will rush off to document exactly how.
Despite the fact that it's a difficult topic to discuss, and despite the fact that it certainly isn't the sort of conversation that attracts lots of traffic and readership, I think it's important for all of us to try to show leadership in solving the probelm. I will not settle for having the reputation of a medium I care about be compromised by the few antisocial members of our community. I will also try not to allow myself or my peers to stay complacent about the issue, because there is far too much good created by bloggers and blogging communities.
Imagine if every person who got an a telephone line had to dread the day when some anonymous stranger would call them up and threaten them over a conversation they'd had. We certainly wouldn't be carrying mobile phones around with us everywhere we go, and there wouldn't be love songs about people waiting expectantly by the phone. Blogs can, and have provided as many meaningful moments in my life as phone calls ever have; In order to make sure that other people have that potential, too, we need to be active in stopping those who threaten the medium as a whole.
Related links:
- Learning From Experience, the post where I first tried to articulate some of these concerns.
- Winning at what cost? Which revisted those ideas last year.
- Call for a blogger's code of conduct by Tim O'Reilly
- Some links to Mena Trott's discussions of blogging and accountability
- President George H.W. Bush attributes a coarsening of political discourse to the incivil tone of political bloggers.
- The Old Boy's Club is for Losers, which is about the pervasive misogyny of much of the tech industry, which often fuels the incivil tone of discussion in blogs.
- Finally, bringing things somewhat full-circle, a post about a blogosphere attack cycle at Tim O'Reilly's expense. I can't help but think this helped inform Tim's initiative as well.
Previously: Meet up at PodCamp?
Next: It's a Spectrum!
Douglas Karr
Isn’t the threat of bodily harm evolving from the freedom of speech of individuals, in fact, terrorism? Isn’t this why we have young men and women dying overseas right now? (Politics aside)
Thanks for this, Anil. It’s an excellent post and worthy of more discussion.
billg
Excellent, one of the best posts I’ve read on this flap.
You’re right to point out that this is an accountability issue, not a free speech issue. Elsewhere, the link between speaker and his or her words is obvious. Accountability, policed by the threat of libel or slander suits, is well in place. The net’s technology breaks that link, allowing many to avoid censure for their behavior because the rest of us can’t find them.
Perhaps the underlying structure will need to change, somehow devising a way to trace IP packets back to the individual who sent tem on their merry way.
Until then, it falls to those of us who publish blogs to be accountable for everything we publish. If that means moderating comments and doing things like setting a limit on the number of comments from a given IP in a time period, so be it. It’s your blog, and you get to be responsible for it all.
As for the suggested code of conduct: I have no problem with its creation or discussion. Many professions have such codes. But the enforcement techniques that have been proposed — badges, letters, etc — strike me a coming perilously close to creating a de facto licensing scheme. That’s not good.
Long comment threads appeal to bloggers because they give us the illusion of popularity. But, from a reader’s perspective, needing to wade through dozens and dozens of off-topic rants to find the few that address the post itself is a waste of time. It’s a disincentive to ever read that blog again. Personally, I’ve stopped reading some blogs because I found their comment threads to be offensive and/or inane. I suspect the best way to deal with blogging’s abusers is to delete them from your feedreader and your bookmarks.
mat
I think, to some extent, death threats against bloggers are an unfortunate proof and result of the medium’s maturtiy. People still debate whether or not bloggers are journalists, but what’s no longer debated is whether or not bloggers have the reach, scope and influence of journalists. At nearly every publication I’ve worked for—both print and online—we’ve received threatening emails and letters. I’ve seen them addressed to authors, the publications generally, and to myself personally. To be honest, I don’t think there’s very much to be done about this.
Some people, lacking intellectual confidence in their arguments or emotional stability, will always resort to threats of violence as a way to make you PAY ATTENTION TO MY OPINION. That bloggers are increasingly on the receiving end of this speaks more to their reach and legitimacy than it does to any inherent unfriendliness on the Web, in my opinion. The Internet just makes it easier for jerks to get their message out; no more futzing with finding graph paper and scrawling a threatening epistle in childish block letters, trundling it off to the post office and paying for a stamp. Today it’s click and send, baby, click and send.
(Furthermore, in response to the NYT piece, I think that the idea of ridding the Web of anonymity is equally futile: Surprisingly often, people are willing to sign their names.)
The obvious question is how do you encourage accountability? How do you enforce that? Public shaming? Too often these people seem unashamed. I’m with you, Anil, that it’s a problem. It’s just that I fear it’s an age old problem, exacerbated by today’s ease of communication, with no easy solution.
But the discussion, at the very least, seems like a good idea.
Steph Mineart
I’m not against cleaning up public discourse by any means, but I’m bothered quite a bit that the focus is on the internet, when the problem seems to me much larger. I think it’s ironic that Bush blames blogs; I blame talk radio and pundits - where the rot and toxicity has been festering for literally decades. I think this is a sewer flowing downstream - with the political sphere at the top and internet further down.
Lola LB
I think it should be pointed out that certain bloggers have been receiving death threats and such for years, yet this was not highlighted because they lean to the right. These folks deserve just as much support as bloggers who lean to the left and have been receiving death threats and unwarranted attacks.
Anil
“I think it should be pointed out that certain bloggers have been receiving death threats and such for years, yet this was not highlighted because they lean to the right.”
And most threats to people in the gay community go underreported. As do those against people who aren’t white. And those who lean to the left. There is absolutely an element of disproportionate reporting due to the social status and social connections that various people have. That doesn’t diminish the importance of the fundamental issue or taint its legitimacy.
Anonymous
Great post Anil. But while I agree with your post, I cannot say I agree with the proposed Code of Conduct.
Now I’m not much of a blogger, and to be honest, I don’t follow the sites normally. But the very fact that this issue has attracted such a wide audience shows how important it is.
But to me, from outside, this whole argument seems like a schoolyard incident gone entirely wrong. I’m not trying to downplay Kathy’s feeling of danger at all, but I don’t think the scope or implications are nearly as far reaching as some people seem to think. In the end this is a misunderstanding between a small group of people, and as O’Reilly so astutely points out, it probably wouldn’t have been as much of an issue with better communication between the parties involved. That seems like the best solution to me, not an overarching Code of Conduct that will undoubtedly be used like a hammer to disparage other bloggers whom some disagree with.
Chason
Just so no one thinks I’m hiding, I posted the comment above. Just messed up with the form. ;)
Vicki Davis
I am tired of people calling Kathy’s incident a schoolyard incident. It is way further than that — students are suspended and removed from school for far less and indeed have been sent to juvenile court for threats of almost any kind.
No, we need a code of conduct and a code of ethics. I am a teacher and we are working to determine how do you teach people to be effective digital citizens.
Almost any blogger has had similar feelings and happenings as Anil has. And when it happens and you get the e-mail or real mail or even phone calls, it is scary. And such things shouldn’t be allowed to happen.
Blogging is real life not just an online life. We should be civilized particularly on professional blogs.
Julia
Hi Anil, I’m a knitblogger, visiting by way of my friend (on-line and in real life) MJ. Our little on-line community, though usually quite positive, seems to be having this type of problem, though thankfully not with violent threats at this point.
I think that your example of MT/Six Apart’s problems (and I am an MT user - nice job!) are a lot like the ones we’re experiencing. Knitting blogs are a unique mix of very personal and seemingly anonymous content. People write very personal entries, day after day, year after year, which their readers follow, and often comment on, regularly. At the same time, many, many facets of life are not addressed in those entries, and the full personality of the blogger is often unknown. The readers, who have spent increasing amounts of time with a blog begin to feel that they know the blogger, and begin to have a stake in that person being who they believe them to be on the blog. They can become adamant about who the person is, what they are or should be doing, etc. And they feel compelled to comment on all of this, because of the perceived relationship.
The first problem is that the relationship is based on one little slice of the blogger’s perceived life. The second is that the relationship is often one way. While the reader may know, or feel she knows, much about the blogger, in many cases the blogger knows little or nothing about the reader, and is not only disinclined to seek criticism (or worse, bashing), but also incredibly offended. And from there it devolves. It is an interesting study in humanity that people can form these rather proprietary relationships to one another through the release of a relatively small amount of personal content, but it appears to happen all the time. There is just something about that combination of the personal and the anonymous, I believe, that creates the conditions we’re now finding ourselves in.
I’m not sure how to avoid these problems, and I’m not even sure I’ve articulated them well, but I did want to chime in on your conversation with this one thought, and also to thank you for your discussion. I hope more people will read what you’ve written and think about it. Accountability is a key trait that it seems we are sorely lacking in many arenas of life, and it is important that we all think about our words and their effects and strive to act accordingly.
Amelia Torode
This is a great post - thank you so much for sharing your thoughts.. I have to say that I think that you are spot on, but I am amazed by the negativity about all of this that I am encountering online. I thought that it was actually a gender thing and posted about it. Lady Bloggers on the whole seem to be in favour of codes of conduct whereas Male Bloggers don’t. http://ameliatorode.typepad.com/lifemovesprettyfast/2007/04/ladybloggers_a.html Would be interested in your thoughts.
Post a comment