Cyberbullying

A new law in North Carolina has left me wondering if I was guilty of bullying back in high school when I publicly challenged my physics teacher on a fact of physics. I was right, of course, but according to the new law I might also be subject to punishment as a bully if I used a computer (e.g. cell phone) with the "intent to intimidate or torment" a school employee. Who is to say what my intent was? I don't even know. I was only fourteen at the time. But my teacher took it personally so I guess he felt he was bullied by the facts. The only thing that lets me off the hook is that I didn't use a computer. They weren't available yet.

Cyberbullying is certainly a problem. Part of the problem is that it can be anonymous if the bully uses a computer. But the new state law doesn't stop at anonymous bullying. And it doesn't stop at banning untruthful statements. It potentially jails teenagers for telling the truth, just because they cybered it. How does that differ from what I said aloud in front of a whole class? (And some of them laughed.)

Suppose that a school employee engages in an illegal sex act with a student and the student surreptitiously photographs the act with a cell phone and puts a picture of the encounter on Facebook. According to the new law that act--the Facebooking, not the sex--is punishable by a $1,000 fine and up to 60 days in jail.

Here is my thought on the matter. All of us live in a Brave New World brought on by the electronic revolution. Either we need to adjust to it or we need to ban computers. I don't think we are going to ban computers. The new law may be an attempt to adjust to the BNW, but banning free speech is not the answer. The new law seems to assume malicious intent, but intent is notoriously difficult to judge. Putting words and pictures on the internet doesn't even seem to require intent these days. My thumbs did it. So bug off with your stupid new laws.