“-you say that Republicans are out to destroy the president. I see no evidence of that. We have an opinion, and it will be heard, even though Republicans have been excluded from every major policy issue from the get go in January.”
Legion, I agree with a lot of what you’re saying, but certainly not all, and I do think you’re going too easy on the Republicans. Just as I’m disappointed in Obama and the Democrats for pushing their legislation too far to the left, I’m disappointed that, by and large, the Republicans have become the “Party of No”, and I do think Obama and SOME Democrats in Congress reached out to Congressional Republicans and were pretty soundly rebuffed.
I am equally disappointed in both parties right now. I utterly fail to understand why they couldn’t come together on a health care bill. Why can’t there be tort reform and cost control as well as some form of trigger for a public option? Ditto on stimulus package. Why did it have to be a pork-laden bill that pretty much did everything except what it was supposed to do? Seems like for the past 20 years, whichever party is out of power is hellbent on obstructing the party in power.
So my biggest disappointment this year is that both parties are still unable to find a way to work together on matters in which the entire country has a vested interest.
I came across this article and I thought it would be nice to past it here with the new year coming up ans resolutions.
Keep a Civil Cybertongue
Rude and abusive online behavior should not be met with silence.
By JIMMY WALES AND ANDREA WECKERLE
In less than 20 years, the World Wide Web has irrevocably expanded the number of ways we connect and communicate with others. This radical transformation has been almost universally praised.
What hasn’t kept pace with the technical innovation is the recognition that people need to engage in civil dialogue. What we see regularly on social networking sites, blogs and other online forums is behavior that ranges from the carelessly rude to the intentionally abusive.
Flare-ups occur on social networking sites because of the ease by which thoughts can be shared through the simple press of a button. Ordinary people, celebrities, members of the media and even legal professionals have shown insufficient restraint before clicking send. There is no shortage of examples—from the recent Twitter heckling at a Web 2.0 Expo in New York, to a Facebook poll asking whether President Obama should be killed.
The comments sections of online gossip sites, as well as some national media outlets, often reflect semi-literate, vitriolic remarks that appear to serve no purpose besides disparaging their intended target. Some sites exist solely as a place for mean-spirited individuals to congregate and spew their venomous verbiage.
Online hostility targeting adults is vastly underreported. The reasons victims fail to come forward include the belief that online hostility is an unavoidable and even acceptable mode of behavior; the pervasive notion that hostile online speech is a tolerable form of free expression; the perceived social stigma of speaking out against attacks; and the absence of readily available support infrastructure to assist victims.
The problem of online hostility, in short, shows no sign of abating on its own. Establishing cybercivility will take a concerted effort. We can start by taking the following steps:
First, and most importantly, we need to create an online culture in which every person can participate in an open and rational exchange of ideas and information without fear of being the target of unwarranted abuse, harassment or lies. Everyone who is online should have a sense of accountability and responsibility.
Too frequently, we hear the argument that being online includes the right to be nasty—and that those who chose to participate on the Web should develop thicker skin. This gives transgressors an out for immoral behavior.
Just as we’ve learned what is deemed appropriate face-to-face communication, we need to learn what is appropriate behavior in an environment that frequently deals with purely written modes of communication and an inherent absence of nonverbal cues.
Second, individuals appalled at the degeneration of online civility need to speak out, to show that this type of behavior will no longer be tolerated. Targets of online hostility should also consider coming forward to show that attacks can have serious consequences. There are already several documented cases of teens taking their own lives because of cyberbullying.
A third step has to do with media literacy. People need to know how to differentiate between information that is published on legitimate sites that follow defined standards and also possibly a professional code of ethics, and information published in places like gossip sites whose only goal is to post the most outrageous headlines and stories in order to increase traffic. People can and will learn to shun and avoid such sites over time, particularly with education about why they are unethical.
Fourth, adult targets of online hostility deserve a national support network. This should be a safe place where they can congregate online to receive emotional support, practical advice on how to deal with transgressors, and information on whom to contact for legal advice when appropriate.
Finally, it’s time to re-examine the current legal system. Online hostility is cross-jurisdictional. We might need laws that directly address this challenge. There is currently no uniformity of definition among states in the definition of cyberbullying and cyberharassment. Perhaps federal input is needed.
The Internet is bringing about a revolution in human knowledge and communication, and we have an unprecedented opportunity to make the global conversation more reasonable and productive. But we can only do so if we prevent the worst among us from silencing the best among us with hostility and incivility.
Mr. Wales is the founder of Wikipedia and sits on the board of CiviliNation, a nonprofit. Ms. Weckerle is the founder and president of CiviliNation.
Copyright 2009 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights
dibs,
I’m not a fan of McCain, although he has done a good job in being outspoken for the past year on issues that will matter a great deal to the rest of us as they unfold. not the least of which is the piece-o-crap “healthcare” bill which the majority of Americans disagree with and do not want implemented.
Hey Adam! Happy Holidays and a very happy, healthy New Year! Please calendar Thursday, January 21st. Details TBD.
I put McCain right up there w/ Lieberman – both turn-coats; McCain has reneged on everything he campaigned for & is just doing sour grapes.
“-you say that Republicans are out to destroy the president. I see no evidence of that. We have an opinion, and it will be heard, even though Republicans have been excluded from every major policy issue from the get go in January.”
Legion, I agree with a lot of what you’re saying, but certainly not all, and I do think you’re going too easy on the Republicans. Just as I’m disappointed in Obama and the Democrats for pushing their legislation too far to the left, I’m disappointed that, by and large, the Republicans have become the “Party of No”, and I do think Obama and SOME Democrats in Congress reached out to Congressional Republicans and were pretty soundly rebuffed.
I am equally disappointed in both parties right now. I utterly fail to understand why they couldn’t come together on a health care bill. Why can’t there be tort reform and cost control as well as some form of trigger for a public option? Ditto on stimulus package. Why did it have to be a pork-laden bill that pretty much did everything except what it was supposed to do? Seems like for the past 20 years, whichever party is out of power is hellbent on obstructing the party in power.
So my biggest disappointment this year is that both parties are still unable to find a way to work together on matters in which the entire country has a vested interest.
I came across this article and I thought it would be nice to past it here with the new year coming up ans resolutions.
Keep a Civil Cybertongue
Rude and abusive online behavior should not be met with silence.
By JIMMY WALES AND ANDREA WECKERLE
In less than 20 years, the World Wide Web has irrevocably expanded the number of ways we connect and communicate with others. This radical transformation has been almost universally praised.
What hasn’t kept pace with the technical innovation is the recognition that people need to engage in civil dialogue. What we see regularly on social networking sites, blogs and other online forums is behavior that ranges from the carelessly rude to the intentionally abusive.
Flare-ups occur on social networking sites because of the ease by which thoughts can be shared through the simple press of a button. Ordinary people, celebrities, members of the media and even legal professionals have shown insufficient restraint before clicking send. There is no shortage of examples—from the recent Twitter heckling at a Web 2.0 Expo in New York, to a Facebook poll asking whether President Obama should be killed.
The comments sections of online gossip sites, as well as some national media outlets, often reflect semi-literate, vitriolic remarks that appear to serve no purpose besides disparaging their intended target. Some sites exist solely as a place for mean-spirited individuals to congregate and spew their venomous verbiage.
Online hostility targeting adults is vastly underreported. The reasons victims fail to come forward include the belief that online hostility is an unavoidable and even acceptable mode of behavior; the pervasive notion that hostile online speech is a tolerable form of free expression; the perceived social stigma of speaking out against attacks; and the absence of readily available support infrastructure to assist victims.
The problem of online hostility, in short, shows no sign of abating on its own. Establishing cybercivility will take a concerted effort. We can start by taking the following steps:
First, and most importantly, we need to create an online culture in which every person can participate in an open and rational exchange of ideas and information without fear of being the target of unwarranted abuse, harassment or lies. Everyone who is online should have a sense of accountability and responsibility.
Too frequently, we hear the argument that being online includes the right to be nasty—and that those who chose to participate on the Web should develop thicker skin. This gives transgressors an out for immoral behavior.
Just as we’ve learned what is deemed appropriate face-to-face communication, we need to learn what is appropriate behavior in an environment that frequently deals with purely written modes of communication and an inherent absence of nonverbal cues.
Second, individuals appalled at the degeneration of online civility need to speak out, to show that this type of behavior will no longer be tolerated. Targets of online hostility should also consider coming forward to show that attacks can have serious consequences. There are already several documented cases of teens taking their own lives because of cyberbullying.
A third step has to do with media literacy. People need to know how to differentiate between information that is published on legitimate sites that follow defined standards and also possibly a professional code of ethics, and information published in places like gossip sites whose only goal is to post the most outrageous headlines and stories in order to increase traffic. People can and will learn to shun and avoid such sites over time, particularly with education about why they are unethical.
Fourth, adult targets of online hostility deserve a national support network. This should be a safe place where they can congregate online to receive emotional support, practical advice on how to deal with transgressors, and information on whom to contact for legal advice when appropriate.
Finally, it’s time to re-examine the current legal system. Online hostility is cross-jurisdictional. We might need laws that directly address this challenge. There is currently no uniformity of definition among states in the definition of cyberbullying and cyberharassment. Perhaps federal input is needed.
The Internet is bringing about a revolution in human knowledge and communication, and we have an unprecedented opportunity to make the global conversation more reasonable and productive. But we can only do so if we prevent the worst among us from silencing the best among us with hostility and incivility.
Mr. Wales is the founder of Wikipedia and sits on the board of CiviliNation, a nonprofit. Ms. Weckerle is the founder and president of CiviliNation.
Copyright 2009 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001 … ewsreel_opinion#printMode
quote:
The psychic part of my brain tells me Rob was back there with Oscar the Grouch.
in a sense, i kinda was lol. you might be Indigo jessibaby, get the psychic part of your brain tested!
*rob*
yeah, *rob*, I second Dave’s WTF???
Can I 3rd this??? Rob, you have some explaining to do…
dibs,
I’m not a fan of McCain, although he has done a good job in being outspoken for the past year on issues that will matter a great deal to the rest of us as they unfold. not the least of which is the piece-o-crap “healthcare” bill which the majority of Americans disagree with and do not want implemented.
yeah, *rob*, I second Dave’s WTF???
well it wasnt in an alley it was just behind a bunch of trash cans, and it also wasnt exactly concentual!!
*rob*
Posted by: Butterfly at December 29, 2009 2:16 PM
WTF?????