The obvious issue in the Lori Drew case is that of free speech. But, there are two other issues . . . personal responsibility, and stupidity.
Again, it may be difficult to prove Lori had intent, or that she was even one of the few that could be help responsible for creating the MySpace page that was used to bully Megan. Denying it sure makes her look guilty. After all, if she really wasn't involved, shouldn't she come clean and turn in her daughter? That's a tough question. On the other hand, if she was involved, I would think coming clean would not only be the right thing to do, but people would sympathize more readily if she showed remorse and stated she never intended for anything to happen.
Lying will just get her in to deeper trouble.
The other issue is that of stupidity. Beyond being a shhitbag, she's an idiot. What person would be so blatantly stupid as to do something so widely public, so potentially scrutinized, so potentially traceable, as to do something like this?
There's another interesting twist to this story. Cyber vigilance. That story is here.
It makes for an interesting debate. If we allow free speech to the extent that a shitbag can cyber bully a person in to killing themselves, we need to also allow those who tattle. The irony here is that the same mechanism that Lori used to bully Megan was the same that lead to her undoing . . . the internet. In this case, it was well deserved. But what about accusations that are fabricated? Is it free speech then?
No comments:
Post a Comment