The Tripod

The right to free speech is central to the success of any organization that strives to provide stability, equality, and prosperity for its members. In fact, exchanges of ideas and information through public forums are invaluable to society for a number of reasons. These exchanges guard against abuses of power from community leaders, give a voice to minority opinions, and provide an outlet for the creative and social energies of individuals. But strangely enough, there is a catch - a paradox, if you will: the right to free speech must be conditional.

Initially skeptical? Great. This means you still believe that humans are inherently good and are capable of using such forums in a constructive rather than destructive manner. But, unfortunately, this also means that you have never visited the Anonymous Confession Board at TrinTalk.com. Let us save you the trouble - it is not a pretty sight. The comments posted, presumably by Trinity students, range from helpful and informative to amusingly innapropriate to forms of concentrated evil. We enjoy a good tap-sitting joke as much as the next guy, but the personal attacks are destructive to individuals and reflect poorly on our school. Many of these posts are appalling and inexcusable. Thus, a condition of accountability must be enacted.

We understand that many will try to justify TrinTalk.com with superficial arguments (i.e. "Free speech is patriotic" or "TrinTalk.com is helpful / funny / in any way redeeming"). We are not arguing against the right to free speech. In fact, we truly believe that one should be able to go online and write hateful things about certain people or even certain groups, as long as the world is able to see who is responsible for those words. Indeed, it is with the anonymous aspect of the Anonymous Confession Board (ACB) with which we have a problem. Nowhere in the Constitution are we afforded the right to anonymous free speech.

An American courtroom is an example of a public forum that has helped to stabilize and strengthen this country for hundreds of years. And not coincidentally, the right to free speech is protected in this courtroom. An individual has the right to testify at a trial and make whatever accusations he wants but he will be held accountable for what he says. For instance, if he knowingly lies in his testimony, he may be punished, and perhaps more importantly, the defendant has the right to address his accuser and defend himself. In other words, an individual may not get up on the stand wearing a mask for anonymity, accuse someone of murder, and then run out of the room before he is cross-examined. Why, then, is this behavior considered unacceptable in a criminal court but tolerated in Trinity's court of public opinion?

Medieval executioners wore masks. The Ku Klux Klan wore masks. Masks are bad.

We don't fault TrinTalk.com's creator for providing us with such a forum. He is a valued friend. And, anyways, there will always be opportunities for people to share their views anonymously. Instead, we have a real problem with the act of posting without accountability. Technological progress should not afford us the right to distance ourselves from our actions or words. If you have something to say, by all means say it, but have the integrity to stand by your statement. The effect of accountability will be two-fold. Firstly, fewer offensive statements and untruths will be posted if the authors know that they will have to deal with the fallout. Secondly, when such controversial statements are posted, the community and the author will be able to discuss the topic without hiding behind the antagonistic curtain of anonymity.

Article Tools