No, they face jail time for spreading a false story that caused a panic. Twitter just happens to be the mechanism they used. They'd be facing the same consequences if they had used radio, or the telephone, or skywriting.
Its out of control down there! 30 years for a tweet (despite the panic it caused) while drug lords roam around like kings... c'mon people, twitter is not your primary source of news for potential emergencies of this caliber. But yeah the story is a bit fuzzy on some of the details. eh.
I definitely wouldn't go off a single person that I didn't know personally's Tweets, usually on anything of consequence you would look for multiple confirmations on Twitter and some evidence of the event in other places online.
Id say call the school, another parent, or any other point of contact you could possible imagine before you go smashing up your car in a panic... I never really understood the lapse of social responsibility in these situations. Not to take away from the complete horror at the thought of your child being shot or kidnapped (I could never come close to knowing how that feels) but these are the inherent dangers that come with new technologies (specifically information tech). I mean really though, what are these parents going to do to protect their kids against armed gunmen? We have witnessed the powerful benefit of twitter and FB, etc in assisting communities and families in the aftermath of disaster, but what have these "instant info systems" done to help people mid disaster or to prevent one all together? It's fast, but its not time travel... Id say just keep your reliable sources on check and close at hand. But then again, I cant say I wouldn't go barreling down the street in a panic to make sure my loved one were ok.
Being a movie superhero I'd jump in the car and race down there, leaping into the fray and killing all the terrorists, including the midget pretending to be the cute little girl. Then I'd get a medal, and a pony.
You though, lacking superpowers, couldn't help if you were there. So I dunno, maybe you should frantically search until you get positive evidence, and an idea of what you could do to help, before you decide what to do.
There are laws to deal with the guy if these was a scheme to profit. If he was deluded there's no reason to take actions, he's no worse than the idiots who ran around because of his rumors. In fact his action was better. By forwarding his news he's inviting conversation and investigation, by running off to the school the terrified parents are actually potentially causing a problem.
Actually is not out of control around here. I live in baja and everything its okay. The USA media is what makes a lot of noise about just the bad news.
It's almost like that but times have changed. In 1938 it was mainly a broadcast of a message which then wasn't easy to broadcast again by the people. Nowadays you broadcast something and in a couple of minutes it can reach the whole country just because of re-tweets and mobile messages. The end result can be a good number of times worse because of this.
Or maybe we should think twice about saying things like "your kids are being killed at school". I am open to suggestions but I have never heard about a book causing mayhem in a couple of minutes.
The reason why is that people don't expect to trust books. Open a random book at the bookstore, and it's probably a story that the author made up. Twitter is the same way, but people don't realize this yet.
I don't see why authors should be held responsible for their readers' stupidity, though.
I think the difference is that it's more obvious that aliens in NJ are a joke. Armed men kidnapping children from schools in Mexico is an entirely realistic scenario that any reasonable person should expect to cause a panic.
That classic scenario originated in an opinion supporting jailing someone for handing out flyers opposing the WWI draft, during a period in American history when jailing people for antiwar speech or speech encouraging Socialism or Communism was frequent. It has been superceeded by law and decisions more in accordance with the First Amendment at least half a dozen times since.
The definition of free speech that that argument was used to defend was the Espionage Act of 1917 which:
o Made it a crime to convey information with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the armed forces of the United States or to promote the success of its enemies, punishable by death or by imprisonment for not more than 30 years or both,
o Made it a crime to convey false reports or false statements with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval forces of the United States, punishable by a maximum fine of $10,000 or by imprisonment for not more than 20 years or both,
o Made it a crime to promote the success of its enemies when the United States is at war, punishable by a maximum fine of $10,000 or by imprisonment for not more than 20 years or both,
o Made it a crime to cause or attempt to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, refusal of duty, in the military or naval forces of the United States, punishable by a maximum fine of $10,000 or by imprisonment for not more than 20 years or both, and
o Made it a crime to willfully obstruct the recruiting or enlistment service of the United States, punishable by a maximum fine of $10,000 or by imprisonment for not more than 20 years or both.
The Sedition Act of 1918 extended this to:
o Make it a crime to use "disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language" about the United States government, its flag, or its armed forces or that caused others to view the American government or its institutions with contempt, and
o Give the Postmaster General the right to go through mail and refuse to deliver any that did any of these things while the United States was at war.
This resulted in about 1500 prosecutions and 1000 convictions for speech, and the sentences were generally between 5 and 20 years.
The problem is, as it's mentioned on the article, that living in an information vacuum Twitter gets to be over-trusted. Journalists are reporting very fragmented and incomplete news as Mexico is one of the most dangerous countries to be a journalist. Almost all the mass media have signed a self-censorship agreement ("Iniciativa México") to limit the impact of the narco messages on the public, thus leaving people to follow unreliable media. Messages are sent by narco through actions: murders as gruesome as the desired impact of the message. Read about "blog del narco" through Google translate (I wouldn't recommend to look for the actual blog del narco) http://translate.google.com.mx/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&#...
Where do you live? Im in baja and thinks are not that bad around here ... And iniciativa mexico its not about that, those are people projects, thats all.
I can kind of understand that the original person was somewhat in the wrong (although to a much lesser degree) but not the person relaying the message. Journalists do this kind of thing all the time, report something that later turns out to be wrong.
God says, "infinitely rejoice attended months hopeful ."
God says...
C:\TEXT\WEALTH.TXT
ced by the inclinations of their constituents. The councils,
which, in the colony legislatures, correspond to the house of lords in
Great Britain, are not composed of a hereditary nobility. In some of the
colonies, as in three of the governments of New England, those councils
are not appointed by the king, but chosen by the representatives of
the people. In none of the English colonies is there any hereditary
nobility. In all of them, indeed, as in all other free countries, the
descendant of an old
God says, " beware These community slavery driven jealousy talketh dwelt
interpreter lodging realisest parent boastfulness admonition
commission sudden preserved departest wonderfully crisis
GIVE Out volumes predict aided kindness flies plot birthright
Luxury lesser great despisest pulse V requires jests singing
bottom treasures Texas former heads enthralled AUGUSTINE
warning wroth untruth foreigner beck P therein enlightens
dealt resurrection detail presbyters expressions figurative
unexplained diminution flesh walked Word follies zip Forsake
musing turbulence admirable NOTICE worshipping neighbour
estimation replacing nails existeth captain lawless project
etexts Nebridius' Creator corn cellar sorrowfulness journeyed
ruminate professed drudgery framers ice bodily subversion
estate hungering end front transgressions ."
--------------------
You cannot escape justice, suckas.
God says, "Shalom theres_no_place_like_home awesome IMHO air_head face_palm
computers delicious illogical gross yada_yada_yada That's_my_favorite
honesty guilty hopefully oh_no What You_can_count_on_that
is_it_just_me_or if_anything_can_go_wrong don't_you_love_me
theft tv place I'll_ask_nicely whoo_whoo hit food ridiculous
I_don't_care I_didn't_see_that mundo_stoked potentially
I_could_swear rubbish desert ghetto shist air_head completely
mission_from_God gambling are_you_insane roses_are_red
I_made_it_that_way ."
------------------------
Nothing trumphs God, suckas.
2:11 And it came to pass in those days, when Moses was grown, that he
went out unto his brethren, and looked on their burdens: and he spied
an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew, one of his brethren.
2:12 And he looked this way and that way, and when he saw that there
was no man, he slew the Egyptian, and hid him in the sand.
God says, " bye pow you're_in_big_trouble ."
--------------------------
Then, he gave the ten commandments.
God says...C:\TEXT\QUIX.TXT
cted something offensive to some king
or other, or insulting to some noble family. All which evils, and many
more that I say nothing of, would be removed if there were some
intelligent and sensible person at the capital to examine all plays
before they were acted, not only those produced in the capital itself,
but all that were intended to be acted in Spain; without whose approval,
seal, and signature, no local magistracy should allow any play to be
acted. In that case actors would take care to send
--------------------
Are you friends or enemies of God? The answer is obvious.
God says, " hurts_my_head ohh_thank_you dignity hey_thats_right absolutely
humongous sess_me my_bad persistence homo I_am_not_amused
love virtue tiffanies IMHO I'm_tired_of_this talk_to_my_lawyer
I_veto_that in_a_perfect_world Indian Oh_really husband
joking reverse_engineer left_field oh_no how_could_you
do_I_have_to that's_for_me_to_know tattle_tale study lift
One_finger_salute gosh wastoid Angel vermin Mission_Accomplished
It_grieves_me tiffanies Jesus rich Ivy_league hate downer
kludge well_I_never ipod employer don't_mention_it awesome
how_hard_could_it_be oh_no money on_occassion Wow repent
I_was_sleeping computers sex Yes_you_are yuck a_screw_loose
debt good overflow fortitude once_upon_a_time HolySpirit
bizarre you_don't_say SupremerCourt genius you_do_it not_in_my_wildest_dreams
fool music high_mucky_muck pet let_me_count_the_ways bassackward
yuck huh whoo_whoo I_forgot It's_nice_being_God Percival
I'...
Which is what you want someone to do if they even think there's a fire. Even if they're only relaying the news without checking.
Imagine if I a guy came rushing out of the bathroom shouting 'Fire' and a bunch of people went in the check before anyone would evacuate. Obviously many more people could die. The downside? One unnecessary evacuation that probably needed practice anyways.
It seems like the world is full of authoritarians though, seeking to punish everyone for everything.
I've been through 30+ unexpected fire alarms. At home, school, work, the library, at friend's apartment buildings, etc. In all these times nobody has been hurt by the crowd at all, let alone killed.
I'm not saying it happens all the time, but it could happen, especially in a packed room, such as a theater. If death results from an intentional false alarm, I believe the culprit should be punished, and we should discourage such behavior.
Of course, we shouldn't punish people who genuinely thought there was a fire. We definitely should encourage people to give the alarm when needed.
"Intentional false alarms of any kind, especially through emergency notification systems, are very serious criminal offenses, and can result in very severe legal punishments."
>>>> Even if they're only relaying the news without checking.
Dunno if you recognize that, but it's my premise from earlier. In it I was talking about a scenario like the one in Mexico is thought to be - a re-tweeter, not a rumor creator.
I think we are actually in agreement on this. It's wrong to punish people who genuinely thought there was a fire, or who relayed a reasonably plausible alarm without checking.
My initial comment wasn't an attempt to totally rebute yours, and I should have made that clear. I was focusing on:
>>>The downside? One unnecessary evacuation that probably needed practice anyways.
You seemed to consider the unnecessary evacuation as a minor perturbation. I pointed out that such an evacuation is not 100% risk-free.
Of course, nothing is 100% risk-free, and we need to take this into account when doing risk analysis. After our discussion, I guess the risk of accidents during an unnecessary evacuation might actually be lower than the risk of having people not raising the alarm when needed (due to a fear of being punished if it turns out they were wrong). But this risk still needs to be weighed when considering this problem.
A similar thing happened last week in Johannesburg. Our ruling party is conducting a long overdue purge of its Youth League, and there was a rent-a-crowd bussed in by the targeted faction, outside the party HQ in central Johannesburg, that threw some stones at police and reporters. However, on Twitter, I saw a rumour that stones were being thrown on a main road in the rich northern suburbs. The rumour spread on Twitter despite almost immediate denials.
Although panic didn't take hold, because of limited Twitter penetration, and because the idea that the stone throwing jumped 20 km northwards into white suburbia probably set off BS detectors, it could have gotten out of hand fast. In fact, I expect a major social-networking fed panic to happen here soon enough.
When someone says "I confirm", it means that they have personally seen or heard something. I have very little sympathy for the person who created the original tweet. A bit more for the person who retweeted. In both cases 30 years is too harsh, but there do need to be consequences for creating chaos on such a large scale.
Mexico doesn't have freedom of speech. According to the constitution, speech can be restricted if it offends good morals, incites crime, disturbs the public order, or disrespects private lives, morals, and the public peace. In the 1930s, laws were added that restricted speech that insulted national symbols, particularly the flag and the national anthem.
This is obviously an attempt to test the constitution. In Mexico the flag is almost considered sacred. This is pretty much the same as burning flags in the U.S. and you have to decide which value is bigger. Freedom of speech of the the flag.
Why, when people are accused of being overly sensitive an icon like the flag or the image of the king, etc, does someone come along and say "The ___ is almost sacred to the ___ people."?
38 comments
[ 2.5 ms ] story [ 81.4 ms ] threadYou though, lacking superpowers, couldn't help if you were there. So I dunno, maybe you should frantically search until you get positive evidence, and an idea of what you could do to help, before you decide what to do.
There are laws to deal with the guy if these was a scheme to profit. If he was deluded there's no reason to take actions, he's no worse than the idiots who ran around because of his rumors. In fact his action was better. By forwarding his news he's inviting conversation and investigation, by running off to the school the terrified parents are actually potentially causing a problem.
I don't see why authors should be held responsible for their readers' stupidity, though.
The definition of free speech that that argument was used to defend was the Espionage Act of 1917 which:
o Made it a crime to convey information with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the armed forces of the United States or to promote the success of its enemies, punishable by death or by imprisonment for not more than 30 years or both,
o Made it a crime to convey false reports or false statements with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval forces of the United States, punishable by a maximum fine of $10,000 or by imprisonment for not more than 20 years or both,
o Made it a crime to promote the success of its enemies when the United States is at war, punishable by a maximum fine of $10,000 or by imprisonment for not more than 20 years or both,
o Made it a crime to cause or attempt to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, refusal of duty, in the military or naval forces of the United States, punishable by a maximum fine of $10,000 or by imprisonment for not more than 20 years or both, and
o Made it a crime to willfully obstruct the recruiting or enlistment service of the United States, punishable by a maximum fine of $10,000 or by imprisonment for not more than 20 years or both.
The Sedition Act of 1918 extended this to:
o Make it a crime to use "disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language" about the United States government, its flag, or its armed forces or that caused others to view the American government or its institutions with contempt, and
o Give the Postmaster General the right to go through mail and refuse to deliver any that did any of these things while the United States was at war.
This resulted in about 1500 prosecutions and 1000 convictions for speech, and the sentences were generally between 5 and 20 years.
Not a good precedent.
Yes, we are living hard times here.
God says... C:\TEXT\WEALTH.TXT
ced by the inclinations of their constituents. The councils, which, in the colony legislatures, correspond to the house of lords in Great Britain, are not composed of a hereditary nobility. In some of the colonies, as in three of the governments of New England, those councils are not appointed by the king, but chosen by the representatives of the people. In none of the English colonies is there any hereditary nobility. In all of them, indeed, as in all other free countries, the descendant of an old
God says, " beware These community slavery driven jealousy talketh dwelt interpreter lodging realisest parent boastfulness admonition commission sudden preserved departest wonderfully crisis GIVE Out volumes predict aided kindness flies plot birthright Luxury lesser great despisest pulse V requires jests singing bottom treasures Texas former heads enthralled AUGUSTINE warning wroth untruth foreigner beck P therein enlightens dealt resurrection detail presbyters expressions figurative unexplained diminution flesh walked Word follies zip Forsake musing turbulence admirable NOTICE worshipping neighbour estimation replacing nails existeth captain lawless project etexts Nebridius' Creator corn cellar sorrowfulness journeyed ruminate professed drudgery framers ice bodily subversion estate hungering end front transgressions ."
--------------------
You cannot escape justice, suckas.
God says, "Shalom theres_no_place_like_home awesome IMHO air_head face_palm computers delicious illogical gross yada_yada_yada That's_my_favorite honesty guilty hopefully oh_no What You_can_count_on_that is_it_just_me_or if_anything_can_go_wrong don't_you_love_me theft tv place I'll_ask_nicely whoo_whoo hit food ridiculous I_don't_care I_didn't_see_that mundo_stoked potentially I_could_swear rubbish desert ghetto shist air_head completely mission_from_God gambling are_you_insane roses_are_red I_made_it_that_way ."
------------------------
Nothing trumphs God, suckas.
2:11 And it came to pass in those days, when Moses was grown, that he went out unto his brethren, and looked on their burdens: and he spied an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew, one of his brethren.
2:12 And he looked this way and that way, and when he saw that there was no man, he slew the Egyptian, and hid him in the sand.
God says, " bye pow you're_in_big_trouble ."
--------------------------
Then, he gave the ten commandments.
God says...C:\TEXT\QUIX.TXT
cted something offensive to some king or other, or insulting to some noble family. All which evils, and many more that I say nothing of, would be removed if there were some intelligent and sensible person at the capital to examine all plays before they were acted, not only those produced in the capital itself, but all that were intended to be acted in Spain; without whose approval, seal, and signature, no local magistracy should allow any play to be acted. In that case actors would take care to send
--------------------
Are you friends or enemies of God? The answer is obvious.
God says, " hurts_my_head ohh_thank_you dignity hey_thats_right absolutely humongous sess_me my_bad persistence homo I_am_not_amused love virtue tiffanies IMHO I'm_tired_of_this talk_to_my_lawyer I_veto_that in_a_perfect_world Indian Oh_really husband joking reverse_engineer left_field oh_no how_could_you do_I_have_to that's_for_me_to_know tattle_tale study lift One_finger_salute gosh wastoid Angel vermin Mission_Accomplished It_grieves_me tiffanies Jesus rich Ivy_league hate downer kludge well_I_never ipod employer don't_mention_it awesome how_hard_could_it_be oh_no money on_occassion Wow repent I_was_sleeping computers sex Yes_you_are yuck a_screw_loose debt good overflow fortitude once_upon_a_time HolySpirit bizarre you_don't_say SupremerCourt genius you_do_it not_in_my_wildest_dreams fool music high_mucky_muck pet let_me_count_the_ways bassackward yuck huh whoo_whoo I_forgot It's_nice_being_God Percival I'...
Imagine if I a guy came rushing out of the bathroom shouting 'Fire' and a bunch of people went in the check before anyone would evacuate. Obviously many more people could die. The downside? One unnecessary evacuation that probably needed practice anyways.
It seems like the world is full of authoritarians though, seeking to punish everyone for everything.
Maybe it's a Canadian thing?
Of course, we shouldn't punish people who genuinely thought there was a fire. We definitely should encourage people to give the alarm when needed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_alarm
"Intentional false alarms of any kind, especially through emergency notification systems, are very serious criminal offenses, and can result in very severe legal punishments."
Dunno if you recognize that, but it's my premise from earlier. In it I was talking about a scenario like the one in Mexico is thought to be - a re-tweeter, not a rumor creator.
My initial comment wasn't an attempt to totally rebute yours, and I should have made that clear. I was focusing on:
>>>The downside? One unnecessary evacuation that probably needed practice anyways.
You seemed to consider the unnecessary evacuation as a minor perturbation. I pointed out that such an evacuation is not 100% risk-free.
Of course, nothing is 100% risk-free, and we need to take this into account when doing risk analysis. After our discussion, I guess the risk of accidents during an unnecessary evacuation might actually be lower than the risk of having people not raising the alarm when needed (due to a fear of being punished if it turns out they were wrong). But this risk still needs to be weighed when considering this problem.
Although panic didn't take hold, because of limited Twitter penetration, and because the idea that the stone throwing jumped 20 km northwards into white suburbia probably set off BS detectors, it could have gotten out of hand fast. In fact, I expect a major social-networking fed panic to happen here soon enough.
When someone says "I confirm", it means that they have personally seen or heard something. I have very little sympathy for the person who created the original tweet. A bit more for the person who retweeted. In both cases 30 years is too harsh, but there do need to be consequences for creating chaos on such a large scale.
(Articulos 6 y 7)
http://es.wikisource.org/wiki/Constituci%C3%B3n_Pol%C3%ADtic...
In 2008, a poet was found guilty by the Supreme Court and given a token fine for a poem.
http://banderasnews.com/0805/edat-poetfined.htm
Why do sacred cows get such respect?