.
Feedback

Talk Back Poll: Should Anonymous Comments Be Banned?

A NYS bill is looking to stop websites from publishing malicious anonymous responses. Tell us your thoughts, Babylon!

A new bill in Albany is looking to combat cyberbullying by prohibiting Internet users from posting anonymous defamatory comments.

The Internet Protection Act, sponsored by Assemblyman Dean Murray (R-East Patchogue) and Senator Thomas O'Mara (R-Big Flats), would force a website administrator to "remove any comments posted on his or her website by an anonymous poster unless such anonymous poster agrees to attach his or her name to the post," upon request.

According to the bill, a website would either have to provide a phone number or e-mail address where users could ask to have false, anonymous comments be removed from the site unless the commenter identifies him or herself.

Murray explained anonymous opinion-based responses would still be allowed, but potentially libelous statements would require user identification, if requested.

Assemblyman Jim Conte (R-Huntington Station) expressed his support for the bill, saying it "turns the spotlight on cyberbullies by forcing them to reveal their identities or have their posts removed."

In an age where a simple Google search could detail a person’s entire background, anonymous comments could be a major concern for users. Conte and other supporters of the bill argue anonymous statements, especially false ones, could essentially destroy an individual’s reputation without the ability to hold the commenter accountable for his or her statements.

The bill would also forbid users to post anonymous criticisms of businesses, which Conte said, would cut down on competitors posting negative or false reviews of a rival business.

Conte and Murray both admitted to being cyberbullied through anonyomous political attacks.

The main criticism of the Internet Protection Act is it could hinder freedom of speech rights under the First Amendment.

“This statute would essentially destroy the ability to speak anonymously online on sites in New York,” Kevin Bankston, a staff attorney with the Center for Democracy and Technology, told Wired.

He said the bill allows a “heckler’s veto to anybody who disagrees with or doesn’t like what an anonymous poster said.”

While the U.S. Constitution prohibits states and Congress from abridging free speech, it doesn't detail specifics about anonymous statements, nor online comments.

Do you think anonymous commenting should be banned?

Take the following poll and share your thoughts in the comments section, Babylon.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Babylon Village Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Adam Crowley May 15, 2013 at 06:53 pm
As I explained, my post was made on behalf of another village resident. However, I did take theRead More time to read the statute and do have an independent viewpoint on this subject. While I do not feel that all dogs require a muzzle at all times, if you have a dog that you know to be a threat to other dogs or humans, you would have a duty to take measures to eliminate that threat before bring that dog into public. If that measure is a muzzle, then that's what must be done. As my post indicated, I believe strict enforcement would be exceedingly difficult and, perhaps, unnecessary (at least with respect to the muzzle requirement). However, a total lack of enforcement is dangerous and unacceptable. I think a little common sense goes a long way and I have confidence that those charged with enforcing the Village code could do so selectively. I understand that selective enforcement may be a concept that many feel uncomfortable with. However, just because the law requires a muzzle, that is hardly a reason to disregard it in its entirety and allow dogs with vicious propensities to roam around unleashed. I will leave it up to Village lawmakers to remove the muzzle requirement (and suggest that they do so) if that is what it would take to make people comfortable with the leash requirement.
Concerned Citizen May 15, 2013 at 05:37 pm
Did you read the law? unless it be properly muzzled and effectively restrained by a chain or leashRead More I'll bet neither dog was muzzled Do you really want them to enforce this law