How about defamatory speech? Alex Jones has certainly defamed the names of good people, innocent children and anyone else he pleases to include in his insane rants. Using the the term "untruths" instead of "lies" is about as Orwellian as it gets. Lets call a spade a spade here and cut these bottom feeders off from civil society.
18
Automatic needs to rethink their policies. Sandy Hook denial is not just untrue content. It is untrue content that is inciting and inflicting harm.
23
Take this up to the Supreme Court!
3
Those on this board waving the "free speech" argument around fail to understand that legit news organizations have standards for printing opinion -they don't have to print every piece of nonsense that crosses their inbox. Those who deny Sandy Hook or the Holocaust, or Obama's birth certificate are absolutely free to shout nonsense from the rooftops or on whatever unmoderated comment boards they can weasel into- but legitimate platforms are not obligated, nor should they endeavor, to amplify lies.
16
My thoughts are with the families of the victems. How on earth can it be that they are treated as fraudes, while is Alex Jones and the platforms that are allowing these contents are the frauds?
How is it possible that some platforms are not willing to remove the contest of the posts that are untrue and even proved to be untrue in court?
Free speech is a good thing, but spreading false information on a platform is good for nobody. It leads to disinformed readers.
If you want to do something against this unjustece, please if you can afford it, make a donation proect the truth to HONR Network.
HONR Network is a 501.c.3 non-profit organization dedicated to Stopping the Continual and Intentional Torment of Victims.
9
@Bob I could not agree more. Here is the link to the HONR NETWORK. I’ve donated. It would be a great way to show our support for this important work.
http://www.honr.com/donate/
2
Smirking Mullenweg looks to be saying "I'd like to help you out, which way did you come in?"
2
Social Media platforms that have no accountability PLUS the moronic screen addicted consumers who lack any frame of reference EQUAL the Golden Age of Stupidity that will lead us to our doom.
Yes to the ancient curse - I live in interesting times, and it is a horror. "Don't go there!" Look away! No add clicks from me for trash and horrors.
3
The town of Newtown, CT undoubtedly has official records that show that the shootings at the Sandy Hook Elementary School did take place on December 14, 2012. There were numerous witnesses to the results of that shooting, including first responders.
Anyone who deliberately, maliciously and knowingly misstates the truth abut the victims could be subject to suit.
In Connecticut, defamation is the act of publicly making or distributing a false statement of fact about another person or business. The defamatory statement is libel if written and slander if spoken.
In Connecticut, defamation is a tort, or civil wrong. If a person is defamed, they are entitled to file a civil lawsuit against the perpetrator and seek monetary damages.
Defamation laws in Connecticut are designed to prevent injury to another person’s or company’s reputation, esteem, respect or goodwill.
The laws of Connecticut provide for general damages in defamation lawsuits. Allowable damages include mental suffering compensation, as well as actual damages for reputational or material loss suffered as a result of the act.
http://kellywarnerlaw.com/connecticut-defamation-laws/
It seems to me that any of the parents of the children killed at Sandy Hook Elementary have a colorable claim to mental suffering compensation, and a claim in the name of their child to defamation.
I think they should sue the pants off Automattic, its owners and officers, and the people who post the defamatory information.
22
Calls for suppresssion of free speech under the guise of protecting “decency” are almost as disturbing as the disgusting conspiracy theories spread by Alex Jones and others. Who is the judge of decency? You? I consider it both indecent and harmful that some parents of autistic children are allowed to spread the lie that vaccines have caused their kids’ affliction. By doing so, they put other children’s lives in danger, as unvaccinated kids may die of measles and other preventable diseases. So should we shut down all forums where anti-vaxxers congregate? And if not, why not? How about sites spreading misinformation about miraculous cures and thus preventing people from seeking real medical help? Shut them all down. How about porn sites? Are they not the very definition of indecent? By the time the wave of censorship is over, there will be nothing left of the Internet. You may not need the social media and Google. I do, and so do billions of others. Freedom comes with a price, and as sad as it is, mindless conspiracy theories, fake news and other froth is the price we have to pay.
1
I'm a freedom-of-speech hawk and long-time conspiracy theorist.
I don't pay much attention to news about the issues raised in this
article simply because the intellectual quality of the theories in
question is zilch, so I don't care what happens to their
proponents.
If you're harassed or otherwise injured because one of these
theorists alleges that you took part in the alleged hoax, then of
course you should have recourse to the libel laws. But if you were
simply named as a victim, you shouldn't. Sue the harassers instead.
Auttomatic makes business decisions based on how to maximize profits; Just as the manufacturer of a defective product or part product that it knows is defective makes a cost benefits decision on profits factoring in how much damages they may be liable for versus potential profits or costs to fix the defective product. Auttomatic is known to be aggressive in their determinations in regards to copyright violation allegations.
3
Good for Automattic. I abhor the idea of anyone claiming an absolute monopoly on truth and reality. These are contested phenomena and have been ever since mankind first developed a conception of itself as individual beings subject to differing and subjective perspectives.
4
@LR
I wondere how many people here lived through the 1960s.
When I went to college, in 1959, my physics profesor had just started teaching again in the US after he had been blacklisted during the McCarthy days. https://www.nytimes.com/1999/05/10/nyregion/dr-david-fox-78-a-physicist-... My other physics professor was a Jewish refugee from Nazi Germany, They taught me about freedom of speech.
The newspapers and broadcasters censored anything critical of their advertisers, such as the auto and cigarette industry. They approvingly reported police raids on gay bars and treated homosexualty as a "perversion." Teenage girls who had sex were "juvenile delinquents" who were sent to reformatories. Abortion and contraception were unmentionable. Criticism of the Vietnam war, or of our overthrow of democratically elected governments in Iran, Guatamala, and elsewhere, was forbidden. Criticism of religion was forbidden. TV networks couldn't mention segregation.
That's what happens when you give somebody the power to choose which ideas are acceptable and unacceptable.
Congratulations to Automattic for upholding free speech. The alternative is dictatorship.
4
Good for WordPress for being a truly free and open platform. If the Pozner family takes issue with the contents of the site, they should seek legal remedy from the author, not the platform.
4
@Brian
One question, Brian: How do you identify the author?
If you cannot do that, how do you ever get a remedy?
6
The only conclusion I can arrive at is that Jones is perfectly fine with the fact that this boy is dead:
He wouldn't have prevented it if he could.
He's happy to use it to further his twisted agenda, and make money off of it.
He would like more kids to be killed by guns.
That guns are more important than kids.
That bullets have more rights than kids.
That there is no reason to try to prevent similar deaths.
And that he knows that he has like-minded supporters in Congress, the christian power elite, the White House, and sympathetic or frightened corporations.
This is America today.
20
These wealthy executives of social media businesses are moral imbeciles. What part of promoting the defamation of murdered children and the harassment their grieving parents don't they understand?
25
The unbearable further heartbreak for the Pozner's is utterly unconscionable! One can't help but to wonder what is so wrong with those involved. Just sick. And 'Victims further victimized' by Wordpress's inaction.
12
That gawker was sued into oblivion and Alex Jones still has money shows how warped society is.
13
Personally I also think Twitter has a lot to answer for. It's one of the reasons Trump's president.
The historians trying to explain the Trump presidency may well point to Twitter. It's how he gained his low-information following, perfect for people - like himself as well - with short attention spans and no ability for sustained thought or respect for knowledge.
In short, Twitter is idiot proof - and it gave us an idiot president.
16
Which is why they aren't banning Jones and others. It's all about the Benjamins. Every time Trump tweets Twitter gets more traffic. Cha ching!
6
Is this the same Automattic company that has its headquarters on Hawthorne Street in San Francisco?
2
It is beyond disgusting that bereaved parents should be subjected to these hoaxes and harassment. It is high time that all Internet forums commonly used should have effective policies in place to remove them.
The argument of “Freedom of speech” is just a smokescreen to avoid the issue of essential decency.
My sincere condolences to the Pozner family and all the other families affected.
14
In the case of Mr. Pozner, however, Automattic suggested that its approach was imperfect. “While our policies have many benefits to free expression for those who use our platform, our system like many others that operate at large scale, is not ideal for getting to the deeper context of a given request,” the company said in a statement.
Indeed. If there's a hell on earth, it's what the family of Noah Pozner has been through since the murder of their child. Automattic cannot be exculpated by any "suggestion" that "its approach was imperfect." They're accessories.
13
If you’re using Wordpress, you need to find another platform. Why not try pen and paper?
9
It looks like Wordpress as yielded to the calls for privately enforced censorship. Be careful people what you ask for. If it is censorship of untrue statements, it's a very slippery slope, because one's best investigative journalism is fake news to others. If this is libelous towards the kid and the families, which doesn't seem that far fetched to me, we have laws on the books against that.
1
I get that Wordpress doesn't want to be the arbitrator of truth or lies, but these haters should not be able to use the family photos. That is a valid copyright claim and should be respected and responded to by Wordpress.
28
I currently host a small website that uses WordPress. I expect to move it to a different (and I hope, better) platform as soon as possible.
While it's important to respect that web hosting services should NOT be under tight state scrutiny of the content their users post (because then the state controls what we can know), that does NOT mean we should ignore what range of content they (as private free speech entities) agree to carry. And if what they carry is manifestly objectionable (which is something different from 'not true'), we as consumers can also exercise our free speech rights to stop spending money on the Word Presses of the world.
11
I'm a little behind in catching on to Word Press. When I read all the comments from this article I wonder if we all could seriously consider excluding Word Press and Twitter from our everyday lives. I'd guess many could manage without it, have time for other worth while pursuits? For myself I would not consider using Twitter. DJ Trump uses it and mostly in a very nasty and derogatory way and and it doesn't interest me. Wonder where people get ideas like Sandy Hook was a hoax, or there is not climate change? Maybe lack of reason and thinking? Or they want to believe no matter what the facts show otherwise.
9
The New York Times could remove its financial support from Automattic. That would be a step in the right direction, yes?
39
Talk about burying the lede, there's this parenthetical statement toward the end of the article:"The New York Times Company is an investor in Automattic."
Please quickly and publicly disinvest, NY Times.
30
If Automattic refuses to delete content that is so obviously harmful to the Pozner family, and also refuses to create a policy for the deletion of all such harmful content, then why is the New York Times an investor in Automattic?
Should we be boycotting the New York Times?
25
@Madeleine
My first thought. Why is the NYT an investor?
5
Why would anyone want to deny the Sandy Hook massacre? Are gun manufacturers that hard up for sales? This administration isn’t going to take any action against the NRA, so they needn’t worry. I’d don’t get it. Imagine the quality and character of people who would make up lies against families whose six year old children were shot by a mentally ill mad man? Low lives, the same people that put and are keeping Trump in office.
12
These comments demonstrate a poor understanding of free speech.
The enlightenment idea of free speech was that no one is so wise that they can decide for everyone else what is true and false.
The best way to establish the truth is to let all sides give their facts and arguments, and let the rest of us decide.
This isn't perfect, but it's the best we have. If we allow exceptions -- for speech that is obviously false or particularly offensive -- then, in the views of the critics, everything they disagree with is obviously false and offensive.
We can see that today in the accusations of White House spokesman Sarah Huckabee Sanders. She accuses the media of false, offensive statements. If Trump weren't restrained by the laws protecting free speech, he would shut down the New York Times and CNN, just as Peter Thiel shut down Gawker. He would have fired the NFL players.
The problem with free speech is that Leonard Pozner must suffer with absurd, false accusations, even after he's taken libel laws as far as he can.
The problem with restricting free speech is that Trump would be the first to shut down everyone he disagrees with.
It's a binary choice. You can have free speech or you can have dictator Trump.
John Stuart Mill explained this better than I can in On Liberty, Chapter II https://www.gutenberg.org/files/34901/34901-h/34901-h.htm
4
Automattic, some of your policies (this one in particular) are inflicting actual pain on actual humans. That in and by itself is bad. That you continue to do so intentionally, in the name of profit, makes them evil.
Investing in evil, dear NYTimes, makes you complicit in that evil. I never thought I would have to say this again after the stain that was apartheid disappeared, but here it is again: DIVEST!
4
This is a disgrace. Every parents wants their children to be safe. And when a horrific incident occurs, the parents can't help but endure the most excruciating pain.
Anyone who allows ridiculous theories to propagate should look into their own souls and consider how much suffering they are causing. How much does a parent have to tolerate?
Shame on the decision makers at Automattic.
5
The bloodless rationalizations of executives like Mullenweg are intended to conceal their greed and opportunism under the pretext of the law. I suspect that his commitment to this "principle" is only as deep as his ability to avoid being terrorized like the Pozner family.
It reminds me of the ultimate hypocrite Eric Schmidt who, as the head of Google, tried to get personal information expunged while attacking people who expressed concern about Google's inattentiveness to privacy issues.
14
Might it help if participating WordPress bloggers posted a statement of support for the Pozner Family?
4
@Living In Beauty
Great idea! I can do that... before moving to another platform!
5
Sorry isn't good enough. This is not fair use. This is clearly libel, and what's more, it amounts to abuse. WordPress is complicit in abusing grieving families and the libel of children. This is wrong, and I will be boycotting all WordPress hosted blogs.
7
Boycott Wordpress and Twitter until they do the right thing!
10
This is how A.I. works. No filters, morality or compassion, just man vs a machine that can only be the definition of a psychopath.
3
Uh, 'Untrue Content' is not banned at the White House press briefing sooo...
6
We have to boycott companies that pander to liars. It’s that simple.
10
The Supreme Court has protected lying as free speech many times. It remains a civil matter. Unfortunately, the legal costs of filing civil suits against a moving target of Internet trolls makes is basically impossible to do.
And let's be honest. Do you really think these conspiracy theory-believing Internet trolls actually have any money to pay in damages? I know a couple of people who believe in this stuff, and they're all the same: divorced, uneducated, dead-end job, and socially dysfunctional to the point where they don't have any real friends. Even among family, they struggle to connect. Who wants to sit at a family function and listen to some nut ramble on about chemtrails?
1
The stance of companies like WordPress and Twitter is really just a way of avoiding responsibility. No freedom is absolute (eg, WordPress would surely take action against, say, child pornography on its sites), so WordPress would not be betraying its customers/users were it to set and maintain some standard of accuracy.
That being said, the best way to combat these conspiracy theorists is through the courts. Getting booted off YouTube makes them martyrs amongst their rabid fans; having to prove something in court, and being unable to, has ramifications of a whole different level. It should be noticed that since Mr Pozner and others sued Alex Jones, Jones has (according to what I've read) gone silent on his moronic Sandy Hook theories.
Jones also pulled his videos and issued an apology for his support of the Pizzagate theory, or he would have been sued for libel. So again, this is the way to counter people like jones and Rush Limbaugh; make them prove their claims in court.
5
Automattic was formed by the GRU and the FSU, the intelligence apparatuses of the Russian government. Cyber, especially media, has become their dominant way of attacking the west, as they fall further and further behind in military technology and scientific advances. Largely this developmental gap is due to their of policy of disengagement from the world community.
Their crafty use of copyright and intellectual property protection rules is typical of the long game they are playing distort the truth and confuse the public.
Why Wordpress is not being held to account for Automattic's activities is beyond me. However, I don't have to prove it, I simply have to write it, and it becomes truth in the world's eyes. What's the word for hidden in plain sight in Russia? Maskirovka (маскировка)?
How do we like Cold War 2.0 Beta, hope we don't get to see the official release!
4
If we just stand by, and not denounce those that purposefully lie to the public, and harm us by spreading conspiracy theories, we may become complicit with our silence. Those greedy liars ought to have no place in society. None.
5
It’s unbelievable that someone would target a small child and their family in making such claims, however, when we restrict free speech, we allow dictatorships to arise. This country was founded on the ideals of freedom. Just because we don’t like the pulpit taken, we cannot reduce the ability of a person to state their opinion: No Matter How Ludicrous.
1
It’s too bad we have to legislate common decency.
4
Why does anyone read this shock-jock, conspiracy stuff on social media? Who amongst us doesn't realize so much of it is misleading, exaggerated and plain false, that you can’t trust any of it? Get your news (though not necessarily opinions) from established media with a reputation for fact checking to uphold. Trying to ferret out the fake stuff on the Internet is like trying to hold back the tide. Better to just ignore it and get on with more important things in your life.
2
While it seems obvious that WordPress should remove the offensive material, one has to consider the precedent that would set. When does one man's complaint supersede another's right to free speech? Does free speech include lies? Is WordPress expected to police the hundreds of thousands of blogs on its platform and remove ... or censor ... those with misinformation or with which they disagree? It's a dilemma every social media and blogging platform must face today, and I don't see any easy answers.
That said, I do think WordPres could reply to Mr. Pozner with something more personal than computer-generated boilerplate.
1
Time to e-mail Automattic and pressure them to do the right thing: it's called being a good corporate citizen.
Also e-mail WeWorkRemotely.com and suggest they refuse business from Automattic, who is one of their advertisers.
3
Are the comments on WordPress regarding Noah Pozner blatantly slanderous or libelous? If so, he should sue for damages. He would win. If those comments are simply incorrect (even laughably so), Mr. Pozner has no recourse in a society that values free speech. This is as it should be.
1
In the #grabyourwallet era of boycotting products & companies, WordPress will re-evaluate its "policies" when people begin moving to other blogging sites.
4
'Untrue"content? What about content which causes real harm to anguished parents?
10
I've been a WordPress fan for years but this throws them in a different light for me. That they allow conspiracy theories that endanger the families of the Sandy Hook victims to fester on their sites is abhorrent. WordPress is dead to me now.
7
On line companies like Word Press should not be exempt from liability for slander or libel when they intentionally continue to publish posts or stories that have been proven to be factually untrue and which can cause harm to the subject(s) of those posts or stories. In the case of the Sandy Hook stories, they are demonstrably false and they have caused harm to the families who have been hounded, including receiving death threats. A book publisher who publishes an author who knowingly libels a person can find itself losing in court.
2
I guess we have to go straight to the large advertisers who post ads on wordplay. "Automattic makes money on WordPress.com by selling advertising on your free sites. "
5
Second bad thing I have heard about WordPress this week. Totally rethinking website strategy. Too many excuses for supporting bad behavior.
2
Wordpress helps a lot of individuals, universities and companies develop their web space. I think a boycott of Wordpress could be very effective. If your organization uses Wordpress, send a link to this article to your boss, or your dean, or your CTO, with a suggestion that they cancel their arrangement with Wordpress. Then let the chips fall where they may. Here's the NYT link to this article: https://nyti.ms/2Mm8uBO
6
In the real world, these families would have strong legal recourse for this blatant harassment, stalking, and libel but not on platforms that, unfortunately, have become the source of news and information for too many people. This needs to change!
We need laws that protect the victims on the internet as well as in real life. Alex Jones and his ilk and the mindless, inhuman thrill seekers who sate themselves on torturing these families need to face stern and long lasting consequences.
If these platforms refuse to police themselves then we need legislation to force them to do it. A "free internet" should not mean freedom to torture others to sell vitamins or increase the users mental problems.
1
The tech companies don't want to be 'arbiters of truth' but they're happy to get their nano-farthings with every click.
Thanks.
My deepest sympathies to you, Mr. Pozner.
6
Does the Federal Communications Commission have anything to say on this, and, if not, why not?
6
Many middle and high school social studies and english departments have lists of good internet sites -trusted like (i.g., Smithsonian Ed, Nat Geo.), questionable - possible misinformation or bias (i.g.,Wikipedia, Wall St Journal) and poor - do not trust material (i.g., Global Association News, National Report.net). Word Press is making someone's garbage list.
4
@disappointed middle class mom
Under the federal Communications Decency Act, schools would get free connections to the Internet, with the condition that they installed filters to block access to "objectionable" content.
The first companies that supplied the filtering software were right-wing conservatives, and the software blocked access to Planned Parenthood, sex education, and even politically progressive sites.
One of the censorship organizations, Morality In Media, is still active today https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Center_on_Sexual_Exploitation and has attempted to censor one of the popular library databases, EBSCO.
I read the Wall Street Journal every day for 40 years, and even after Rupert Murdoch's damage, I can't imagine where you got the idea that it was "possible misinformation or bias" (any more than the NYT).
I also use Wikipedia every day, particularly their medical articles. Scientific journals have reviewed Wikipedia and found it to be as accurate as the Britannica or scientific journals. I agree.
I've read recommended bibliographies, for students, teachers, doctors and scientists. The job is much more difficult than you think.
1
Isn’t a baseless conspiracy theory that knowingly portrays an innocent child and his family in a false light simply another word for slander or libel, which are actionable? I would sue every platform into bankruptcy.
8
@J. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) protects the platforms from being sued over the content that their customers post to the internet.
@Angmar Bokanberry
Obviously that law should be changed.
3
I don't understand the conspiracy theory at all. What psychology underlies this? I cannot get past how absolutely cruel this particular one is. How can so many people lack compassion? This is the worst thing that could happen to anyone. Despite the stance taken by Wordpress and Twitter, I just can't get over that real people pour salt into the wounds to those who have suffered so much. It's a form of torture I'm sure. It's absolutely disheartening.
21
@Sam Cheever Its basically a power trip. The internet fully democratized communication and now anyone can have an outsized influence by using inflammatory language or spreading lies. Before the internet people didn't have the medium to communicate this message broadly with such ease.
Let's be clear--Alex Jones is the bad guy here. He should be made to pay, and pay dearly, for the pain he has caused; the pain he has intentionally inflicted.
Wordpress, on the other hand, should have reacted with more humanity. This is an egregious fact pattern and that should have been obvious to anyone that bothered to look. This content should have been taken down quickly.
However, I don't think webmasters should be the ultimate arbiters of truth or acceptable opinion. If anyone should make that determination, it should be lawmakers and the courts.
If Jones is punished appropriately for what he's done, others may think twice before they engage in such conduct. Tell that to the next person that advocates tort reform.
9
@Justin
Let's be clear, WordPress has the capacity to do the right thing. They simply refuse to do it. That makes them the "bad guys," too.
12
@Justin
Professor at Florida Atlantic Univ. (public university) was NOT punished for harassing Posner family & posting online conspiracies about Boston Marathon & Sandy Hook. He was however, finally dismissed because he repeatedly neglected/refused to file standard conflict of interest paperwork.
Yes, even the universities are too chicken to stand up to evil.
2
This is sheer madness. It defies decency and common sense. They are publishers, and must take responsibility for what they publish. I am tired of seeing our precious freedoms co-opted by people who confuse standards with censorship, and anarchy with liberation, all while getting very, very rich. Will be sure to avoid WordPress.com sites from now on.
36
The conversation intersects closely with the discussion about internet privacy. Tech concerns almost always center around First Amendment rights. Truth arbitration as Mr. Pozner highlights. However, doesn't Noah Pozner have an intrinsic right to his own image without seeking a copyright?
Tech companies are side-stepping the topic of their own profit model. Your information, including images, are worth money to them. A reasonable amount of abuse is the cost of doing business. Content policies are a mitigation technique designed to limit legal exposure. They never address the essential question though: Do tech companies have a right to host, store, and sell your information in the first place?
The question almost becomes tabloid-esque in nature. At what point is it appropriate for newspapers to print embarrassing personal information about a subject? Automattic is clearly on the wrong side of the equation by any journalistic standard. Printing, or in this case hosting, untruths about a non-public figure against their will is libel. Libel is not protected by the First Amendment.
We have to ask the ancillary questions though: When does someone become a public figure and do they have a choice in the matter? I believe this is the central point in Mr. Pozner's case against Alex Jones. I hope to see encouraging answers.
8
When my daughter was believing that Sandy Hook was a hoax, I was horrified. Then I went online and saw what she was seeing and took her computer away for 2 weeks while we talked about truth, compassion, and being a good person. The other fall out from doing nothing to get the lies off of the internet is misinforming our youth. Very damaging.
45
'Technology platforms' such as WordPress are publishers.
And they need to be held accountable for their content.
51
@manta666: The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) is pretty clear that the service providers are not responsible for the content that their users post on the internet. They can be ordered by the courts to remove content, but (for the most part) cannot be held responsible for the content.
This has been somewhat controversial since the DMCA was signed into law in 1998, but it is the law.
3
Thank you for presenting this to us. Not ever using WordPress again, and will be recommending alternatives to my clients from now on, and will be recommending those that are using the platform to migrate from it.
38
Why should WordPress censor their content? Its just a platform. Do you really want them becoming the arbiter of what should be put online?
“Posting conspiracy theories or untrue content is not banned from WordPress.com, and unfortunately this is one of those situations,” Automattic said in a statement. “It is a truly awful situation, and we are sympathetic to the Pozner family.”
Sympathetic but not to the point they will change what is banned from WordPress.com, it seems. From the quote they make it sound like the policy of what is banned is an act of God, and not what they themselves are responsible for.
38
@abo
Exactly. Those who run WordPress choose to allow that content on their site. In effect, they endorse it.
5
Kyle Irving still makes millions despite saying the Earth is flat. You can't fix all the craziness in people. Best we can do sometimes is point and say "that's crazy."
Oh, and not go to sites where the craziness is fostered. There's this funny thing about credibility...
9
Isn't there some organization that can help the Sandy Hook parent?
Could not some famous Lawyer do some pro-bono work for this poor father. How about Stormy Daniels attorney. He seems to have what it takes to figure out how to get this to stop.
Look what he did for Stormy Daniels.
17
I'm so glad they're sympathetic. I'm sure that offers a lot of comfort to parents who have suffered the worst fate imaginable.
I will now boycott WordPress and all their related companies. Will also boycott any companies who advertise on their platforms.
63
Articles like this are valuable in that they expose Wordpress, Twitter, and similar platforms to ethical scrutiny. That's the only way they'll change. One problem in Silicon Valley is that companies are run by technocrats, lawyers, and business people; one wonders how much ethical or moral values (regardless of legal considerations) play a role in their decisions. In a time when humanities programs are cut, and critical thinking is continually debased, perhaps there's a place at the table for philosophers and ethicists? Wishful thinking, I suppose.
61
@jrinsc A much needed place, obviously.
1
My proposal. If you are defamed, or your likeness is used without permission, or your privacy invaded, you should be able to petition the platform/publisher to remove the content. The platform provider should review the case and respond, giving the content provider the opportunity to prove their case as well. Then a decision can be made by the platform provider. If the decision is that the content remains online and the offended wants to pursue a defamation case or invasion of privacy case against the content provider, the platform should be compelled to release the content providers information so that a civil case can be brought.
Similar system exists for intellectual property violations.
28
@SXM Unfortunately such a process would put the platforms in a sickly legal situation. As long as the platform treats all content the same, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act protects the platform legally. But if they start picking and choosing which content can stay, then they can be sued over those decisions, and any decision can be second guessed by the courts. By treating all of the content the same, the DMCA gives them important protections.
Wordpress can choose to do the right thing. It chooses not to do so. This is not about the First Amendment. This is about a myopic view of what constitutes the value of truth, decency and basic humanity.
154
I think there are a number of issues here. One is Internet anonymity allowing people to get away with outrageous lies. The same sort of thing also happened back when newspapers also printed anonymous letters. Even Abraham Lincoln did so before he was caught and decided to become "Honest Abe".
I also do not see why Mr. Pozner had to Alex Jones to court. Isn't defamation of character a criminal offence?
Lastly, it is a sad fact that outrageous claims attract more viewers than boring facts. So web sites have a financial motive to claim that these sort of lies are "free expression" and that allowing them to be posted is some sort of moral high ground.
24
@Tom B. Defamation is generally a civil offense, not a criminal offense.
Defaming the dead is not an offense at all. At least not in any jurisdiction that I know about.
There is a difference between outer space or historical conspiracy theories and those that are personally attacking and harming a living person.
This has nothing to do with free speech but with libel.
84
@msf
Like many folks, you may need to review what actually entails defamation in the USA and in all of the states.
Starting with the idea that you can't defame a dead individual.
“For things that we host and run and provide our kind of company backing to, implicitly through hosting it, we do avoid hate speech,” he said. He added that “egregiously fake or harmful things — we’re pretty good at getting off the system.”
The irony of that statement can't be lost on readers or Noah's family.
51
Ban untrue content? This country would cease to exist without lies: salesman couldn't sell and preachers couldn't preach...
15
@Robert - Come on, give the snark a rest. This is about a bereaved parent who lost his child in a horrific way and who is fighting against online conspiracy theories stating that his child's death never happened and that his child was an actor. This is about holding up platforms like WordPress to public scrutiny when they continue to harbor people who write and spread abusive, defaming content. There is a big difference between salesmen and preachers and the type of stuff that the Sandy Hook parents are fighting against, and you know it.
116
Ban untrue content that defames or injures others.
@Lindsay K
Snarkiness aside, Robert makes a valid point about what is essential trueism about American culture. Most gullible people on the planet.
1
Definitely time to boycott Word Press and Twitter. When companies like this are blind to the harassment and hate speech they enable, they are complicit. We must hold them to a higher standard. Being neutral is consent in this circumstance. The fact that our society has allowed these families to be harassed and tormented by lies like this is shameful. Shame on Wordpress/Automatic and Twitter.
89
Why are Craigslist and Backpage vulnerable to sex-trafficking charges for their open-posting sex-ad pages (which they shut down due to the threat) and Facebook, WordPress and the others not vulnerable to similar charges for (in this case) defamation ands incitements to violence?
61
Suppose somebody denies gravity and keeps wanting to throw people off buildings, claiming that they'll float back right up.
Such a person would be considered a lunatic, yes? Their access to guns, a job, etc. would be under serious review, yes?
Now - a person who denies Sandy Hook - they get access to huns and a media platform.
We always claim that "mental health" is a component behind America's gun violence.
How is it then that these demonstrably insane people - with much more violent tendencies than your average patient - get to build stockpiles of weapons, keep their jobs, get a media platform?
68
Thanks for the article
Twenty-first technologies have so many benefits. Our society must address the problems. This awful sandy hook problem cannot stand. These people list their children. If anyone deserves protection, they do.
Also we ought no continue to permit the charlatans to scour the web for pictures of arrested folk and essentially force them to pay a ransom to get the picture taken down from some sites.
An arrest can now ruin a life even if it resulted from mistaken identity.
8
This poor father. I worry that his endless quest to thwart misinformation will, in turn, keep the wounds of his son's death alive forever too. Perhaps leading this battle is the only way he can process the grief. Tragic on all counts, regardless.
43
@Glenn Some wounds never close. The death of a child is one. I'm sure Mr. Pozner moves on because he must. He fights Alex Jones to protect the rest of his family.
We need to remember that, in fighting the battle, Mr. Pozner is fighting for all of us. We need to support him.
10
Civilized civilization's end began with the computer, accelerated with the development of the internet, and red-lined the tach with the introduction of "social media." It's probably too late to invent the digital equivalent of brakes.
8
@Glen
Humanity has always had uncivilized actors. It is just that the powerful amplifier of social media has given hate mongers and psychopaths a more destructive forum.
WORDPRESS: your reaction is inhumane - and I am looking to move my site to a different platform.
3
@Glen
Lol. People said the same when the printing press was invented, and probably when paper was invented, too. In the late 19th century, novels were said to be ruining civilization. My parents believed TV ruined civilization.
It's no use blaming technology.
@DW
"My parents believed TV ruined civilization."
Your parents were correct according to my parents.
1
If Alex Jones is made to pay $1 billion to defray the costs of people he has hurt (money he does not have), or serve serious prison time, it might represent a step in the right direction. Nothing can lessen the pain of parents who lost their children, but it would discourage people of Jones's ilk who dream of profiting by hurting others.
135
@Kalidan Prison time, yes.
I can understand the company wanting to be a place where conspiracy theories or untrue content can have a home. Even nutty people can be right once in a while, and deserve their say. But why doesn't the company just leave themselves a rule that says they can make exceptions if the content is harmful enough? Call it Rule 52, or the Sandy Hook exception or something. If the material posted meets a certain standard of personal damage, the company can remove it. This case meets that standard.
Taking such a stubborn stance in this particular instance is going to hurt their brand, I would think.
67
@MadelineConant
Any commercial web site can make any rules that they choose to regarding what is published and what is not - FB and Twitter are notable examples.
However this site has specifically chosen a libertarian freedom of speech ethos that any speech - no matter how terrible is free to be published as long as it is legal speech.
If you want to buy them you could change that policy in a second or if you organize a boycott then you might successfully change that policy.
But they have a core ethos and have shown the fortitude to stick with it.
1
When WordPress protects content that criticizes corporations, it's not looking the other way. It understands this information is part of critical public opinion. Sandy Hook conspiracies are disinformation. That's all their policy needs to say: we protect information, not disinformation.
But this isn't a WordPress thing. It's Silicon Valley. They're great at writing endless code, growing great big platforms, nose to the grindstone. But clueless about the real world.
111
@Brian Exactly--these companies are led by people who clearly have no background, training or interest in understanding the philosophies behind concepts like free speech. Being disruptive or being good at writing code does not qualify one for responsibly leading an enterprise.
18
Time to boycott the likes of Wordpress and Twitter.
144
@Craig S or for those who can't boycott Twitter - because, for example, they rely on it for work (many do, including myself) - here's one thing you can do to show your disapproval: https://twitter.com/shannoncoulter/status/1029007992736235525
7
@Zach
You could always find a new job.
This is a sad and discouraging article that says much about our country today. As history repeats itself it is unfathomable that conspiracy theories are still out there and able to spread more easily and quickly than ever before. But that people believe them, well, it renders me speechless.
I can only offer my sincere and heartfelt apologizes to the families of Sandy Hook who have suffered so much and now this?
76
So how is it that liable laws are not being used here. If it is a lie why can't he sue the lier?
46
I am not a lawyer; I believe he can, however, he would have to sue the customer for libel first; if that was successful, he could probably get a court order to take the content down.
2
@oscar jr Blackletter liable law says that dead people cannot be libeled--i.e. there's no libel action for speaking ill of the dead. These people (if you can call them that) are very aware of the intricacies of libel law, so they will lie about poor Noah, but not his survivors.
Alex Jones has created an industry that profits from defamatory lies about dead children.
If there's a lower form of human garbage than Alex Jones, I hope never to learn about it.
3
@oscar jr
There are no defamation laws for the dead.
So, instead Wordpress and the likes are arbiters of lies. I'm sure wordpress isn't the only service providing blogging platforms. And until they figure out that there are alternatives to users more respectful of the truth, let therm continue their ways while these prospective users find those alternatives.
30