<nettime> FC: AOL silences Irish forum sites

[Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com> (by way of Tjebbe van Tijen)]

I found this message on the Politech list and thought it to be somewhat
lengthy, but at the same time interesting enough for NT... Not so much as
to protest against this kind of cernsorship, but to show that also the
Internet can not go beyond human social relationships... when they are
good... no problem Internet communication can work fine... but when they as
bad as they still are in Ireland (whatever part) the same phenomena of bad
human relationships in Ireland tend to be reproduced  and sometimes
amplified by the electronic medium...

Strong statements, flaming, is an understandable effect of such indirect
ways of communication where you do not need to face someone to say "it".
Shouting insults to someone that not can be seen, at the other side of the
wall, is now done electronicaly. That is a new situation, especialy because
the insults are carried by a medium that records it at the same time. It is
different from the shouting over the wall, because there are always
realiable witnesses. It is like asking a policeman to come to your house
and listen to you insulting your neighbour.Who would do it?

There has always been the difference between the 'one to one' insult or
threat and the publicly expressed threat or insult. So with the one to many
communication of newsgroups on the Internet you always act in a public
situation. Now the age old problem is "who is to judge?" In this case the
firm AOL takes it on itself to judge. Not surprisingly such a corporate
organisation is not well equiped to take on this difficult task.

I think there must have been several people making misuse of the
possibilities for communication that AOL sells before they started to act.
You could even see it as a good sign that big business can not accept
outrageous and intollerant behaviour, be it for pure commercial reasons.
When I would use the shouting over the wall metaphor again, than the
solution AOL has choosen (closing down newsgroups that permit such
shouting) equals the gagging of all the members of a family, while in fact
is was only one person in the family that was using bad language. Another
approach could have been to knock down the wall between the warring
families, call in some people from the outside to help and let both parties
voice their grievances in the face of each other for as long as they have
energy (keeping them from bodily violence through the assistance of outside
helpers). I know it is a silly idea, but such a counseling form of conflict
resolution, is the only alternative I can see for the gagging, the shutting
down of an Internet connection.

In this case it was an Irish conflict, there are and will be so many
possible shouting and insulting targets that a more structiral approach
than just shutting down of a site or a service needs to be contemplated.
One can of course say that a provider should not intermingle, but that
seems not to be a practical proposal as the Irish example shows. The
creation of electronic counselling facilities, re-education camps as you
wish, might be another more positive apporach to this eternal problem. Here
the potential of the Internet can be used fully, the wide almost
problemless availibility of counsellers that will help to  bring some
people to the minimal behaviour standards that are needed to move in public
space.

What I fear that this (Irish) conflict will be just used to criticize the
easy scape-goat AOL, because it is a truism that all big business is bad.
Freedom of speech though, can not be a product of laws, but a product of
the  social relations in asociety. We have to do something for it
contineously to have it.

So maybe there could be some creaqtive thinking to suggest solutions to AOL
what to do in such kind of situations..


tjebbe



[Based on what I read below, this is disturbing but not surprising. AOL's
contract gives them tremendous discretion; if you want free speech, shop
somewhere else. I will forward replies from AOL if they feel the urge to
respond. --Declan]

*******

Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 04:22:24 -0800 (PST)
From: Charles
<quester@eskimo.com>
To: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
Subject: AOL
silences Irish

Item of possible interest to you.  I think it's time someone did something
about aol.  But I'm not sure exactly what...

  -   Charles   -

Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1998 22:02:20 -0500
From: Paul Kneisel <tallpaul@nyct.net>
Subject: File 1--Censorship: AOL shuts down 23 Irish Forum sites

    Censorship: AOL shuts down 23 Irish Forum sites, strands
                  thousands of Irish customers

Kate Sheridan (The Irish People)
<http://inac.org/IrishPeople/>
19 Dec 98

In a shocking but not surprising move on December 11th, America Online
(AOL), the world's largest Internet service provider (ISP), closed most of
its Irish Heritage Forum sites, suspending Irish-related services to tens
of thousands of Irish and Irish-American customers.

**Republican/nationalist members are outraged, saying that the closure was
preceded by AOL's "arbitrary cancellation" of at least 20 Irish accounts in
recent months. ** Irish members consider the Forum closure and terminations
an outgrowth of pro-British members' pressure on AOL during an intense
effort to market America Online services to potential customers in Britain.

**As Irish AOL users scramble to find other sites for information, research
and debate, allegations of censorship, intimidation, discrimination,
harassment and even that a pedophile had breached AOL security abound.
**Despite numerous customer complaints and questions, official AOL silence
shrouds the closure.

**A notice on the Forum gateway simply notes that the site is under
"evaluation" because of member complaints.

The Irish Forum has long been a favorite target of anti-republican,
pro-British Internet users intent on disrupting the flow of peace-process
information and on limiting Irish-American access to the broadest range of
Irish views.

Irish AOL users, although frequently speaking bitterly of AOL's apparent
embrace of Unionist disrupters in the Forum, still deeply desired the
services to remain open, despite harassment, in the hope that the sites
would serve as cross-border opinion exchanges without British censorship or
"spin." Unionist AOL members wanted the Forum closed.

Although other AOL services are still accessible, closure of the Forum
blocks access to at least 23 Irish-influence AOL sites and chat areas and
blocks research, education and debate on such topics as Irish history,
language, genealogy, culture, literature, and politics.

Many AOL members who had planned to use the service to contact relatives in
Ireland at Christmastime are heartbroken, stranded without explanation or
apology. Most nationalist/republican AOL members think that the move was
politically motivated, intended to extinguish a growing firestorm of
pro-republican news and comment in the Forum, exposing, among other
matters, abuse of Irish citizens by British-army personnel and British
cover-up of RUC and SAS shoot-to-kill operations in the North.

AOL recent multi-million-dollar marketing push into Britain is actively
trying to attract millions of British customers. The dramatic move to close
the Irish Forum follows at least a year of allegations of intense
harassment and purported sustained intimidation against Irish
nationalist/republican AOL members by Unionist/pro-British AOL members and
volunteer staff. One AOL customer from the Midwest says she had 9 AOL
accounts terminated during the past 14 months.

"I never uttered a foul word, never made a threat, never abused a soul,"
she says. "I carried political news and opinion back and forth and shared
it with readers and debaters. It's that reasonable, rational exposure the
Unionists most fear."

Usually, Irish voices are silenced on AOL more subtly, by vague claims of
"harassment" or "board disruption." Criticism of Orange Order parades or
discussion of news stories unfavorable to the RUC are routinely interpreted
by AOL as "ruining the enjoyment" of Unionists. The offender is then tagged
for AOL termination. Such censorship indeed has the proverbial "chilling
effect on free speech," say AOL members interviewed by this reporter.

One nationalist customer was devastated when her account was terminated
following a Unionist's claim of "harassment" after the nationalist posted
voluminous evidence of sectarian employment discrimination in the North.
With her account went the website and screen name of the legal group of
which she is president. Her legal-research and studies site was accessed
countrywide by attorneys and paralegals.

She also lost her teenage son's screen name, "just two weeks before his
college and scholarship applications were due." Two years' worth of
research and site information was lost. Several applications of his had
already been filed, carrying a return e-mail address rendered invalid by AOL.

Literally dozens of similar stories have emerged in the few days since AOL
acted against the Irish Forum.

Many AOL members view the allegations as simply one more smear in a
long-term smear campaign by pro-British members, "coddled and catered to"
in their activities during the past year by AOL International Channel
personnel. One "Unionist supporter" AOL customer is leading the charge to
cancel nationalists' accounts. **That name is well known on other Irish
Internet sites as well, as are the threats issued under it.

Other threats include releasing information about her targets to the RUC
and DUP and to RUC chief constable Ronnie Flanagan, **and filing complaints
to the FBI. **She has also accused targets of accessing her confidential
Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) files.

One target is Julie Brown, webmistress of Ireland Uncensored, the
longest-running full-access Irish political debate board on the Internet.
She seriously considered closing the board to all AOL customers or
switching to a password system in order to block access to her board from
the harassing screen name, who enters the board through the AOL system.
"Hours and hours" of pleas to AOL officials to act against the harasser
were futile. "AOL says phone harassment is not their problem," Ms. Brown
says. "They say I should call the police. But until she threatens to
actually kill me or physically harm me, the police cannot act. Now she is
threatening my business. People who come into contact with this person
shouldn't underestimate what she has gotten away with."

Ms. Brown says she won't close the Ireland Uncensored site or restrict
access, because "that is what this person wants -- censorship. But free
speech is so important. We need more talking and more debate. It is so
hypocritical that Steve Case [AOL chairman] is publicly such a huge
proponent of free speech, but on his own service, AOL, he allows censorship
weaponry to thrive and does nothing to stop it."

Terry Deem-Reilly, director of the Political Education Committee in Denver,
Col., also contacted AOL's International Channel supervisor about the
problem member. "Now her effluvia is spilling out onto the 'Net,'" she says
in a letter to AOL. "The webmistress has been e-mailed and called at home
by the Unionist poster and threatened with legal action and other more
vague retaliation, because posts left at the site 'offend' this woman, whom
your staff has coddled and catered to for months, even to the extent of
terminating the accounts of members whose posts she dislikes. "Regardless
of AOL's status as the country's largest ISP, it is not a law unto itself
and must consider its responsibility to its customers and other Internet
users. AOL allows this woman to access cyberspace and attempt to enforce
censorship not only within its own [site] boundaries but on other sites as
well. This is intolerable and will eventually rebound on your company as
other AOL members find their access restricted because of her actions."

AOL said that its "evaluation" of the Irish sites would be announced
December 28th. As The Irish People went to press, AOL had not responded to
repeated invitations to comment on the allegations.

------------------------------



--------------------------------------------------------------------------
POLITECH -- the moderated mailing list of politics and technology
To subscribe: send a message to majordomo@vorlon.mit.edu with this text:
subscribe politech
More information is at http://www.well.com/~declan/politech/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: majordomo@desk.nl and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner@desk.nl