Private Opinion, Public Shout
Spain's Attorney General died suddenly last week while visiting Argentina. He was not popular when picked for his job, because he was not as impartial as should be, rather he favored the conservative agenda of the PP political party. He was further criticized over the prosecutions of deposed members of the Catalan Govern.
So, his death was not going to elicit many tears in certain circles. However, publishing in social media one's joy over his death, and insulting his memory is not something that is considered polite or respectful. A young man in Barcelona did just that. But rather than be ostracized socially, he's been arrested on a charge of committing a hate crime.
The funny thing is that until this latest tweet, he had been opening false social media accounts, threatening Civil Guards, police, and judges, then closing them down immediately so as not to be caught. None of those tweets elicited alarm from others who saw them, just the one in which he forcefully mentioned his joy at the death of the Attorney General, of which some people took screen shots and sent to the police.
While I do consider it a crime to threaten anyone with death on the internet or elsewhere, I don't see that stating your happiness at someone's death is a hate crime. It is, to me, merely your opinion. It is tasteless, and completely lacking in empathy to make such an opinion public upon the subject's death, especially since his death is still raw to those who loved him. But I don't see how it can be considered a crime. Whoever writes such a tweet is not stating lies about what the dead person may or may not have done, he is merely stating an opinion. But Spanish law seems to be reverting back to when one had to keep one's mouth shut on most subjects.
Sometimes the laws, while passed with honorable intentions, can be wrenched around and bite those who they weren't intended to bite. A law which does not allow anyone to make fun of terrorist victims was used to bring a history student before a judge and face a prison sentence some time ago. She had merely made a joke about Carrero Blanco, a high government minister from Franco's time, and something about how the U.S. through the Basque separatist group, ETA, had helped him get to the moon. (His car was blown up with a powerful bomb.)
His assassination happened in 1973. Since then, many jokes about his death have been published in book form, online, and used in stand-up comedies. Until now, with the conservative PP in power, no one complained about them. Rather, they involved a historic moment, and a historic character. His granddaughter pleaded with the court to let the history student go free. The student was sentenced to a year in prison and inability to opt for a public job in seven years, ending her dream of becoming a teacher.
Another question is when is something written public or private? Are messages on a private Whatsapp group private when the group numbers over a hundred? Or when it happens to be a group of local police officers? A Whatsapp group of over a hundred police officers on the night watch in Madrid came to the public's attention when various officers wrote xenophobic, racist, and nazi-type messages, and were denounced by a member of the group. The most troublesome were the messages that called for the mayor's death. (She is a leftist mayor and very popular.) Some wished her a "slow and agonizing death." Others wished she had been in her office on Calle Atocha when a couple of assassins turned up and killed those present back in 1977. Others went on to praise Hitler, saying he knew how to get the job done; they were talking about illegal immigrants. At the moment, those policeman have been suspended pending an internal investigation. The question is whether criminal charges can be brought. Their chat was for private use, not public knowledge. Yet, with over a hundred people in the same chat, it doesn't sound very private.
The old adage of "think before you speak" should be amplified to "think before you speak and write." In these times, many people consider social media like a simple conversation one might have with friends. Yes, but it is in a very public forum. What we write online is the same as if we were to shout it in a crowded square. Our private conversations become public. Sometimes, the forum is permissive, and all sorts of opinions, good and bad, are heard without a flicker of an eyelash. But these times make for a restrictive forum, in which opinions come under scrutiny of many official eyes. Whether or not we agree with something or someone, we should measure our words, and realize that shouting a very private opinion is not always a good idea.
So, his death was not going to elicit many tears in certain circles. However, publishing in social media one's joy over his death, and insulting his memory is not something that is considered polite or respectful. A young man in Barcelona did just that. But rather than be ostracized socially, he's been arrested on a charge of committing a hate crime.
The funny thing is that until this latest tweet, he had been opening false social media accounts, threatening Civil Guards, police, and judges, then closing them down immediately so as not to be caught. None of those tweets elicited alarm from others who saw them, just the one in which he forcefully mentioned his joy at the death of the Attorney General, of which some people took screen shots and sent to the police.
While I do consider it a crime to threaten anyone with death on the internet or elsewhere, I don't see that stating your happiness at someone's death is a hate crime. It is, to me, merely your opinion. It is tasteless, and completely lacking in empathy to make such an opinion public upon the subject's death, especially since his death is still raw to those who loved him. But I don't see how it can be considered a crime. Whoever writes such a tweet is not stating lies about what the dead person may or may not have done, he is merely stating an opinion. But Spanish law seems to be reverting back to when one had to keep one's mouth shut on most subjects.
Sometimes the laws, while passed with honorable intentions, can be wrenched around and bite those who they weren't intended to bite. A law which does not allow anyone to make fun of terrorist victims was used to bring a history student before a judge and face a prison sentence some time ago. She had merely made a joke about Carrero Blanco, a high government minister from Franco's time, and something about how the U.S. through the Basque separatist group, ETA, had helped him get to the moon. (His car was blown up with a powerful bomb.)
His assassination happened in 1973. Since then, many jokes about his death have been published in book form, online, and used in stand-up comedies. Until now, with the conservative PP in power, no one complained about them. Rather, they involved a historic moment, and a historic character. His granddaughter pleaded with the court to let the history student go free. The student was sentenced to a year in prison and inability to opt for a public job in seven years, ending her dream of becoming a teacher.
Another question is when is something written public or private? Are messages on a private Whatsapp group private when the group numbers over a hundred? Or when it happens to be a group of local police officers? A Whatsapp group of over a hundred police officers on the night watch in Madrid came to the public's attention when various officers wrote xenophobic, racist, and nazi-type messages, and were denounced by a member of the group. The most troublesome were the messages that called for the mayor's death. (She is a leftist mayor and very popular.) Some wished her a "slow and agonizing death." Others wished she had been in her office on Calle Atocha when a couple of assassins turned up and killed those present back in 1977. Others went on to praise Hitler, saying he knew how to get the job done; they were talking about illegal immigrants. At the moment, those policeman have been suspended pending an internal investigation. The question is whether criminal charges can be brought. Their chat was for private use, not public knowledge. Yet, with over a hundred people in the same chat, it doesn't sound very private.
The old adage of "think before you speak" should be amplified to "think before you speak and write." In these times, many people consider social media like a simple conversation one might have with friends. Yes, but it is in a very public forum. What we write online is the same as if we were to shout it in a crowded square. Our private conversations become public. Sometimes, the forum is permissive, and all sorts of opinions, good and bad, are heard without a flicker of an eyelash. But these times make for a restrictive forum, in which opinions come under scrutiny of many official eyes. Whether or not we agree with something or someone, we should measure our words, and realize that shouting a very private opinion is not always a good idea.
Comments
Post a Comment