-Caveat Lector- Internet, free speech collide As talk halted, worry grows over AOL's control By AMY HARMON New York Times Service Like the divided generations of Irish before them, the two opposing camps of contributors to America Online's discussion group on Ireland rarely agree on anything. But when the world's leading online service suspended their contentious electronic debate last month, participants on both sides were united in their dismay. ``Don't stop just to appease the AOL Thought Police,'' one proponent of a united Ireland wrote to the Unionist contingent. ``I'd much rather have someone vehemently disagree with me than know that anyone has been silenced!'' America Online reopened its Irish Heritage discussion after a 17-day ``cooling off'' period. But the episode has fed a growing discomfort with the social and political power America Online has come to wield by dint of its surging popularity and its unusual purview over individual communication. And it underscores the challenges the company may face as it seeks with mixed success to maintain both civil discourse and satisfied customers while presiding over 180,000 continuing conversations on topics from the teenage idols 'N Sync to presidential impeachment. Difficult balance Balancing free expression with civility has always been a struggle for America Online and other electronic publishers that provide areas where people can voice their opinions by typing them into the ether. But it is America Online's scope combined with its editorial control that some critics say is cause for concern. With 15 million subscribers, America Online is now the gateway to cyberspace for more Americans than the next 15 largest Internet service providers combined, according to a report by the International Data Corp., a market research firm. Last week, announcing strong earnings, the company said 1.6 million accounts were added in the last three months of 1998 alone. But some members have begun to chafe at its definition of civility, or at least the way it seems sometimes arbitrarily applied. And some civil liberties advocates are scrutinizing the service more closely as a new breed of institution that governs speech and yet is immune from First Amendment claims. Growing concerns A flurry of recent clashes in discussion areas ranging from race relations to fiction writing have served to heighten concerns over the company's more subtle methods of monitoring the discussions on its message boards -- the continuing discussions that subscribers can follow and contribute to over time, as distinct from the simultaneous and sometimes chaotic (but also monitored) exchanges in what it calls chat rooms. In particular, some subscribers cite the online service's practice of deleting message board postings without explanation and of attaching the equivalent of demerit marks to the accounts of individuals deemed to have offended another subscriber. ``The question is, who gets to decide what's `offensive?' '' says Renee Rosenblum-Lowden of Riegelsville, Pa., who recalls being cited for a violation for posting a message in a debate on abortion advising an opponent, ``If you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen.'' Under America Online's contract, universally referred to among members in both noun and verb form as TOS, for ``terms of service,'' all subscribers promise not to ``harass, threaten, embarrass, or do anything else to another member that is unwanted.'' Often transgressions are reported to America Online officials by other discussion group participants, whose identities are not released to those they accuse. According to the company's subscriber contract, three such violations may result in the suspension or termination of an account. Targeted by opponents Rosenblum-Lowden -- whose screen name is now ``Prejteach 2'' because her ``Prejteach'' account was closed -- says she and a group of other women who take part in discussions on the Women in Action board have been chosen as targets for complaints by those who disagree with their liberal views. ``Unlike a court of law, you don't face your accusers,'' she said. ``That gives people free rein.'' America Online officials concede that judging what is unduly offensive in often-complex political disputes or long-running personal battles can be tricky, especially given the volume and range of messages. That is why the company has enlisted nearly 14,000 volunteers to patrol the boards, and employs a group of about 100 known as the Community Action Team to determine when a comment crosses the line. In intervening in conversations between its users, America Online says its objective is to maintain a sense of community. Although legal liability for libelous statements appearing on its boards was once more of a concern, a provision of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 essentially grants online services immunity from prosecution over such matters, characterizing them as a ``common carrier'' like a telephone company -- simply a means by which information is transmitted, with no responsibility for the information itself. Irish board an extreme case Most terms-of-service violations are handled case by case. In an extreme case like the Irish board, where dozens of violations were being reported every day by the most active participants, the company said there were enough profane and offensive postings that it became necessary to shut down the whole discussion. The discussion archives, which sometimes remain on the service for several years, were wiped clean during the weeks that the board was shut down, so no trace remains. ``There's a certain amount of judgment required in situations on whether something is particularly harassing or threatening of other members,'' said Katherine Boursecnik, America Online's vice president for network programming. ``That's where things get the most difficult. We train people to be agnostic about the specific content and to look more at things like tone: Is it threatening, harassing, profane, vulgar?'' But given the well-documented tendency of normally sober citizens to act out online, the problems of privacy protection and threats to minors -- as well as congressional efforts to regulate online speech -- Boursecnik said the company's supervisory policies were necessary to provide the open atmosphere its customers wanted. ``We are a service that prides ourselves on having a wide-ranging appeal to a wide range of individuals,'' she added. ``But at the same time we're also a family service.'' `Comfortable' community Indeed, for many subscribers, America Online's virtue is its controlled environment. A members-only online service distinct from the unfettered Internet, America Online has achieved market dominance by promoting itself as a place where families and first-time Internet users can feel comfortable. While members can venture out into the World Wide Web and other parts of the Internet from the online service, many seldom do, preferring America Online's relative safety and familiarity. The service is far from the only Internet discussion area to enforce its own standards of acceptable speech. Popular Web destinations like the search and directory site Yahoo, discussion-oriented sites like Theglobe.com, and sites operated by traditional publishers reserve the right to remove postings on the message boards they provide to Internet users. And those who find America Online's terms unacceptable can always go to another online service, or to the Internet's entirely unmonitored forums called news groups. But America Online's extraordinary market dominance, critics argue, makes it the only place in practical terms for a growing number of people to speak their mind in cyberspace. Many Internet users find the unmoderated news groups too technically complex to use and too overrun with advertising to be productive for discussion. DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
