On Dec. 15, 1791, something amazing happened in the United States of America. The First Amendment was adopted. It changed the face of America; in some ways for the better, in some ways for the worse. Men and woman died for it. People have been liberated by it and criticized within it, and now, online, people seem to be forgetting it.
It's freedom of speech.
Before I delve into the mess of "freedom of speech" online, let me first address why freedom of speech is so amazing and why we're lucky to have it.
Not only does freedom of speech give anyone the right to expresses his or her opinion on any subject, but it gives them the right to tack their name to it with no legal consequences. Libel and slander, however, do have legal consequences as lies and the like are different than opinions. Now, to clarify, freedom of speech doesn't go without social consequences. That's the beauty of it; we can disagree. We can agree and disagree in circles, and we do. There are political issues like health care and the war. Then there are deeper social issues (which, for some reason, seem to have turned into political issues) like religion, homosexuality and race. I can even express my disgust for onions, while you eat one raw right in front of me.
Another feature which can sometime be interpreted as negative is that everyone gets this right. Racists have freedom of speech, human rights activists have it, I have it and you have it. Both hate and support can be discussed openly.
Not everyone in the world has this right. In October, a Saudi man was sentenced to five years in jail and 1,000 lashes for talking about his sex life on TV. Living in a country that broadcasts shows like "Talk Sex with Doctor Sue," and "The Bachelor", this type of reprimand is hard to conceptualize.
We're lucky. We should be running up and down the street, expressing every unique thought we have to anyone who'll listen.
Unfortunately, the Internet seems to be turning into a shield for our opinions. Comments on stories online are riddled with anonymous replies. With freedom of speech comes the freedom not to speak. And, as unforeseen technologies and types of communication continue to erupt, the freedom to hide ourselves but still speak. This is our right. This is your right. However, when we are too afraid to be held accountable for what we say - something is lost. You have the right to remain anonymous, but I ask you, what is the benefit?
On CNN, users are able to comment on stories – an excellent feature which can help keep news organizations in check. The users must sign up for an account, which cuts down on spam.
Most users, however, create artificial user names, to hide their identities. For example, "Anonymous12345" or "Guest04". Most do not include a profile picture.
One user posted this on a health care story for CNN, "Not to offend anyone here (or there) but as an ordinary American, I'd cast my vote for Palin more because of what she has between her legs than ears. Though, abstinence now would make it a moot point! CNN, no censorship please! We are not China! :)"
This user is right. We are not China. However, despite not being in China, and being able to openly express opinions with no legal repercussions, the need is still felt to hide behind an artificial username. Ironic, don't you think?
The comment itself also points out why so many people remain anonymous. The sexist and offensive comment regarding Palin's gender is something this person likely wouldn't say if they had showed his or her face to it. Anonymity generates garbage.
Granted, a certain amount of anonymity on the Internet is safe. However, taking into the account that Facebook recently jumped in front of Google as the most visited site in the U.S. and Internet dating is an ever-increasing phenomenon – the argument begins to weaken. People just aren't concerned with their identities online – they are concerned with their personas. Being honest is truthful and people are afraid of the consequences of being themselves, even though in theory, there aren't any.
While initially, the reasons for remaining anonymous might be disguised as "safety" precautions – certain comments begin to get out of hand. For example, on a Fox News story about the health care bill, an anonymous user debating the bill told a user to "Have a good time and don't forget to slip under a gas truck and taste your own blood." Would this user have felt comfortable expressing such a disturbing opinion if his or her name were next to the comment? I doubt it.
is a member of the 
5 comments
“If we begin to be accountable for what we say… we will begin to cut back on the nonsense. The flood of inaccurate and misleading information will begin to subside. Thought provoking and educational online debates can flourish. Having a name attached to what we say holds us entirely accountable and when people have to be accountable, they tend to check their facts.”I can’t decide if this is tongue-in-cheek or if the author doesn’t read the signed feedback on DN columns.