Report Inappropriate Comments

I decided to draft this for anyone who would like to attack another person on the Warwick Beacon Website. I will be forwarding a copy to John Howell as well. This is an example of how a person uses facts when commenting rather than inducing disparaging, hostile, or disagreeable opinions or feelings against a person.

I am sure the Warwick Beacon is aware of the 1st amendment of the constitution as written in the Bill of Rights. This amendment give citizens the rights of Freedom of the press and Freedom of Speech. The bill of rights also provides Amendments for a speedy trial, a public trial, an impartial jury, a Jury Trial for the accused, due process and an equal protection clause. All of these things together combine to form the idea that a person is innocent until proven guilty.

I know a newspaper reporter is protected by the freedom of speech. Is a person who comments on a story protected by the freedom of the press. I would argue that they are not a reporter and are not protected by the freedom of the press. I would say that they are protected by the freedom of speech but I would hope that prior to posting a comment they have information to back up their claim. Without the ability to back up a claim it would be difficult for the person if confronted to defend themselves from a defamation suit.

Defamation

Any intentional false communication, either written or spoken, that harms a person's reputation; decreases the respect, regard, or confidence in which a person is held; or induces disparaging, hostile, or disagreeable opinions or feelings against a person.

Defamation may be a criminal or civil charge. It encompasses both written statements, known as LIBEL, and spoken statements, called slander.

The Warwick Beacon "Letters to the Editor" REQUIRE a name. The Warwick Beacon comment section allows for anonymous posts of comments. People hide behind screen names and comment on the articles. I have posted several times always under my actual name. When I post I regularly back up my opinion with facts, links to other articles or public records. Others simply lash out and name call thinking they are protected from libel, slander and defamation of character.

The Warwick Beacon is giving anonymous people the ability and the avenue to defame and slander others. The Beacon doesn't give people the ability to edit their comments or delete their comments. The Beacon also doesn't have a person who reviews and approves the posts prior to public view.

When a news reporter does a story that have the right to keep their sources confidential. Does a person who comments believe they have the same protection as a source when they are not reported on in the story? The fact is prior to writing the story, the newspaper has no idea who may or may not comment on a story. I do not believe a person who comments is a protected source. I do know that the newspaper allows for people to comment on a story anonymously but has a record of the name and email of the person who is commenting under a screen name.

According to the Beacon Registration policy, Member registration requires "users agree to provide certain Personally Identifiable Information, such as your name, e-mail address, street address, and age".

Users become "members" when they register and as the terms stipulate," If you become a Member, you accept responsibility for all activities that occur under your account." Additionally, the Warwick Beacon "reserve the right to terminate Membership and deny access to the site to any person who violates this Terms Of Use. "

The Beacon has reserved the right to terminate an account of a person that does not follow the terms they agreed to when the registered to become a member. You state a user should " not use the Web Site for any purpose that is unlawful".

Regarding contributing content and directly from the terms of use section all registered members agree that, "All contributions will be accepted for publication on the Web site provided they adhere to these rules:

1. You agree not knowingly submit any false, defamatory, abusive, obscene, threatening, racially offensive, sexually explicit or illegal material to the Web site.

2. In posting comments on the contributions of others, you agree not to harass other participants.

3. You may not submit information that is libelous or defamatory or that discloses private or personal matters concerning any person."

The terms also clearly state, "This web site does not endorse and is not responsible for any statement, opinion, advice given or made in discussion forums. Your use of the discussion forums is at your own risk." The Warwick Beacon seems to be protected from any remarks a person makes on the comment section but also seems to be warning that others who comment are doing so at their own risk.

The terms also reference User Content Removal. It states to the member , "You acknowledge that this web site and/or its designees shall have the right (but not the obligation), in their sole discretion, to move, remove, or block any User Content for any reason, including without limitation that such User Content violates the Terms of Service or is otherwise objectionable. "

"This web site does not intend to engage in any prior review of notes posted to discussion areas, but it reserves the right in its sole discretion and for any reason to delete or redirect any information or other content posted to this web site (including posts to discussion areas), regardless of whether the information or other content violates the rules for content described in above policies. Further, we reserve the right to limit or terminate service to participants who violate the terms of this Agreement. "

I would suggest that any member who contributed to the comment section be aware that they are not protected by freedom of the press and additionally, freedom of speech does not give a person protection for slander, libel and defamation of character.

I might suggest a warning pop-up for your comment section that members are not protected by freedom of the press and that the Warwick Beacon is not held responsible for the posts of others. I would also warn that while each person who comments has the right of free speech that free speech does not include defamation of character or libel and slander. The Beacon may require that upon logging on to the site the member agree to this in a popup as a reminder. Although once again the Beacon is covered by the terms a member agrees to when they register for a name. "This web site is not responsible for censoring or monitoring postings but it reserves the right to enforce the policies outlined in this document, and reserves the right to move or remove notes at its sole discretion and without explanation. "

The individual providing comments is responsible for their post and can be held accountable by a court of law where they will be very happy that they are protected by the 5th, 6th, 7th and 14th amendments in the Bill of Rights. They will have the protection that they do not want to afford others. A person accused of the most heinous crime is innocent until proven guilty. If convicted I have always thought the punishment should fit the crime. Any person who commits a crime against a child, the elderly, the handicapped or any person who cannot defend themselves should, once convicted, have the maximum penalty levied against them.

In closing, people have the right to freedom of speech and can comment but not slander, libel or defame. People who comment are not protected by freedom of the press. People who comment can have their posts deleted at any time. People who post have agreed to the terms of the Website including providing a name and email that can be traced to a screen name. A person Commenting is not a protected source for the newspaper and their identity is not protected by freedom of the press. People who decide they would like to induce disparaging, hostile, or disagreeable opinions or feelings against a person can be held responsible but the Beacon will not be held responsible.

Sincerely, Patrick Maloney Jr.