Taiwanese freedom of speech advocates
"I know when the tofu stinks, because I smell it" ~ by Unknown
If you have read my previous post about the legal case of the blogger, who was punished for insulting a restaurant owner, you probably have noticed that it sparked a very heated debate in the comments. It seemed to me, that some English speaking bloggers and twitterers, who so fiercely advocated "freedom of speech" in their own blog posts felt very insulted, that I have put them on the spot by mentioning some of their bogus claims, that were full of factual errors and unflattering interpretations. When criticizing them, I have chosen my words wisely, however I've been called "delusional, naive, sexist, creepy, rude, unstable, entitled, immature" and have been challenged with sarcasm and underlying hostility in many of the comments. Luckily there were voices of support and they were much appreciated. As this is my 4th year of blogging, I have had my fair share of heated debates and ad hominem attacks, that's why I was just smiling, when I saw how Forumosans flooded my "avoided" blog. Maybe I'm too immature and should've insulted them back, because it's very mature to support your argument with insults. Anyway, I'm happy, that they taught me some valuable lessons today.
However, I was wondering, what would've happened, if I had singled out one of these commentators and written another post, mentioned their real name and address (or the address of the company, where they work), called them [insert whichever insult] and fabricated a story about them, that would tarnish their reputation. Would they still support my freedom of speech?
Somehow I'm not sure about that anymore. How about you?
15 KAFKAESQUE COMMENTS:
Hm, I guess I have to read that previous post! Because now I'm left unsure of whether you were in support of this blogger being punished for the insult or not, whether by English speaking you mean Taiwanese who speak English or native English speakers, and last but not least if the ones you are wondering if they would still support you if you personally attacked someone are the freedom of speech supporters or the punishment supporters as I don't know what your position was..
June 28, 2011 4:19 AM
Dear me ... I realise that last paragraph takes the form of a reductio ad absurdum but come on:
'mentioned their real name and address (or the address of the company, where they work), called them "dirty cockroaches" or some other derogatory names'
Who did this? You've moved from saying the judge ruled on the basis that she had a personal agenda to implying she called the owner a dirty cockroach ('evil tyrant' was what I saw).
That you criticise others for, at best, being too loose with their words and, at worst, wilfull distortions is more than a little ironic.
Do you think Ms Liu might have a case against you?
June 28, 2011 10:17 AM
@Carina: My main point of that post was poor reporting on the story from the media to the bloggers. I noted, that I found the verdict too harsh, but never said she should not gotten punished. I explained why the judge leaned to her conviction in the part about the defamation law in the ROC and in the part about the cultural and societal particularities of Taiwan.
@James: If it's reductio ad absurdum, then why do you go in such detail and try to deconstruct it? Not sure, why you mentioned that name, as I have not quoted her in this post, nor ever mentioned her name on my blog. I feel you are trying to twist my words just to find an argument against me. That's not a noble thing to do, I'm disappointed. I could've chosen 'evil tyrant', 'dork', 'a..hole' or whichever other insult there is, it doesn't matter for the point I was trying to make, which is that staunch advocates of free speech are usually very offended, when someone's unpleasant free speech is targeted at them.
June 28, 2011 11:58 AM
MKL: both of us might be surprised if we saw freedom of expression in the United States at work - might be. I'm not familiar with the practice there, but many for many bloggers there or anywhere, the right to speak out seems to matter more than any other right. It is something that would seem to be in a blogger's interest, at least so long as nothing as described in your post would happen to them.
In Britain (not known as a repressive place, and with a great tradition of freedom), both freedom of expression and protection of reputation are referred to as fundamental rights. The court case discussed in your previous entry about the Taichung blogger still looks somewhat unclear to me, but then, it hit a nerve, and from what I can see, the discussion about it in the blogosphere became one about fundamental values, right away. In some other places, where people feel more secure about their liberties, such heated debates would only be conceivable when it comes to, say, the Middle East.
There are of course many reasons to distrust the KMT, be it for their foreign policy, be it for their historic role on Taiwan, or for the way the trial against Chen Shui-bian was conducted. Trust seems to be a scarce commodity on Taiwan, and that's understandable. But if ppl allow that feeling to rule them, it doesn't help to see things clearly.
Some two years ago, Adam Soboczynski, a Polish-born German (I think - maybe he's still a Polish citizen), wrote an article about the internet I didn't agree with, but I can see some of his points. Especially on days like these ;-)
June 28, 2011 1:55 PM
Sorry but I thought I made it perfectly clear why I mentioned her.
You blatantly implied, through association, that she had called the guy a 'dirty cockroach'.
It's interesting that JR should start bringing up freedom of expression in the UK. He is quite correct that it is not held as some all-trumping sacrosanct right in the way it is in the US.
You may surprised to learn that I agree as well that there is a limit.
My American friends (and others of other nationalities), pretty much to a man, support free speech without restriction even in cases such as the recent Westboro Supreme Court reversal of the decision against the Westboro nutbags:
http://www.aolnews.com/2011/03/02/westboro-court-decision-pits-free-speech-against-common-decency/
I don't agree. If Mr Snyder had given Phelps or his cronies as a slap - which would have been perfectly justifiable as they gloated at his son's funeral - he would doubtless have been charged with assault.
To me, what these people are doing is tantamount to assault.
But you open up a can of worms by raising the UK's libel laws JR. Despite MKL's vague statements about the constitution in Taiwan, the libel laws are fairly similar to the UK (which doesn't have a written constitution by the way) in that they permit for fair comment.
Truth is not sufficient if it is deemed there has been an attempt to bring the plaintiff down in the estimation of their peers.
Likewise, in the UK at least, falsity is not sufficient for a succesful suit, the Jessye Norman case being a well-known example of this: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/opera-libel-case-is-over-before-the-fat-lady-even-opened-her-mouth-1186003.html
The point is: 1) the slander laws here are idiotic. 2) the libel laws are being interpreted in such a ludicrous manner that your comment MKL may fall foul of them.
I'm not sure what your implication is about me mentioning Ms Liu. It seems to be that I was up to something sinister.
In fact, I was trying to demonstrate that in being a little too loose with your words, you could be hoist by your own petard.
June 28, 2011 4:27 PM
Oh, and when I said it was reductio ad absurdum, I didn't mean it was absurd MKL - just deliberately distorting things.
June 28, 2011 4:33 PM
I'm not commenting on Ms Liu's case, because I don't expect to become familiar with the story, James. My point is that frequently, freedom of expression is put above any other right - something where we seem to agree to some extent.
June 28, 2011 4:59 PM
My point = where I'm taking issue.
June 28, 2011 5:00 PM
Sorry - mention of Ms Liu was to MKL who was taking issue with me mentioning her for some reason.
June 28, 2011 5:07 PM
As long as you've made intense and proper research on things (which you have), you have the right to state your opinion. Ignore the others. :)
June 28, 2011 8:19 PM
I thought you done a very good job with that last post! Don't let them nutters tell you otherwise >:)
June 28, 2011 10:55 PM
@James: Thanks for your comments, I appreciate your effort, even if I disagree with you in many ways.
@Justrecently: Thanks for coming and challenging all of us, you raised the quality of the discourse on my 2 posts hinsichtlich the controversial trial. I hope I can engage in this kind of blogging in the future in order to attract your return, but I will probably switch back to my old style of personal observations and travelogues. I do find it very frustrating at times, that my English has limits and that I come across in a different way than I intended. I didn't anticipate such an uproar by only linking to some poorly researched blog posts. It's surprising, how much ego is present in the Taiwan blogosphere. If you ask me - too much, because a lot of things get distorted and twisted and people just leave it at that (um den Gesichtsverlust zu vermeiden? Vielleicht). I miss bloggers challenging each other, instead of patting each other on the back. But that's just how it is here, maybe part of an small island mentality. I have to admit, that Taiwan is challenging and it does change you. It changed me and I'm here only few months.
@Gnetch: Thank you :) I will.
@soNotIram: Thank you as well :)
July 1, 2011 12:54 AM
No worries MKL. Not sure I agree about the mutual back slapping - at least not from me. I'm always up for a good old-fashioned row with anyone!
As you're obviously something of a polyglot, I scarcely think you should be apologising for your language limits.
My Slovenian is hardly exemplary, though I was fortunate enough to visit your charming country way too long ago.
July 1, 2011 10:18 AM
I hope I can engage in this kind of blogging in the future in order to attract your return
Hey, I've commented on personal observations, too!
Btw, it was a timely thread, given the indictment of former president Lee Teng-hui on Thursday. Smells like very old fish. (Fortunately, I'm not commenting on a restaurant here.)
July 1, 2011 7:22 PM
@James, Justrecently: Thanks guys for the debate, was a pleasure to read your responses. Hope to have you back here soon.
July 3, 2011 5:09 PM
Post a Kafkaesque comment!