I remember 1995, when I first started writing online — it was awesome. You could — and I did — open up your entire heart, spill your guts out to a faceless, anonymous audience who could choose to listen or go somewhere else and not care. Those who listened, who cared, who sympathized with my rantings about how much I hated the government, hated my teachers, hated everything (hey, I was 15 in 1995) formed a bond with me, and I keep in touch with them to this day. Being able to express myself so freely and completely without hindrance made my angst-ridden teenage life possible.
Being able to hold politicians, companies, and individuals accountable for their actions by publicly calling them out for their misbehavior is what makes the internet a powerful tool for the consumer and the voter, what gives the silent majority a voice against tyranny and oppression.
So naturally, such a voice should be oppressed. But how?
Introducing The Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act would make it a felony punishable by up to two years in prison to transmit an electronic communication (”including email, instant messaging, blogs, websites, telephones, and text messages”) “with the intent to coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person…to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior.”
Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person, using electronic means to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both….
["Communication"] means the electronic transmission, between or among points specified by the user, of information of the user’s choosing, without change in the form or content of the information as sent and received; …
["Electronic means"] means any equipment dependent on electrical power to access an information service, including email, instant messaging, blogs, websites, telephones, and text messages.
Now the death of Megan Meier was a tragedy, I have no disagreement with that. There is something absolutely psychologically wrong with any adult who colludes with teenagers to systematically torment and psychologically torture a teenager with a well-known history of mental instability. It is morally wrong and in some states illegal to put a loaded handgun in the hand of a suicidal person and tell them, oh I don’t know, how about, “Everybody in O’Fallon knows how you are. You are a bad person and everybody hates you. Have a shitty rest of your life. The world would be a better place without you.”[1]
However, while free speech is not protected if it is with the intent to provoke or promote harm (can’t yell fire in a crowded theatre if there’s no fire, for example), the broad message of the new law is far greater that that. It goes farther than what your mother always said, “if you can’t say anything nice, don’t say anything at all,” and actually gets into the Orwellian territory of “If you say bad things, you’ll go to jail.” We’re not just protecting the Megan Meiers of the world any more. We’re now dancing in the territory of censorship.
UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh outlines six ways that this law could punish Citizen Journalists (like yours truly), newspaper reporters, personal bloggers, and posters on social networking sites:
1. I try to coerce a politician into voting a particular way, by repeatedly blogging (using a hostile tone) about what a hypocrite / campaign promise breaker / fool / etc. he would be if he voted the other way. I am transmitting in interstate commerce a communication with the intent to coerce using electronic means (a blog) “to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior” — unless, of course, my statements aren’t seen as “severe,” a term that is entirely undefined and unclear. Result: I am a felon, unless somehow my “behavior” isn’t “severe.”
2. A newspaper reporter or editorialist tries to do the same, in columns that are posted on the newspaper’s Web site. Result: Felony, unless somehow my “behavior” isn’t severe.
3. The politician votes the wrong way. I think that’s an evil, tyrannical vote, so I repeatedly and harshly condemn the politician on my blog, hoping that he’ll get very upset (and rightly so, since I think he deserves to feel ashamed of himself, and loathed by others). I am transmitting a communication with the the intent to cause substantial emotional distress, using electronic means (a blog) “to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior.” (I might also be said to be intending to “harass” — who knows, given how vague the term is? — but the result is the same even if we set that aside.) Result: I am a felon, subject to the usual utter uncertainty about what “severe” means.
4. A company delivers me shoddy goods, and refuses to refund my money. I e-mail it several times, threatening to sue if they don’t give me a refund, and I use “hostile” language. I am transmitting a communication with the intent to coerce, using electronic means “to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior.” Result: I am a felon, if my behavior is “severe.”
5. Several people use blogs or Web-based newspaper articles to organize a boycott of a company, hoping to get it to change some policy they disapprove of. They are transmitting communications with the intent to coerce, using electronic means “to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior.” Result: Those people are a felon. (Isn’t threatening a company with possible massive losses “severe”? But again, who knows?)
6. John cheats on Mary. Mary wants John to feel like the scumbag that he is, so she sends him two hostile messages telling him how much he’s hurt her, how much she now hates him, and how bad he should feel. She doesn’t threaten him with violence (there are separate laws barring that, and this law would apply even in the absence of a threat). She is transmitting communications with the intent to cause substantial emotional distress, using electronic means “to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior.” Result: Mary is a felon, again if her behavior is “severe.”
Cites:
image of LA Subway Station by 
