In a memo to the FCC,  Over thirty organizations have asked them to open up a probe on “hate speech” and “misinformation” in media.

“Hate has developed as a profit-model for syndicated radio and cable television programs masquerading as ‘news’,”

The request further urged the Commission to:

“examine the extent and effects of hate speech in media, including the likely link between hate speech and hate crimes, and to explore non-regulatory ways to counteract its negative impacts….”

The memo is extensive and detailed.  It makes great points.  I agree that “hate is for sale” in 21st Century Media and on the internet including Social Media.  It has become the primary means of profit for many talk pundits. It is dished out for free on blogs, Twitter and Facebook.  While networks such as Facebook  would never admit it, hate speech does have a monetized value in social media. When a network monetizes the free exchange of ideas and a portion of those ideas are hate speech you can put a dollar sign on  it.

Hate speech is a viral epidemic that has  spiraled out of control with no end in site.  Something needs to be done.  Something, but not this.  An FCC study is an interesting and noble concept but also an expensive and dangerous waste of time.  It’s an information gathering mission  doing nothing more than documenting the obvious. It  can either sit in a file to be studied by academics or be used in an attempt to regulate. Regulation is a non-starter. We have this little thing called the 1st Amendment. Hate speech enjoys protection in this country like no other country in the world. The academics can conduct their own studies without the FCC muscling into our minds.

It is also simply not feasible.  Where would the FCC begin?  How would they decide the parameters of the study?  Are they going to nitpick every pissy thing said in cable media and on the internet?  What about social media? If you listen to some, Facebook is fast on its way to for many purposes becoming the internet. Despite their rules against hate speech, it runs rampant within the borders of the new “3rd largest country”  Twitter for all intensive purposes has no rules against hate speech. You can’t make a true threat of bodily harm but other than that its the Wild West.  Is the FCC going to assert jurisdiction over these private companies to gather data? Good luck. Regardless, there is simply too much data.  This would be nothing more than a “hit and run” random sample study.

How will they define hate speech?  It’s easy if someone calls me a kike or uses another standard racial or ethnic slur. That’s too easy. What about the subjective media rhetoric?  We have seen claims of Sedition against politicians, racism against our President and every perversion in between. Cable and online hate speech associated with the Israeli-Palestine conflict could be a complete study in its own right.  How will the internal values of those evaluating content affect their decision on what constitutes hate speech?  What’s hate speech to one person is simply the truth to someone else.  I had someone tell me once that calling that Denver Nuggets “The Thuggets” was hate speech  She was dead serious. She blocked me on Twitter.  Too many questions with no objective means to provide answers.

Finally, we have what amounts to the government creating  a “hate list”.    Joseph McCarthy did that once, holding up a piece of paper in Wheeling West Virginia with the names of  of communists allegedly working in the State Department. It was of course bullshit.  There was no list.  America however, then and there, fell into one of its darkest periods.  I certainly would not want to be on an FCC official hate speech list.  Even if that is not the intent, when you start attaching names to negative content, there is a “defacto list” even if there is no piece of paper. Cable pundits who profit off of hate speech love to talk about  lists.

The vaccine for the for hate speech virus is not to deal with it on the back end with government studies. It starts at home with parenting.  It’s too late for the Beck’s and Olbermanns of the world.  They are who they are.  An FCC study is not going to change them or stem the tide of evil rhetoric.   It will simply give pundits more fodder and create a specter of government regulation and McCarthyism. Once again, more to talk about but other than that, no upside at all.

I sat down with former New York Post Reporter and Twitter activist, Melissa Jane Kronfeld. We discussed her recent Twitter campaign to raise public awareness as to the plight of kidnapped Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit.   Shalit was abducted on 25 June 2006 by Palestinian militants in a cross border raid and has been held been held in captivity by Hamas since then.  In early October 2009 a video of Gilad Shalit was  released by Hamas proving he was alive as of Sept 14, 2009.

I previously wrote an article entitled “The Legality Of Social Media Gaming”.   I analyzed a legal dispute between USocial and the social media giant Digg.  USocial is an Australia based company in the business of selling Diggs for money. They are in the business of gaming Digg.  I analyzed the Cease and Desist sent by Digg to USocial.  I looked at whether Digg would win a lawsuit against USocial or could shut them down through economic warchest superiority.  After writing the article I emailed USocial advising them that I was an attorney and had written about the case.  I asked if they would keep me updated as to any developments.  I received a very nice reply stating that they would be happy do so.  After not hearing anything for a month I once again wrote USocial asking for an update. I was not expecting to get anything more than a perfunctory response with the current status if I received any response at all.  I was surprised when  received an email basically laying out their position and admitting they use a software program to game Digg.  I contacted USocial to confirm that this information was already in the public domain.  I received a response that it was.  My article addressed most of the issues raised although I admittedly did miss the fact that USocial is based in Australia.  I have no experience in international jurisdiction issues or how any business USocial does with Diggers residing in the United States(if any)  would affect venue.  I will leave that one alone.  Digg could also go after those involved in the design and marketing of the software aruging that its sole purpose is to game Digg and whatever legal arguments go with that. As it appears that none of the involved parties lived in the United States, it is questionable whether Digg, being in the weak financial  it is would do anything unless it could get venue in the United States. Here is the email.  It is self-explanatory.

I am being stalked in the social media universe by a Fanboy.  It sounds like something out of Nightmare On Elm Street doesn’t it?  Here is the deal.  Some idiot named Mike Pinto who runs a website called Fanboy has been spending his “valuable” time hunting down my blog content on the Digg social media site leaving arguably defamatory comments. What is a Fanboy?  Here is the term as defined by Wikipedia:

“Fanboy is a term used to describe any individual who is devoted to a single subject in an emotional or fanatical manner, or to a single point of view within that subject, often to the point where it is considered an obsession.”

That says everything you need to know about Mr. Pinto.  For some unknown reason he has been “social media obsessing” about me for the last few months. His Fanboy site is actually pretty cool focusing on anime, science fiction, science in general among other geek type stuff.  I happen to be a Trekkie and the guy has put some cool Star-Trek content up. I have no problem giving his site some props.

The guy is still an idiot.  It is res ipsa loquitur. Here is why.  An article I wrote about former professional wrestler Jeff Gaylord was posted on Digg.  The Digg comments are all pretty inane in general, none having anything to do with the story.  That is not unusual within the social media universe. The social media community is no different than any other.  There will be those who like you and dislike you based on perceptions formed. The posted comments will to a degree reflect that.  These perceptions are never grounded in reality.  They can not be because 99 percent of the people have never even met or spoken to each other.  We simply know user names and  the type of content submitted by a person.  I am no different. There are people in the social media realm that like me and dislike me for whatever reason they use to legitimize their feelings.  In the Digg realm there are those who do not like me because I wrote an article about getting banned for scripts and admitting that I had gamed the Digg system so some of my content could reach their front page.  Ironically that article was my last  to make the Digg front page. There are also those in social media who do not like me simply because they do not like my brother.   The reasons are limitless bounded only by the limits of what people who have never met either of us can conjure up in their  minds.  The angry people are easy to spot because the comments are always about Mark or me personally and not the content.  I have no issue with it.   If it makes “Diggers”  or other social media users feel better they can rant away and move on to the next thing that angers them that day.

It is the obsessive Pinto Fanboy/ stalker behavior that is creepy. Not as creepy as the fixation SEC attorney Jeffrey Norris had with Mark Cuban but creepy just the same.  It makes you contemplate the things that go through a person’s mind to negatively fixate on someone they have never met in a realm meant to be fun and entertaining.  Here is Fanboy Michael Pinto’s  comment in response to a my Jeff Gaylord article:

“Isn’t Brian Cuban under investigation from SEC for insider trading charges? Before he yammers on about anything relating to the law shouldn’t he wait until he’s in the clear?”

He has left minor variations of the exact same comment on three other posts of mine that showed up on Digg.  Considering not everything I write gets submitted to Digg it is a pretty high fanboy/stalker ratio.   So why is Pinto an idiot?  The answer is in his comments.  Pinto is clearly so wrapped up in his Star Trek fantasy world  so as to be completely unaware of anything going on in the real world around him  To be unaware that it is my brother  Mark who is involved with the SEC.  To have missed the international news coverage. The coverage on CNN, Fox, NBC when it was announced is pretty oblivious to the world around you.

It is possible that I am not giving Pinto enough credit. I admittedly do not know him.  He may be very aware of the facts.  If that is the case he must have missed the part of my blog where it talks about my occupation as an attorney before he began posting arguably defamatory statements about my being investigated by the SEC.  Hopefully he is not under some illusion that because he posed it as a question, it is a defense to a defamation lawsuit.   If he wants to ring me up, I will be happy to  “yammer” on to him about the law of defamation.  My non-legal advice to Pinto is that should I decide to pursue legal action his best bet is to claim what I first said about him. Simply admit he is an idiot and did not know the true facts.

I am being tongue and cheek to an extent.  The people who know me are for the most part educated and intelligent. They actually pay attention to the world around them beyond Star Trek, Star Wars and Anime.  My skin is also thick.  I have no interest in winning a legal judgment against Mr. Pinto and taking Fanboy from him.  If I did, in the nature of a true Cuban family “greed is good” profiteer, I would change the web site name to “Dallas Mavericks Fanboy” and start selling Dallas Mavs merchandise on it. I hear William Shatner is a Mavs fan.  Instead I will be happy to give Mr. Pinto some true facts about myself.  This will give him some much needed social media credibility should he wish to continue “yammering” on about me in the social media universe.  It will also give him protection in a defamation lawsuit since truth is an absolute defense.  Here you go Mike: