Trolling

   Children know that trolls are malevolent and live under bridges. In a park near my childhood home, there was a bridge which I refused to cross despite my mother's assurance that it was safe.
   Nevertheless, I knew there was a troll under that rickety bridge, lurking ... 

   Today, people worry about trolls waiting under internet bridges, stalking the unwary and posting malevolent and "fake news" about them. The latest report is about a journalist who exposed the activities of trolls on Twitter.
   In retaliation, the Twitter trolls posted many thousands of malevolent denials, enough so that the company cancelled the journalist's account, thus giving the trolls a victory.
   The journalist managed to regain access, but the damage was done, and the trolls remain under the internet bridge, waiting to attack the unwary.
   One solution might be to have the internet service providers such as Twitter, Facebook and the rest monitor the postings for accuracy, balance and fairness. This they have never done, on the premise that the internet is a public platform and the companies are not editors or censors.
  True enough, as far as it goes. The problem is that it doesn't go far enough.
  News media, both print and broadcast, are also platforms for information and comment and they have editors to select which stories get what amount of space and time and which do not. Newspapers also carry letters to the editor to convey alternate opinions, if not alternate facts.
   The tradition of free speech enables anyone to mount a physical platform in a public square and speak at length on whatever topic. Or distribute comments and opinions either printed on an office copier or published on the internet.
   Moreover, there are limits to freedom of speech. For example, you can't yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater. The laws against libel and slander also apply. But even these have limits, leaving public figures open to criticism and comments that, when said of so-called "ordinary citizens" would be libelous. In addition, satire and comedy can bring some really outrageous jokes targeted at others, especially politicians.
   Readers and viewers have the option to read and share these comments and opinions, or to ignore them.
   You may have the right of free speech. But others have the right to ignore you.
   So the puzzle is this: Should Twitter, Facebook and the rest be held responsible for the content distributed on their platforms, or should the readers and viewers have the choice of ignoring the trolls or canceling their subscriptions, just as angry newspaper readers used to do in years gone by?
   The choice for this editor is to stay off the bridge platform. That way, the trolls can't get you.
   Either that, or follow Mom's advice: Get on the bridge and ignore the trolls like they don't exist.