The Cyber "Catch-22": Internet Rights & Responsibilities

As a connoisseur of the absurdist and paradoxical sides of life, one must note the passing of the father of the contemporary cultural icon par excellence of paradoxical (and bureaucratic) entrapment – Joseph Heller and his classic, "Catch-22." It’s been a good while since reading the novel, but here’s the essence of "the catch": the novel’s protagonist, Yossarian, a WWII Air Force Pilot, wants to stop flying bombing missions as he fears for his life and the war is making him crazy. Yet, because he can rationally assess his vulnerability and mental instability he, ipso facto, cannot be crazy. Request denied. Keep flying soldier! (More recently, I’m sure the character of Corporal Klinger on the TV series "MASH" was inspired by Heller/Yossarian.)

While hardly of the creatively chaotic caliber of the Heller or television classics, for a brief while, recently, I experienced, if not a pure "22," at least a contradictory cyber catch. This past week "The Stress Doc" Website was bestowed an electronic award by HealthAtoZ.com for its, "superior content, ease of use, layout and overall appearance." As the name implies, AtoZ is a broad database of health-related information (including a medical spell checker). Then, a couple of days later came an interview by the publisher of Empowerment Magazine (www.Empowermag.com). The website’s mission is helping individuals create their own path and fulfilling their fullest potential. There will be a featured story about my evolution as an up and coming "netrepreneur."

Gentlemen, thank you both. However, the most startling news also provided a mark of distinction, but this time of a more notorious nature. A live client informed me that a relative (upon my client’s suggestion) had attempted to retrieve one of my writings. She got to "The Stress Doc" Home Page – www.stre ssdoc.com . Then, when trying to navigate the Psychohumor Essays link…ZAP! The WebNannies (or some watchdog equivalent) blocked further access. Oh my goodness. Have I transgressed some cyber standard of propriety? (Is this itself a contradiction in terms?) Is my site a danger to the moral welfare of today’s youth? Do the WebNannies need to get a life? What about the fact that my site has been singled out for it's health-supporting and life-fulfilling qualities? Okay, enough of the self-righteousness blather, Stress Doc.

Apparently, "WebNannies" is a software program that can be installed on an individual’s computer to block access usually to pornographic or sexually-explicit sites. Could the last newsletter highlighting bedroom escapades with Georgia, including an essay titled, "His Moans, Her Moans, Hormones," have been the catalytic culprit? (This is the first time I’m aware of being sanctioned. And knowing how some readers thrive on pointing out missteps, I’m assuming no previous censorship.)

Speaking with some America Online/Digital City Hosts, the Nannies can whip into repressive action if they discover even one taboo word. The Hosts explained how a few years ago AOL had a celebrated censorship episode. AOL was blocking messages or postings with that provocative "b"-word: "breast." It took the threat of a legal suit from members of an online Breast Cancer Support Group to help AOL be a little less Puritanical and more common sensical in its "hot button" reaction.

Virtual and Real Rights and Responsibilities

Now I’m several minds regarding this issue. Clearly, there’s much web content – of a pornographic and violent – nature that is inappropriate and potentially destructive…and not just for kids. For example, my recent series on workplace violence illustrated how racial tension in a federal agency department undergoing divisive reorganization was being acted out by some employees pulling up KKK websites. (This provocation was countered by playing tapes of Louis Farrakhan.)

Also, I recall a West Coast friend, an owner of a legal placement and document business, cautioning me well over a year ago to be more selective in the "Readers Submissions" section. She felt uncomfortable reading my newsletter in her workplace when it contained material that was bordering on the explicit (if not over the edge). And more conscious and careful selection of content ensued.

So too as a media/public performer and educator, I’ve occasionally crossed the propriety line and have swiftly experienced the sting of rebuke. The first time was spurred by a series of five minute inserts on stress and burnout for New Orleans Public Television. I relayed an encounter at a Tastee Donut shop while responding to a late-night munchies attack. Two men were arguing. One, finally, said something that was fairly preposterous. (Alas, I don’t recall the specifics.) His antagonist (a native of Louisiana, I assume) immediately countered: "Man…are you from Mississippi?" (Ah, who amongst us can completely resist the smirk or chuckle, that need to feel superior?)

Not surprisingly, this little story did not go over well with our viewers in Biloxi and the Mississippi Gulf Coast. After receiving a number of angry calls, the Station Manager, in no uncertain terms, let me know that the Tastee exchange was history. (I was next if he had more complaints of a similar nature.) Of course, he was right. It was a cheap shot; no higher power humor or redeeming purpose here. PBS must be concerned about public support. To his credit, this manager kept the edited segment on the air.

Sex and Humor: Definitely On the Edge

And finally, the Stress Doc’s media "sense and sensibility" has been shaped by live audience feedback and an appreciation for cultural context. For example, in New Orleans, in the ‘80s, I often ended my workshops on the following playfully bawdy note: "Remember, laughter is the best tension reliever and sex is second. So if you're having funny sex you're probably in good shape." One time, when I closed a convention talk with that line, one of the program organizers quickly stood up and announced, "Next year we bring the 'Stress Doc' back to speak on 'Funny Sex.'"

But humor, especially the sexual variety, is subject to the Stress Doc's theory of cultural relativity: that which plays well in "The Big Easy," doesn't always go over in the land of political correctness. It wasn't till I moved to Washington, DC that I truly learned that with certain kinds of humor, timing and trust are everything. Let me illustrate.

I was speaking to about 100 association executives shortly after I had moved to DC. At this convention workshop, as part of my opening remarks, I was explaining how the transition had helped put in perspective my geographic journey and mid-life synthesis. In my mid-20s, I left those Brooklyn and Queens roots and went into creative exile in New Orleans. (My "American in Cajun Paris" years.) Did a bunch of interesting things as a "multimedia social worker" but, eventually, there were no more mountains to climb in the bayou. I started having this urge to move to the nation's capital. I didn't understand it till I got here in 1990. Then I realized if New York City and New Orleans had a baby it would look like Washington, DC. (Of course, I still can't vouch for its legitimacy.)

Being a bit obsessive, I saw other parallels among the three distinct and otherwise different towns, including the urban vitality of "The Four R's: Rivers, Races, Restaurants...and Roaches! (And believe me, you don't know what startle stress means till a three inch New Orleans flying sucker has dive-bombed your neck.)

With this group of serious-minded professionals, I should have left well enough alone. But no...once you start coming from the obsessive edge, it's hard to stop. So here's my mind teetering on the brink, about to go into free fall: Now what if we decided to play around with this notion of cities playing around. What if DC tried to get it on with NYC? Let's think symbolically and big...think monumental. Can't you just picture the Washington Monument hitting on the Statue of Liberty. And Ms. Liberty feistily replying, "Georgie, believe me...I've dealt with all kinds. And I especially like big men. You and I could probably rewrite all those Guinness Book records...But I believe in practicing safe sex. And where the hell will you find a big enough condom? Now don't tell me the Goodyear Blimp. Please, don't flatter yourself."

Because I hadn’t sufficiently warmed up the audience, hadn’t sufficiently bonded with them, my provocative repertoire was met with an angry stony silence. The Moral: Start slowly then carry on with a big shtick!

A Final Word on Freedom and Boundaries

In conclusion, from Nannies to "No Nos," I do believe in the First Amendment right of free speech, even when other’s find it uncomfortable or offensive. However, sometimes with reluctance, I’ve evolved to embrace the notion that right and responsibility coexist. My brand of psychohumor needs to err on the side of healing rather than hostility. In a way, having public forums for self-expression is a privilege of a mostly democratic society or, at least, one that allows for democratic enclaves. The power of this verity has been crystallized most poignantly by a new friendship with an émigré from post-Tiennamen Square Mainland China. And while cyber space gives new global meaning to the concept of freedom of expression and, hopefully, the Internet will help open up more repressive societies, (not just wallets for online shopping) I also respect the real and virtual concept of boundaries.

Conceptual, cultural and legal boundary issues between nations and organizations in cyberspace, e.g., trademark, domain name, preventing the homogenization, if not Americanization of the world's countries and cultures, etc. provide mind boggling conundrums, beyond the scope of this essay. But the family that wants to protect their child from what they perceive or those WebNannies perceive as provocative material, clearly has the right to exercise such a boundary. Just as I have the right to present words and create a picture of what it means to be whole and fully human. And for me, this includes a sensual and spiritual, "safe" and playful attitude toward sex and healthy aggression as a vital part of the human condition.

So long live synergistic struggles between freedom and boundaries, rights and responsibilities, order and chaos. Here lies the vulnerable, ambiguous path for surmounting repression and that bureaucratic "Catch," for developing personal complexity and integrity. It’s also a credo to help you…Practice Safe Stress!

Mark Gorkin, LICSW, known as "The Stress Doc," is the Internet's and America Online's "Online Psychohumorist" (TM). An experienced psychotherapist, The Doc is a nationally recognized speaker and training and OD consultant specializing in Stress, Anger Management, Reorganizational Change, Team Building and HUMOR! His writings are syndicated by iSyndicate.com and appear in a wide variety of online and offline forums and publications, including AOL's Online Psych and Business Know How, WorkforceOnline, Mental Health Net, Financial Services Journal Online, Paradigm Magazine and Counseling Today. Check out his USA Today Online "Hotsite" Website -- www.stressdoc.com . For info on his workshops or for his free newsletter, email stressdoc@aol.com or call 202-232-8662. Spring 2000, look for The Art of Practicing Safe Stress: The Stress Doc's Survival Guide, published by AdviceZone.com.