THE COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION: CRIME AND PUNISHMENT ON LINE

Dear readers, we live in a time when justice is not always delivered in a courtroom. Today, trials often take place on social media through hashtags, comments, shares, and likes. All it takes is a viral video, image, or message for public opinion to deliver its verdict, without the need for full evidence, a defense, or due process.

In this "court of public opinion", people can be accused, judged, and punished within minutes. Their names are damaged, their careers are paused, and their lives can be changed forever. What's most concerning is that, in some cases, this happens because of information that is misunderstood, taken out of context, or even completely false. 

How much power do social networks have to judge someone? Is it fair for a person to be "canceled" for a mistake without the chance to explain or make things right? Are we confusing justice with digital revenge?

In this post, I want us to reflect on this modern phenomenon where anyone can become a judge, a witness, or even the accused, and where  punishment no longer comes from a courtroom, but from a single click.  

One case that clearly illustrates this issue is that of Cheryl Bennett, a physical education teacher in the United Kingdom. In 2024, a video manipulated using deepfake technology appeared to show her making racist comments during a local election campaign. The clip was widely shared on TikTok and other platforms, leading to public outrage, threats, and demands for her to be fired, even though there was no real proof that she had ever said those words.  

Later, an investigation confirmed the video was fake, and Cheryl received legal compensation. However, the damage had already been done. Her reputation was tarnished, she experienced serious emotional stress, and her professional life was disrupted. 

This case shows how social media can act as judge and jury, punishing individuals before the truth is even known.  

The case of Cheryl Bennett raises important questions about how we, as digital citizens, use our voices online. Should a viral video be enough to destroy someone's career? Can we really trust what we see on the internet? And more importantly, are we contributing to justice or to injustice when we rush to judge others based on what social media shows us?

In the "court of public opinion" there is no presumption of innocence, no time for explanation, and often, no path to redemption. A single post, a manipulated video, or a trending hashtag can become a digital sentence that changes someone's life forever.

This is not just about Cheryl, it's about all of us. It's about how easily we can become the accusers, the judges, and the executioners, all with the tap of a screen. And it's about asking ourselves: are we using our digital power responsibly?  

Crime and punishment have always been part of human society. From ancient times to the modern world, we have created laws, courts, and systems to decide who is guilty and what consequences they should face. But as the world changes, so do our ideas of justice.

Today, punishment does not always come from a judge in a courtroom. It can come from social pressure, digital communities, or even silence and rejection. In many cases, the real question is no longer just "Was there a crime?", but rather, "Was the punishment fair?"

True justice must be guided by truth, balance, and understanding. Punishment alone does not fix what went wrong, it must also offer the chance to learn, to grow, and, when possible, to repair. If we lose sight of that, we risk turning justice into revenge.

As a global society, we must continue asking ourselves: Are we building a system that protects, educates, and restores or one that simply punishes and forgets?

Dear readers, I invite you to share your opinions, 

What are your thoughts on this topic? Let's continue the conversation in the comments below.