The habit of saying or posting things that are offensive or demeaning to the president, what is it intended to achieve and what is the law regarding that offence intended to achieve?
The most basic meaning of “to annoy” is to“make (someone) a little angry; irritate” according to the online dictionary. Synonyms include “vex, anger, exasperate, irk, gall, pique”.
Different individuals are annoyed or angered differently depending on a litany of factors including context and the existing relationship but, in general, irritating statements are characteristically unkind, demeaning, provocative, accusatory, vindictive, threatening and rude. The fact of an assertion being true does not take away that it can annoy. It matters how the concerned person is addressed; the message matters equally as the forum.
If, for example, I wished to blame or accuse someone of failing to meet their part of a bargain or an accord or to respond to something they did or said about me, if I write a private email or use my phone or inbox to address such a person, the addressee, will likely understand and respond constructively while admitting the problem. He or she would have an opportunity to pour their heart out without fearing that what they will be misconstrued or that their dignity will be brought into question around prying eyes.
On the other hand, if I addressed the person in public, amongst friends, family and even strangers, the same person would be so disappointed owing to the great embarrassment among relations that they would have suffered. Remember that some of the details may be sordid or graphic!
Most severe fallouts and those that have led to acts of vengeance are those where parties involved have washed their dirty linen or said unkind things to or about others in public without an amicable settlement in sight. Reputation is sacred and brittle; once damaged it can never be restored. Untruths or scandalous material about people run faster than truths and modest statements and when dealing with crowds, whose very judgment and rationality is difficult to quantity, it is more complex. Some are gullible while others are adamant and will want to rub in the scandalous thing or rumour or representation they have heard about others and they will take action in reaction to the same.
In the case of a president, their position as a “fountain-of-honour” would have been eroded; their standing, generally, would have been lowered; it could affect how they execute their job as relations with juniors would be compromised. It doesn’t matter the individual holder’s tolerance for abuse. It is the office under attack, its image and efficacy left in tatters. It depends on the influence of the individual alleging things about them and their own reputation or the remedies that the “offended” has.
Usually, the best test of the annoyance inducing levels of a statement is to subject the one hurling such invectives to the same treatment. They will not like it because their intention was to cause pain to the person they hate. Nobody says unkind and demeaning things to or about a person they like or care for. To insult is to subject someone to psychological and emotional pain, with a possibility of getting physical given chance.
By Atuhairwe Robert via Ugandans at Heart (UAH) Community
How users harness language reveals their intentions towards those they ridicule or hold in scorn. That is why one way the secret service goes about organising a visit of the US president anywhere is to look out for persons in the particular area set to host the president and what they have recently said or posted about the president. As much information about them and their connections and networks is gathered; they are monitored closely. In case something sinister happens to the President during the visit, investigators must, as a rule, interview such people to determine if they had a connection to the incident.
What we say about others counts a lot more than the effect it has on them because we give away our ill intentions about them and place ourselves in the weighing scale-how we were brought up, schooled, our peers and so on. There is also an element of incitement to others.
Language is a weapon and the law acts as guide and guarantor of remedies to the offended, but the most important is moral law. Insult is not synonymous with criticism! When a president is demeaned and called names, the inference is that the whole country which he or she leads is what the president has been described as being. Feel sorry for the ordinary citizen who can only be regarded as much lower and undeserving of any dignity and esteem!