When in doubt, phrase it as a question, okay?

Everything is public these days. Especially as social networking has shown most of us to be navel-gazing, egotistic blatherers desperate for attention. So, you have to be careful what you say, or tweet.

Paul Chambers, a trainee accountant from Doncaster, UK, found that out the hard way after posting a message on Twitter threatening to blow up an airport in South Yorkshire in January.

His tweet?

Robin Hood Airport is closed. You’ve got a week… otherwise I’m blowing the airport sky high!

The 26-year-old claims he tweeted in a moment of frustration after finding out the airport was closed because of snow. In May, however, Chambers was found guilty of sending a “menacing electronic communication.” His lawyer described his tweet as “facetious parody.” Chambers and his lawyer have started an appeal against his conviction.

Of course, Chambers is not alone in being a victim to a humourless public.

Actor John Cusack was set upon by the rabid and paranoid captains of media at Fox News. In August, the High Fidelity and Being John Malkovich star was the centre of a Fox story labelling him as a sadist out to incite public violence. And it all started with another random and very facetious tweet:

I AM FOR A SATANIC DEATH CULT CENTER AT FOX NEWS HQ AND OUTSIDE THE OFFICES ORDICK ARMEYAND NEWT GINGRICH-and all the GOP WELFARE FREAKS

Fox News twisted Cusack’s words and described Cusack’s tweet in various ways.

First the headline:

John Cusack Calls for ‘Satanic Death’ of Fox News, GOP Leaders

Then the opening paragraph:

Actor John Cusack went on a caustic Twitter rampage Sunday evening, attacking former House Majority Leader Dick Armey, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Fox News.

Followed by the expert quote:

“His provocative tweets could easily incite a rabid fan to commit violent acts against Fox News Headquarters and others he names,” said Dr. Carole Lieberman, a Beverly Hills-based psychiatrist and author of Coping With Terrorism: Dreams Interrupted.

Rolling Stone blogger Matt Taibbi had this to say on the incident:

It’s not just that Fox totally (and intentionally, of course) misread Cusack’s thing — there’s a difference between calling for the opening of a “satanic death cult center” at Fox News and calling for the “satanic death” of Dick Armey. It’s that a parade of bozo talking heads, even tenth-rate, cardboard-PhD talking heads of the sort Fox tends to patronize, could be prevailed upon to take this nonsense seriously, and that masses of real human beings who are probably licensed to drive automobiles and may even have procreated instantly bought this as a real call to violence. Exactly how absurd do you have to be before this crowd can perceive that you’re kidding about something?

This reminds me of a news item I heard a few years after 9/11 that taught me a very good lesson. Somewhere in Atlantic Canada (Nova Scotia or perhaps P.E.I.) a man was held for questioning at an airport, and later charged, after saying the wrong thing to a security official checking his hand luggage. Apparently frustrated with the detailed probing and monotone questioning after an already long wait, the passenger sarcastically said, “Yeah, I got a bomb in there.” Oops. Not good in the “End-of-Irony” era. But it was not just what happened that provided the important lesson: it was the analysis of a lawyer. If the passenger expressed his frustration with a sarcastic question, said a lawyer being interviewed on the radio, there would have been no case against him. Sure, the authorities still may have pulled him aside, questioned him, caused him to miss his flight and made his life generally miserable, but no criminal charges would ever have been able to stick because of a question. “Do you think I have a bomb in there?” and “Are you looking for cuticle scissors or simply Bond-like explosives masquerading as chewing gum?” will never go over well in the age of global terror, but questions can never be treated as threats or admissions or statements.

Must Twitterers fearful of mistweets begin to re-structure their endless and inconsequential commentaries to ensure that they remain inconsequential?

Well, Paul Chambers would have been better off if he tweeted this: “Robin Hood Airport is closed. You’ve got a week… Would you get me a plane if I threatened to blow the airport sky high?”

And same goes for John Cusack: “IS ANYONE FOR A SATANIC DEATH CULT CENTER AT FOX NEWS HQ AND OUTSIDE THE OFFICES Of DICK ARMEY, NEWT GINGRICH and all GOP WELFARE FREAKS?”

Yeah, I know. Questions are wimpy and not as fun. They’re meant for “Jeopardy!” Not Twitter… don’t you agree?