In fresh days there has been a loud exchange of views between the politicians of the governing coalition – Michał Grammar from Poland 2050 and Magdalena Filiks from the Civic Coalition. The dispute afraid the issue of anonymous hatred on the net and the sharing of individual data. The conflict sparked a wide debate on social media and one more time highlighted the problem of hatred speech on the web.
Michał Grammar reveals net data – a controversial step or a correct response?
Deputy Minister of Digitization and Polish MP 2050, Michał Grammar, published on platform X the individual data of 1 of the users, who, according to the politician, "provided quite a few reasons for a suit in electoral mode". Grammar justified his step, claiming that the Internetnaut repeatedly attacked him and the leader of Poland 2050, Szymon Hołownia, in a “ordinary and hateful way”.
– "Heiders should not be anonymous. In Poland 2050 we even have a bill for this” stressed the politician. In his opinion, the fight against anonymity online is the key to limiting hatred speech.
Online consequence and deletion of alerts
Data publication has sparked a wave of criticism among net users. In consequence to negative comments, Grammar removed the entry, but did not retreat from his position. – "No tolerance for anonymous hatred online. How must they hatred it under their name” – he wrote in another post.
On Saturday, the Polish MP 2050 referred again to the situation, stressing that "zero tolerance for hatred online is simply a necessity". He besides called for swift introduction of legal solutions to limit the phenomenon of anonymous hatred speech.
Magdalena Filiks demands the resignation of Grammar
Magdalena Filiks from the Civic Coalition besides dealt with the case, which powerfully criticized the actions of the Deputy Minister. – "You made your individual data and home address publically available to a man who criticizes you as a politician. This man has a household and has the first consequences. For that, you should resign yourself.” – wrote the outraged parliamentarian.
The filix besides pointed out that the availability of data could have been ‘incentive to hate’ To a criticic net user. She stressed that she herself was repeatedly the victim of criminal threats, but never decided to disclose the data of her perpetrators. – “I have data on many people who threatened to kill me, I have never given their addresses, due to the fact that it is an incentive for justice – besides for their families and children” She added.
You made individual information publically available and the home address of the man who criticizes you as a politician
This man has a household and has the first consequences.
That's what you should resign for.
I skip the fact that it was an incentive to hatred him/nothing else
— Magdalena Filix (@FilixMagdalena) February 8, 2025
An argument on platform X – who's right?
The exchange between politicians moved to the X platform, where there was a sharp verbal push. Grammar accused Filix that ‘lost the truth’And the police are after the criminals. – “Since the prosecution of criminals is the Polish Police – she is the 1 to study criminal threats” He said.
The filix replied briefly: – ‘Go on... Unlike you, I'm just leaving these tasks to the police. What are you a minister now?” – thus ending the media discussion.
Well, I guess you haven't seen it – that's why I'm talking about missing the truth.
Since the prosecution of criminals is @PolskaPolice – it is for her to study criminal threats
— Michał Grammar #Holownia2025 (@McGramat) February 8, 2025
Should anonymity be limited?
The dispute between Grammar and Filix one more time highlighted the problem of anonymity on the Internet. On the 1 hand, anonymity can defend freedom of speech, on the another hand – it helps spread hatred speech. Is there a solution to the introduction of rules that will limit the anticipation of concealing identities on the network? Or is this a threat to citizens' privacy?
In Poland, 2050 announces a bill aimed at combating anonymous hate. However, will this solution gain the support of another parties? Time will show whether politicians can find a compromise on this delicate issue.
Summary
The conflict between Michał Grammar and Magdalena Filiks is not only a individual dispute, but besides an crucial discussion on the limits of freedom of speech and work on the Internet. Was it right to make the net available or to violate its privacy? Should anonymity be limited? These questions stay open and the answers will affect the future of the Polish digital space.
Read more:
The Deputy Minister has released data on the Internet. Filix: You should resign
