Ben’s Blog: Prisoner Reform and the Internet

As far as controversies go, a prisoner blogging is never going to rank with the modern presumption of paedophilia or the exploits of Glen Jervey.

I doubt that a prison blogger being banned is going to attract much more attention. And if it does it will likely be a mumbled “too right, bloody con.”

Ben’s Blog is currently the only Blog being written by a serving British prisoner. Like NightJack, he writes from a perspective which is currently unique and with honesty which is somewhat disturbing.

As prisoners are not allowed internet access Ben publishes through letters sent to his friends on the outside, who post on his behalf.

However, a letter was seized yesterday as it left the prison because “the content is interesting enough to be published on the internet.” This is the beginning and may be the end of a campaign to shut down his blog.

As a precaution Ben Gunn, the author of Ben’s Blog gave a piece to John Hirt should his blogging be stopped. It is currently available on Comment is Free and details why he blogs, why banning prisoners blogging is illegitimate and why allowing prisoners to blog is important in the first place.

Unfortunately the discussion at CiF has already descended into some name calling and rudimentary untruths. Someone has accused him of not being sorry enough:

This is said despite Ben having said:  “I was a boy when I committed my crime. I handed myself in to the police and pleaded guilty in court. That was the sole act of violence in my life and I feel revulsion at my crime, which is a permanent stain on my spirit.” Perhaps Ben is the wrong sort of sorry.

While another has a reading comprehension of a Daily Mail commenter:

At the risk of repeating my self: As prisoners are not allowed internet access Ben publishes through letters sent to his friends on the outside, who post on his behalf.

The restriction on prisoner internet use and on prison blogging by proxy interest me as a blogger and a someone who thinks our prisons are broken.

Should the government censor the internet? If so, should prisoners be able to blog, even by proxy? If so, should prisoners then have the right to use the internet directly? How much liberty should you lose when you enter prison?

What is Prison for?

Before we get to that we have to look at what a prison is for. There are many reasons for sending people to prison, and each individual weights the different reasons differently. However, the ultimate purpose of a prison is to ensure that as few people as possible become the victim of crime.

Of the many reasons for imprisoning someone vengeance certainly plays a big role for some people. In my view this is the least convincing reason for sending someone to prison.  Revenge is certainly cathartic, but that feeling would soon fade and you would be left with… what?

The idea of vengeance is of course closely connected with the idea that a criminal needs to repay their debt to society through suffering and the deprivation of their liberty. This is something which is more valid than merely seeking revenge, it strikes a very basic chord of justice, that someone be responsible for their actions.

These two reasons are especially primal, but still utterly valid. However, I believe that fetishising these reasons for prison or punishment will only lead to a more dangerous world, and ultimately counteract the most important basic function of a prison: to keep up safe.

In my mind the other functions of a prison are far more important. Prison are fairly good at keeping those who have been convicted of crimes away from people who have haven’t. That is the separating the criminal from society argument.

In this way prison very obviously and deliberately separates those deemed likely to offend from those assumed innocent. And to a degree it works, it is very difficult to reform someone overnight and in the time it takes to do so it is sensible to keep them away from others.

However, what decides how effective a prison is at keeping me safe are its last two functions, deterring some and reforming others.

The idea of prison as a deterrence is something which I find hard to prioritise, but the threat of punishment is surely an important factor in keeping people safe.

Of course the most important thing is not how dreadful you can make prison, or how “hard” your time is, but the overall likelihood of you ending up there.

What some miss is that although some people do fear jail, they don’t fear being caught. Prison as a deterrence does not rely on how awful you can make the place, being locked away from friends and family is always going to be awful. Making it likely to be caught, now that will reduce crime.

Lastly, and most importantly is the role of prison as a place for rehabilitation. Crime is not a pathology, in any society with any set of rules people will transgress them and enter some sort of “law and order” system. It is important to rehabilitate those who become criminals as only very few are incapable of making a contribution of society. A prison is a vast well of wasted opportunity.

Using prison to deter people will never deter enough. Concentrating on revenge will only create more criminals seeking it themselves. Focussing on extracting the maximum payment for a crime will only increasing the likelihood of it reoccurring. You can only lock someone up so long to keep the general population safe, if you don’t reform them (or they reform themselves) then they, and the people they meet, are in deep trouble.

Reform

Prison reform is a vast task, and making sure prison and punishment actually work is an incredibly important task for any society. The Howard Reform League are an excellent place to start if you are curious about the general case for prison reform.

Some obvious reforms are sending people to prison less as it tends to criminalise those who are only petty offenders; or allowing prisoners the vote as it connects them with the outside world and ensures their voices are heard.

In all honesty allowing internet access for those inside must come fairly far down the list of things which prisons need to change, but it should be on that list. A big part of rehabilitation is connecting prisoners to the outside world, and the internet is incredibly good at doing that.

Moreover, as the internet becomes a more and more integral part of our world, cutting a segment of our society off from it will only further alienate them. For both of these reasons allowing most prisoners supervised time on the web will be a good thing.

There are dangers of criminals using the internet (writing a blog is of course not one of them). Sex offenders are often cited prime examples of those who it is imperative to keep away from the internet, as the internet is essentially a vast porn reservoir. A similar argument is made with violent criminals. What if the internet is used to goad their victims?

Worst of all is the threat that a convict may Google “prison break” and get a whole lot more information than Wentworth Miller’s vital statistics.

However, these are arguments that rest on the assumption that prisoners can never be trusted, and that monitoring them is an impossible task. These are disingenuous arguments. Prisons operate smoothly only with prisoners consent and prisons can set the rules for internet use, and it can be allowed withing set parameters.

Internet use can be monitored as postal correspondence is. It can be rationed so that the task is not so gargantuan as to be impossible. But in the end it should be allowed, as prisoners should remain part of our society so that one day they may fully rejoin it.

Of course some believe that internet use should be proscribed because prisoners have forsaken their right to it, or because it would lessen the deterrent effect of prison. I think these are specious arguments too, the only convincing argument is that prisoners don’t deserve the internet because they have renounced their right to it. It is our right to not allow it in simple vengeance for their act.

This doesn’t shape up either, as it ignores the most vital role of prisons: to keep us safe by ensuring those that go there do not do so twice. When you enter a prison you lose your liberty, but this should be with the aim of returning it to you in the knowledge it won’t be abused. Restricting the internet is unfair and counterproductive.

The internet will never be the most important issue in prison reform, but it should be part of our manifesto and access should be demanded without hesitation.