It is not clear what is forbidden by the relevant Colorado statute. To be a violation, you must have "intent to harass, annoy, or alarm another person". Then we get to action (e):
Directly or indirectly initiates communication with a person or
directs language toward another person, anonymously or otherwise, by
telephone, telephone network, data network, text message, instant
message, computer, computer network, computer system, or other
interactive electronic medium in a manner intended to harass or
threaten bodily injury or property damage, or makes any comment,
request, suggestion, or proposal by telephone, computer, computer
network, computer system, or other interactive electronic medium that
which we can reduce to
initiates communication with a person or
directs language toward another person by
computer in a manner intended to harass
In other words, communication intended to harass can be indirect or direct. Putting the pieces of the statute together, harrassment is an act with the intent to harrass or annoy, and the act is communicating electronically in a manner intended to harass (it does not say annoy). One could then conclude that electronic communication intended to annoy is not harassment, only electronic communication intended to harass is. But "harass" is not otherwise defined.
And finally, the statute states:
(8) This section is not intended to infringe upon any right guaranteed
to any person by the first amendment to the United States constitution
or to prevent the expression of any religious, political, or
There are many horrifying, demeaning and identifiable cartoons of politicians communicated on the internet (in Colorado) which can clearly be understood as having an intent to annoy (as well as make a social comment), and yet these are protected by the First Amendment. One can wonder why they bothered with that last clause. Perhaps it refers to the fact that the First Amendment may override this statute. The First Amendment is general, that is, it is not just there to allow political expression.
This being a new law, it's really hard to say what the bottom-line on this law is.