Internet vigilantism: Difference between revisions
MaryJane404 (talk | contribs) m changed description |
MaryJane404 (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
'''Internet Vigilantism''' is the act of carrying out [[vigilante]] activities through the [[Internet]]. The term encompasses vigilantism against alleged scams, crimes, and non-Internet related behavior. |
'''Internet Vigilantism''' is the act of carrying out [[vigilante]] activities through the [[Internet]]. The term encompasses vigilantism against alleged scams, crimes, and non-Internet related behavior. |
||
The expanding scope of media savvy and online interaction has enabled vigilantes to utilize methods specific to the internet in order to distribute justice to parties they consider to be corrupt, but who have not committed a formal crime or have not been held accountable by the criminal justice system. |
The expanding scope of media savvy and online interaction has enabled vigilantes to utilize methods specific to the internet in order to distribute justice to parties they consider to be corrupt, but who have not committed a formal crime or have not been held accountable by the criminal justice system<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Trottier|first=Daniel|date=2016-04-01|title=Digital Vigilantism as Weaponisation of Visibility|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13347-016-0216-4|journal=Philosophy & Technology|volume=30|issue=1|pages=55–72|doi=10.1007/s13347-016-0216-4|issn=2210-5433}}</ref>. |
||
Internet Vigilantism originated in the early two-thousands and has since evolved to include a variety of methods such as hacking, baiting, and public shaming. Internet vigilantism changes in cultural and political drive depending on location, and has varying relationships to state authority depending on context. There are many internet vigilante groups as well as individuals. |
Internet Vigilantism originated in the early two-thousands and has since evolved to include a variety of methods such as hacking, baiting, and public shaming. Internet vigilantism changes in cultural and political drive depending on location, and has varying relationships to state authority depending on context. There are many internet vigilante groups as well as individuals. |
||
| Line 36: | Line 36: | ||
==References== |
==References== |
||
{{Reflist|30em}} |
{{Reflist|30em}} |
||
==Further reading== |
==Further reading== |
||
Revision as of 05:09, 6 December 2020
Internet Vigilantism is the act of carrying out vigilante activities through the Internet. The term encompasses vigilantism against alleged scams, crimes, and non-Internet related behavior.
The expanding scope of media savvy and online interaction has enabled vigilantes to utilize methods specific to the internet in order to distribute justice to parties they consider to be corrupt, but who have not committed a formal crime or have not been held accountable by the criminal justice system[1].
Internet Vigilantism originated in the early two-thousands and has since evolved to include a variety of methods such as hacking, baiting, and public shaming. Internet vigilantism changes in cultural and political drive depending on location, and has varying relationships to state authority depending on context. There are many internet vigilante groups as well as individuals.
Description
The term internet vigilantism describes punitive public denunciations, aimed at swaying public opinion in order to “take justice into one’s own hands” by engaging in forms of targeted surveillance, unwanted attention, negative publicity, repression, coercion or dissuasion. Associate professor in sociology Benjamin Loveluck identifies the four main forms of internet vigilantism as: flagging, investigation, hounding, and organized denunciation. Also referred to by Steve Man as Sousveillance, meaning "to watch from below", internet vigilantism can work as a type of peer surveillance. This is based on the premise that shame can be used as a form of social control. Augustė Dementavičienė defines the phenomena through the concept of Swarms, which are "Short term relationships between consumers formed for the purpose of achieving a goal". There are muddied overlaps between internet vigilantism and cyber bullying, as both utilize public shaming methods, and cyber bullying may sometimes be conducted under the guise of internet vigilantism. This is in the case that the vigilante "realizes they aren't achieving social justice but utilize it as a means of rationalizing their acts". Cyber Bullying often involves publishing of private information to publicly humiliate the target, but is typically driven by affordance rather than a desire for social change. Digital vigilantism can also overlap with digital activism, as the awareness of a social issue may increase due to the dissemination of information and weaponization of visibility associated with digital vigilante tactics. Visibility enables the broadening of social outrage, and is used in digital social justice campaigns such as #MiTuInChina.
Methods
The following are methods of Internet vigilantism that have been used or proposed for use:
Online shaming
The act of publicly shaming other internet users online. Those who are shamed online have not necessarily committed any social transgression, however. Online shaming may be used to get revenge (for example, in the form of revenge pornography), stalk, blackmail, or to threaten other internet users.[2]
Legality
In 2002 in the United States, Representative Howard Berman proposed the Peer to Peer Piracy Prevention Act, which would have protected copyright holders from liability for taking measures to prevent the distribution, reproduction or display of their copyrighted works on peer-to-peer computer networks.[3] Berman stated that the legislation would have given copyright holders "both carrots and sticks" and said that "copyright owners should be free to use reasonable, limited self-help measures to thwart P2P piracy if they can do so without causing harm."[4] Smith College assistant professor James D. Miller acknowledged the threats to the privacy of legitimate Internet users that such actions would pose, but drew comparisons with other successful crime-fighting measures that can invade privacy, such as metal detectors at airports.[5]
See also
References
- ^ Trottier, Daniel (2016-04-01). "Digital Vigilantism as Weaponisation of Visibility". Philosophy & Technology. 30 (1): 55–72. doi:10.1007/s13347-016-0216-4. ISSN 2210-5433.
- ^ Laidlaw, Emily (1 February 2017). "Online Shaming and the Right to Privacy". Laws. 6: 3. doi:10.3390/laws6010003. Retrieved 5 April 2020.
- ^ "Giving Chase in Cyberspace" (PDF).
- ^ "The Truth About The Peer To Peer Piracy Prevention Act". Writ.news.findlaw.com. 2002-10-01. Retrieved 2009-03-03.
- ^ "Let Hollywood Hack". Techcentralstation.com. Archived from the original on 2005-02-10. Retrieved 2009-03-03.
Further reading
- Cheong, P. H., & Gong, J. (2010) “Cyber vigilantism, transmedia collective intelligence, and civic participation.”, Chinese Journal of Communication, 3(4), 471-487.
- Byrne, Dara N. 419 Digilantes and the Frontier of Radical Justice Online. Radical History Review, Vol. 117, 2013, p. 70-82. doi:10.1215/01636545-2210464
- Rolon, Dario N. Vigilancia informatica y responsabilidad penal de los proveedores de internet
- Lennon Y.C. Chang and Ryan Poon (2016) “Internet Vigilantism: Attitudes and Experiences of University Students in Hong Kong”, International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative criminology. (doi:10.1177/0306624X16639037)
- Lennon Chang and Andy Leung (2015) “An introduction of cyber-crowdsourcing (human flesh searching) in the Greater China region” In Smith, R., Cheung, R and Lau, L. (eds) Cybercrime Risks and Responses: Eastern and Western Perspectives (pp, 240-252). NY: Palgrave. doi:10.1057/9781137474162_16
External links
- 'From flash mob to lynch mob', CNN, June 5, 2007
| Related websites |  | |
|---|---|---|
| Groups | ||
| Activities | ||