Cyberbullying
 |
You must add a |reason= parameter to this Cleanup template – replace it with {{Cleanup|January 2007 |reason=<Fill reason here>}}, or remove the Cleanup template.
Cyberbullying (also spelled Cyber-bullying, Cyber bullying or online bullying) is the term used to refer to bullying and harassment by use of electronic devices though means of e-mail, instant messaging, text messages, blogs, mobile phones, pagers, and websites. Other terms for cyberbullying are "electronic bullying," "electronic harassment," "e-bullying," "sms bullying," "mobile bullying," "online bullying," "digital bullying," or "Internet bullying".
It can constitute a computer crime. For example, in the United States it is a federal crime to anonymously "annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person" via the internet or telecommunication system, punishable by a fine and/or up to two years imprisonment.[1]
Cyberbullying is willful and involves recurring or repeated harm inflicted through the medium of electronic text. According to R.B. Standler[2]bullying intends to cause emotional distress and has no legitimate purpose to the choice of communications. Cyberbullying can be as simple as continuing to send e-mail to someone who has said they want no further contact with the sender. Cyberbullying may also include threats, sexual remarks, pejorative labels (i.e., hate speech)
Comparison to traditional bullying
Certain characteristics inherent in online technologies increase the likelihood that they will be exploited for deviant purposes [3]. Personal computers offer several advantages to individuals inclined to harass others. First, electronic bullies can remain “virtually” anonymous. Temporary email accounts and pseudonyms in chat rooms, instant messaging programs, and other Internet venues can make it very difficult for individuals to determine the identity of aggressors. Cyber-bullies can hide behind some measure of anonymity when using the text-message capabilities of a cellular phone or their personal computer to bully another individual, which perhaps frees them from normative and social constraints on their behavior. Further, it seems that cyber-bullies might be emboldened when using electronic means to carry out their antagonistic agenda because it takes less energy and courage to express hurtful comments using a keypad or a keyboard than with one’s voice. Additionally, cyber-bullies do not have to be larger and stronger than their victims, as had been the case in traditional bullying. Instead of a victim being several years younger and/or drastically weaker than his bully, victim and cyber-bully alike can be just about anyone imaginable.
Second, electronic forums lack supervision. While chat hosts regularly observe the dialog in some chat rooms in an effort to police conversations and evict offensive individuals, personal messages sent between users are viewable only by the sender and the recipient, and therefore outside the regulatory reach of the proper authorities. Furthermore, there are no individuals to monitor or censor offensive content in electronic mail or text messages sent via computer or cellular phone. Teenagers often know more about computers and cellular phones than their parents and are therefore able to operate the technologies without worry or concern that a probing parent will discover their experience with bullying (whether as a victim or offender).
In a similar vein, the inseparability of a cellular phone from its owner makes that person a perpetual target for victimization. Users often need to keep it turned on for legitimate uses, which provides the opportunity for those with malicious intentions to engage in persistent unwelcome behavior such as harassing telephone calls or threatening and insulting statements via the cellular phone’s text messaging capabilities. There may truly be “no rest for the weary” as cyber-bullying penetrates the walls of a home, traditionally a place where victims could seek refuge.
One possible advantage of cyber-bullying for victims is that they may be able to avoid it in some circumstances simply by avoiding the site/chat room in question. Email addresses can be changed and emails can be identified before they are read (most e-mail accounts now offer services that will automatically filter out messages from certain senders before they even reach the inbox). Phones also include caller ID systems which may be able to stop harassing calls or messages. In the event that this fails, it is possible to change email addresses and phone numbers, as can identities in chat rooms etc. Unfortunately, this obviously does not protect against all forms of cyber bullying; publishing of defamatory material about a person on the internet is extremely difficult to prevent and once it is posted, millions of people can potentially download it before it is removed. hi my names is homer!
Identifying Cyber-bullies
Online identity stealth blurs the line in infringement of the right of would-be victims to identify their perpetrators. See Computer networking tools as "tracert" or "nslookup" in order to trace an individual's computer to either their hosts, IP addresses or MAC addresses that are legal, legit and easy to use tools that allow one person to trace another one's computer.
However an IP address can only be traced back to its originating gateway and subnet in this way. The gateway point is part of a large range of IP addresses that are usually owned by Internet service providers. WHOIS directory information disclosed by such a trace is likely to be Internet Service Provider contact information. While such information can be useful it is improbable that a single user by him or herself can locate the offending (remote) computer directly without some authoritative law enforcement and court order.
While an IP address is usually not traceable users can view other relevant information by searching on Google of the offending IP and find referenced information such as forum posts or other reported issues by Administrators. Users who choose to purchase their own domain names from a registrar such as a personal website may also be at risk of revealed home/billing personal information in the WHOIS lookup unless it is concealed or changed.
Research
Hinduja and Patchin completed a study in the summer of 2005 of approximately 1500 Internet-using adolescents and found that over one-third of youth reported being victimized online and over 16% of respondents admitted to cyber-bullying others. While most of the instances of cyber bullying involved relatively minor behavior (40% were disrespected, 18% were called names), over 12% were physically threatened and about 5% were scared for their safety. Notably, less than 15% of victims told an adult about the incident[4]. Additional research by Hinduja and Patchin [5] found that online bullying victimization is related to offline problem behaviors. That is, youth who report being victims of cyber-bullying also experience stress or strain that is related to offline problem behaviors (an index of 11 deviant behaviors including: running away from home, cheating on a school test, skipping school, using alcohol or marijuana, among others). The authors acknowledge that both of these studies provide only preliminary information about the nature and consequences of online bullying due to the methodological challenges associated with an online survey.
According to a 2005 survey by the National Children's Home charity and Tesco Mobile[6] of 770 youth between the ages of 11 and 19, 20% of respondents revealed that they had been bullied via electronic means. Almost three-quarters (73%) stated that they knew the bully, while 26% stated that the offender was a stranger. Another interesting finding was that 10% indicated that another person has taken a picture of them via a cellular phone camera, consequently making them feel uncomfortable, embarrassed, or threatened. Many youths are not comfortable telling an authority figure about their cyber-bullying victimization; while 24% and 14% told a parent or teacher respectively, 28% did not tell anyone while 41% told a friend [6].
A survey by the Crimes Against Children Research Center at the University of New Hampshire in 2000 found that 6% of the young people in the survey had experienced some form of harassment including threats and negative rumours and 2% had suffered distressing harassment.[7]
See also
Notes
- ^ Annoying Someone Online Becomes Federal Crime, Wikinews January 2006
- ^ Standler, Ronald B., (2002) Computer Crime
- ^ Patchin, J. W. & Hinduja, S. (2006). Bullies move beyond the schoolyard: A preliminary look at cyberbullying Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 4(2), 148-169.
- ^ Patchin, J. W. & Hinduja, S. Cyberbullying: A Preliminary Profile of Offending and Victimization. Manuscript in review.
- ^ Patchin, J. W. & Hinduja, S. Offline Consequences of Online Victimization: School Violence and Delinquency. Journal of School Violence
- ^ a b National Children's Home. (2005). Putting U in the picture. Mobile Bullying Survey 2005.(pdf)
- ^ Finkelhor, D., Mitchell, K.J., & Wolak, J. (2000). Online victimization: A report on the nation’s youth. Alexandria, VA: National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.
Further reading
- Berson, I. R., Berson, M. J., & Ferron, J. M. (2002). Emerging risks of violence in the digital age: Lessons for educators from an online study of adolescent girls in the United States. Journal of School Violence, 1(2), 51-71.
- Keith, S. & Martin, M. E. (2005). Cyber-bullying: Creating a Culture of Respect in a Cyber World. Reclaiming Children & Youth, 13(4), 224-228.
- Hinduja, S. & Patchin, J. (2007). Offline Consequences of Online Victimization: School Violence and Delinquency. Journal of School Violence. In Print.
- Patchin, J. & Hinduja, S. (2006). Bullies Move beyond the Schoolyard: A Preliminary Look at Cyberbullying. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 4 (2), 148-169.
- Tettegah, S. Y. , Betout, D., & Taylor, K. R. (2006). Cyber-bullying and schools in an electronic era. In S. Tettegah & R. Hunter (Eds.) Technology and Education: Issues in administration, policy and appications in k12 school. PP. 17-28. London: Elsevier.
- Wolak, J. Mitchell, K.J., & Finkelhor, D. (2006). Online victimization of youth: 5 years later. Alexandria, VA: National Center for Missing & Exploited Children. Available: http://www.unh.edu/ccrc
- Ybarra, M. L. & Mitchell, J. K. (2004). Online aggressor/targets, aggressors and targets: A comparison of associated youth characteristics. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45, 1308-1316.
- Ybarra ML (2004). Linkages between depressive symptomatology and Internet harassment among young regular Internet users. Cyberpsychol and Behavior. Apr;7(2):247-57.
- Ybarra ML, Mitchell KJ (2004). Youth engaging in online harassment: associations with caregiver-child relationships, Internet use, and personal characteristics. Journal of Adolescence. Jun;27(3):319-36.
- Ybarra M, Mitchell KJ, Finkelhor D, & Janis Wolak (in press). Examining characteristics and associated distress related to Internet harassment: Findings from the Second Youth Internet Safety Survey. Pediatrics.
- Ybarra M, Mitchell KJ, Finkelhor D, Janis Wolak (in press). Internet prevention messages: Are we targeting the right online behaviors? Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine.