Cyberbullying
Since its inception, people are always seen seeking refuge to the powers of the internet as it is now the quickest and most efficient way to perform tasks and activities normally requiring immense effort and time. From complex applications such as computing and analysis to simple applications such as chatting, and socializing; everything can be done through the internet. However, while the internet admittedly has its benefits, it also has setbacks and dangers as it now increases the severity of oppressive acts such as bullying and how it is done. In the United States, reports of cyberbullying continues to increase especially for the younger generation as these attacks are becoming more aggressive. Although it is difficult to establish the exact nature and definition of cyberbullying, the US government in both federal and state level developed their laws to concentrate on anti-cyberbullying measures that would support pre-existing bullying bills/laws, identify the grounds of cyberbullying and its subsequent punishments without threatening the rights of users.
Bullying has long been a problem for many people, may it be in the home, school, workplace or community. Donegan (2012) has stated that the term “bully” has been coined since the 1530s, directed to people who abuses victims through physical, verbal and mental aspects in order to become superior to the other. Experts argue that bullying had long been ingrained to every living thing for the sake of survival and dominance. In the case of the United States, the capitalist nature of its political, economic and social schemes ingrained itself to the minds of its citizens as they see success and wealth together, therefore adding the perception that competition must be eliminated or weakened. From the time an American child enters primary school, these students are taught to excel and eventually pick up survival tactics such as bullying to survive in the competitive environment they are included. Students bully other students to get answers on homework or get them to work on their projects to get a higher grade and if the student in question does not do what was told, the bully would spread social rumors to destroy their victim to others. The tactic may not work in some instances, however, its effectiveness is undeniable as some victims would often lose their self-confidence to fight these bullies. Once the bullies see the effectiveness of their harassment or pressuring, they would slowly incorporate this line of thinking to get what they want and affect everyone around them.
With societies continuously developing and rapidly advanced through the use of technology, bullying had also taken a new form through the use of electronic devices that would enable them to pressure or harass a person anonymously through the use of a computer or cyberbullying. Cyberbullying can be done in several different locations or mediums as the internet has introduced several methods to transmit and share information or communicate with other users. With the introduction of the internet, chat rooms and forums had been an immediate fad for users to harass or assault another user. The first known chat rooms were first offered by AOL Instant Messenger, a prominent messaging program that enables users to chat with the other through private messaging or public chat rooms. In the case of chat rooms, users could then create specific rooms to discuss gossip, spread rumors or harass a fellow user without fearing identification.
Aside from these messaging applications, further innovations had introduced new mediums to commit cyberbullying such as the introduction of mobile phones and social media. Mobile or cellular phones had been introduced sometime around the late 1960s and had revolutionized the way communication is done. Although these cellular phones were portable and efficient, the younger generation had mostly preferred it when a more portable and updated version had been introduced in the 1990s. With applications such as text messaging and group messaging, cellphones became an immediate hit with almost 75% of American teens ages 12-17. According to the study done by Pew Research Center, the number of young American mobile phone users had increased exponentially through the years and at least 3,000 text messages are transmitted each month throughout the country. While the increase in young phone users can be attributed to parents wanting to have easy means to contact their children, most youths have admitted in the study that they use their phones to bully their fellow users. In the case of social media, the internet has introduced websites such as MySpace to have a more visual means to socialize with friends, family and connections. MySpace has been considered the pioneer in social media interaction as it was the first in the globe to allow users to create profiles -may it be authentic or fake- and enable users to reach out to friends or enemies. Experts have long warned users to stop publishing their personal information in social media websites for the possibility of others exploiting these details for criminal intentions. In the case of cyberbullies, these broadcasted information could be used to harass the victim in other methods aside from their online profiles. Social media has also introduced the function of multiple or alias profiles, enabling users to mask their identities and further harass their targets without fearing the consequences of their actions.
With these mediums of cyberbullying now dominating everyday activity of its users both young and old, reports of cyberbullying had increased significantly despite the interpretation of its meaning and nature, the method used and the age group affected. In the study done by Sameer Hinduja and Justin Patchin of the Cyberbullying Research Center, they defined cyberbullying as “when someone repeatedly makes fun of another person online or repeatedly picks on another person through email or text message or when someone posts something online about another person that they don’t like”. Given this criteria on what is cyberbullying, their study revealed that victimization rates have increased considerably from 2007’s 18.8% to 2009’s 28.7%. Most cyberbullying cases had been done through offending comments and rumors online, followed by threats sent through text messages or private messages. The study had also revealed that cyberbullying victims mostly utilize cellphones and the internet as their means to communicate with others, leading to their vulnerability to their cyberbullies. Aside from spreading rumors and threats; cyberbullying can be done through flaming (online fights), denigration (dissing or soiling another’s reputation), impersonation (posing as the victim), outing (sharing private information or files), trickery (pressuring someone to reveal their secrets online), exclusion (removing a person from the group) and cyberstalking (harassing users) . Age and gender also play key factors in terms of cyberbullying as studies showcase that cyberbullies often have preferences on who to target and why they target these people. Tokunaga (2010) cited that cyberbullying does not pick a specific age group when it comes to their targets. However, in several studies done from 2007 to 2008, students from seventh and eighth grades report high instances of cyberbullying. In terms of gender, most victims are often women similar to traditional bullying while men are usually those found as cyberbullies. Cyberbullying attacks on women are often directed to their virtue or virginity and are often times bullied psychologically to reduce their self-esteem and confidence.
The impact of cyberbullying is severe considering its capabilities on crippling the victim completely from society. The severity of cyberbullying’s impact may vary in cases, depending on how long the attack was done, how often it was done and how malicious or aggressive the attack had been done. It is most often that cyberbullying only occurs in a short period of time in comparison to traditional bullying, however, it is still capable of causing severe mental health complications and social incapacities. Victims are reported to have academic problems since they are mostly preoccupied with the experience of being bullied online, causing them to have dropping grades and increased absences. A few cases would even include parents reporting that their children feel that they are no longer safe in school. Additional school problems are also reported regarding cyberbullying victims as they are often sent to detention and suspended due to possession of weapons and other contraband items. Aside from poor academic performance, psychosocial problems and negative moods are common with cyberbullying victims such as social anxiety, low self-esteem and emotional volatility. Victims would become severely angry at the cyberbully and would be sad towards themselves for failing to stop these attacks on their person. Victims also become detached from others and would decline in pro-social activities and relationships to escape further bullying. When it comes to acting against these cyberbullies, 25% of the victims did not do anything to counter the effects of the experience or sue those responsible for the bullying due to the possibilities of being bullied again or threatened. At least 15-35% of victims would act against these bullies to tell them to stop and explain their position as the one being attacked .
With the growing trends of cyberbullying online and its corresponding consequence to its victims, legislators are now becoming more concerned because with the internet now an important asset to each person. However, several crucial issues had been raised regarding the development of anti-cyberbullying laws. According to Donegan, the first problem that lawmakers had to consider is the very essence of cyberbullying itself and how to consider an attack as cyberbullying. Sanctions for cyberbullying should also be taken into account because it may not be effective in stopping further bullying to occur. The First Amendment of the US Constitution also hinders the process of identifying the nature and definition of cyberbullying as the country embraces freedom of speech and opinion. Policies may infringe this very right and can be used as the main defense of the plaintiff regarding their actions. In the case J.S. v Bethlehem Area School District in 2000 regarding an 8th grader who made a website filled with derogatory remarks about his school, the court did not have a clear premise if they would see the site as a freedom of speech or an offensive speech. The school expelled the student due to the emotional impact it caused the teacher despite the student’s argument that his site was a protected speech he is entitled to by right . Unless these considerations are taken into account, laws to counter the impact or prevent cyberbullying may be insufficient.
Regardless of the difficulties in identifying the very essence of cyberbullying and how it can be determined, the US government remains firm in their goal of reducing cyberbullying cases without affecting the right to freedom of speech and including clear provisions on punishments and identification. In the report of the Iowa Policy Research Organization (2009), it states that while there is no federal legislation on cyberbullying, proposals have been raised to create a federal law countering cyberbullying. Californian Democrat Linda Sanchez had sponsored the Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act of 2008, which would push for the amending of the federal criminal code to include cyberbullying as a punishable offence. Under the act, any person who uses electronic means to send messages intended to “coerce, intimidate, or cause substantial emotional distress to another person” should be punished. The act had been named after Megan Meier, a 13 year old Missouri citizen who had committed suicide after receiving harassing messages from a user known as “Josh Evans”, which was ran by a mother of a friend of Megan as Megan was allegedly spreading gossip on her daughter. Several opponents have stood up against the bill as it threatened freedom of speech and fostered overcriminalization for cases that could only have civil penalties .
Aside from the proposals such as the Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act of 2008, the federal government also utilizes present policies that would ensure the prevention of discriminatory harassment in any form. According to the website StopBullying.Gov of the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services (n.d) the Department of Justice and the Department of Education can utilizes the following civil rights laws to stop bullying/cyberbullying: Title IV and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (desegregation and prevention of discrimination), Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the American with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act . As of press time, the federal government has yet to propose or discuss the provisions or sanctions on cyber-bullying in the country.
In the case of state laws, Hinduja and Patchin (2013) stated that out of the 50 states of the country, 18 states already have a preexisting bullying law that includes cyberbullying with 6 states proposing their own version of a cyberbullying law. These laws mostly support their pre-existing bullying laws, adding provisions regarding identification and punishment. In Alaska, for example, while the state does not have a specific cyberbullying statute, the ALASKA STAT. § 11.61.120 includes a provision that harassment also includes those being done in electronic means, threatening the physical well-being of another person affected. In the case of Arizona, House Bill 2415 clearly states that harassment, bullying or intimidating through technology is prohibited. H, B. 2415 was signed on April 19. 2011 and is also a supplementary bill for H.B. 2368 of 2005, which requires school district boards to impose procedures prohibiting bullying of all forms on school grounds.
Aside from Alaska and Arizona, California has also implemented its own laws to stop cyberbullying which would work hand in hand with its pre-existing bullying policies. A.B. 86, 2008 Code §32261 (g) Lieu was the first bill enacted by the state to counter cyberbullying as it enables school administrators to suspend or expel pupils if they are caught bullying through electronic means. Following the 2008 Bill is AB 746, 1156, and 9 in 2011, adding supplementary policies on cyberbullying. AB 746, signed in July 2011, identifies that bullying committed through social networking sites would also be counted as an offense and a ground for suspension or expulsion if found guilty. This bill other areas wherein cyberbullying can be justified, such as posting on a social networking site or a Website entry. AB 1156 is California’s means to help victims of bullying to recover by removing them from “unhealthy settings” and aid in restoring their academic performance. AB 9, on the other hand, is known as “Seth’s Law” named after 13 year old Seth Walsh who had committed suicide after being attacked online for his sexual preference and identity. Recently, the California State Legislature had approved AB 256, Chapter 700 on October 10, 2013 to mandate schools to intervene in bullying cases off-campus and stating that “electronic acts” can cover activity originating from the main school site.
Like Florida, Illinois also has its own extensive policies fighting cyberbullying and its prevention. In 2008, 105 ILCS 135/1-2 had been enacted to define cyberbullying as “[an act] making any obscene comment, request, suggestion or proposal with an intent to offend” and “threatening injury to the person or to the property of the person to whom the electronic communication is directed or to any of his family or household members”. If anyone is found guilty of this crime, they are charged with a class B misdemeanor or a felony, resulting into a prison sentence of one year and a fine. In addition to this bill, H.B. 3281 was signed in January 1, 2012 to add the provision that schools can expel or suspend a student found guilty of making a threat on the internet against a school employee, personnel and student visible for all. Finally, New York also mirrors their fellow states’ policies on cyberbullying as it has signed Senate Bill S 1987-B (A 3661-C) or the Dignity for All Student Act on June 22, 2010, listing the definition of harassment and bullying even through electronic means. Upon its implementation on July 1, 2013, the Act also recognizes the nature of cyberbullying committed off-campus and considers it a threat to the school community and education. Aside from the Dignity for All Students Act, New York had also added the “Commissioner’s Regulation 100.2 (I) and the Education Laws 2801 and 2801-a to cover schemes to improve communication between students to prevent bullying and report such cases to teachers through an anonymous reporting scheme to prevent possible retaliation and violence .
In today’s age, the internet is an integral part of day to day activities as it makes activities easier and faster than traditional means. However, it also makes aggressive intent or behavior such as bullying to persist in severe levels due to the anonymity and mediums the internet provides. Similar to its traditional form, cyberbullying can be very dangerous considering its capability to push victims to the edge and with the world now connected to the internet, there is a need for policies to stop cyberbullies from exploiting the internet’s features for their use. For the United States, a federal policy remains far from development due to the First Amendment and the unclear definition on cyberbullying. While this is the case, initiative is already beginning in the US through the enactment of persisting laws against bullying or discrimination and at the same time, the enactment of state laws to determine the grounds of cyberbullying and its punishment. The internet is for everyone, which is why users should learn common courtesy while online and foster peaceful relationships with other users because bullying others may have severe impacts to the victim that may lead to their death and despair.
References
Donegan, R. (2012). Bullying and Cyberbullying: History, Statistics, Law, Prevention and Analysis. Elon Journal of Undergraduate Research in Communications, 3(1), 33-42.
Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. (2013, December). State Cyberbullying Laws: A Brief Review of State Cyberbullying Laws and Policies. Retrieved from Cyberbullying Research Center: http://www.cyberbullying.us/Bullying_and_Cyberbullying_Laws.pdf
Iowa Policy Research Organization. (2009). Legislation on Cyberbullying. Retrieved from Iowa Policy Research Organization: http://www.uiowa.edu/~ipro/Papers%202009/Cyberbullying%20Final.pdf
StopBullying.Gov. (n.d.). Federal Laws. Retrieved from StopBullying.Gov: http://www.stopbullying.gov/laws/federal/
Tokunaga, R. (2010). Following you home from school: A critical review and synthesis of research on cyberbullying victimization. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 277-287.
