In the modern century, the development of Information Technology has created numerous platforms of interaction in people. These platforms are not limited by location or proximity increasing the depth at which a person my acquire companionship. The claim may is evidenced by the growth of the social media. The social media incorporates information technology in social interaction sites. However, the growth of social media has created a social ill, cyber bullying. Schmidt (2013) defines cyber bullying as a voluntary act aimed at causing harm in a repeated manner through information technology. The seriousness of the issue has caused states to put in place legislation aimed at minimizing the cases of cyber bullying. In the literature review, sources will be included that show the development of cyber bullying, its effects and measures included that could be used to solve the issue.
Boyd (2014) is of the assumption that teens are exposed to the social media lifestyle at a great depth. The author further points out that social media have become part and parcel of the teenage life (Boyd, 2014). For this reason, teenagers become the greatest targets of social media bullying. The results portrayed by Boyd (2004) depict that victims of social media bullying are mostly teenagers. The gets influence from the fact that teens are the largest consumers of social media services. Moreover, perpetrators of cyber social media bullying are also teenagers. Through social media, teens’ lives are easily accessible and tormented. It makes it easier for perpetrators to select their victims and ways in which they could dominate their victims.
Hinduja & Patchin (2008) also share the same perception of bullying. The authors are of the assumption that bullying victims and perpetrators are of the teenage. Bullying is influenced by numerous factors. For instance, a victim of bullying may be racially targeted by a particular group of people. In addition, causing factors revolve around the factors of a person. In an argument by (Hinduja & Patchin, 2008) victims of social media bullying are usually from a minority group. The authors further point out that the effects leads to severe emotional distress.
Hinduja & Patchin (2009) compare bullying in the school setting to social media bullying. They point out that physical bullying is being replaced by the increased cases of cyber bullying. For this reason, educational institutions should develop mechanisms aimed at preventing the growing trend. Putting in place strategies to enhance social media security prevents the crime in a significant way. Moreover, an academic institution may completely hinder the access of social media in the school setting (Hinduja & Patchin, 2009). The argument bases its assumption on that the school setting makes it easier for victims to be selected considering the amount of time students spend together. Moreover, the author also points out that enhancing connectivity with victims may also aid in eradicating the vice. Institution and states should provide a platform that victims may use to report crime against them.
Kowalski, Sue & Patricia (2012) perceive social media as a digital crime. In addition, both victims and perpetrators are of the digital age. For this reason, preventive measure should also match the requirements of the trend. Kowalski, Sue & Patricia (2012) mainly focus on monitoring of social media sites as a major way to prevent social media bullying. In this approach, users of social media should be informed to the monitoring system. In addition, they should be provided with warnings that depict the consequences to be faced by perpetrators. The approach seeks to avoid even consideration by perpetrators to commit a crime. The approach should be implemented in both social settings and institutional settings to acquire maximum results. Kowalski, Sue & Patricia (2012) support their argument by pointing out that, laws and policies developed to stop cyber bullying have significantly minimized its occurrence probability.
Mooney, David & Caroline (2009) perceive social media bullying as a social problem that should be approached with frameworks of similar to other social problems. However, the authors assert that an intervention would be the most preventive approach (Mooney, David & Caroline, 2009). The approach may be launched by conducting social educational campaigns on the effects of social media bullying. The sensitization should most target academic institutions that record high number of victims. The approach would then develop platforms that victims should seek help. Consequences of social media bullying should then be pointed out to minimize the risk of intent. In order to retain relevance, the approach should be developed to adapt to changes experienced in social media networks.
Patchin & Hinduja (2006) are of the assumption the assumption that a more serious preventive system such as juvenile justice should be used to prevent social media bullying. Juvenile justice refers to the consideration of using strict laws to prosecute perpetrators or offenders of a young age. This realization is after the consideration that perpetrators of the crime are mostly teenagers. In most states they get protection against prosecution of menial crimes. In an argument by Patchin & Hinduja (2006) constitutional laws that would include legal prosecution may significantly reduce cases of social media bullying. Different from other small offences, more strict and harsh consequences may be created. They may include time in juvenile correctional facilities and heavy social work (Patchin & Hinduja, 2006).
Schmidt (2013) analyzes the effectiveness of laws developed in Wisconsin to curb social media bullying. Like most states across the United States, Wisconsin developed cyber security laws aimed at minimizing cybercrimes such as cyber bullying. The laws include penalties that may be awarded to offenders. Since the development of the laws, cyber bullying cases have significantly reduced thus increasing the reliance of the laws to curb the crime. In an argument by Schmidt (2013) other interventions take long before their impact in the society are felt as compared to legal laws and policies. For this reason, the most productive intervention to social media bullying is creating constitution legislation covering the crime.
Ybarra & Mitchell (2004) however, provide a more personal approach to social media bullying. The authors suggest an understanding on the social characteristic of the perpetrator. Specifically, Ybarra & Mitchell (2004) connect social media bullying to parent child relationship, internet use and personal characteristics.
References
Boyd, D. (2014). It's Complicated: The Social Lives of Networked Teens. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Hinduja, S. & Patchin, J. W. (2008). Cyber bullying: An Exploratory Analysis of Factors Related to Offending and Victimization. Deviant Behavior, 29(2), 129–156.
Hinduja, S. & Patchin, J. W. (2009). Bullying beyond the Schoolyard: Preventing and Responding to Cyber bullying. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Kowalski, R., Sue L. & Patricia W. (2012). Cyber bullying: Bullying in the Digital Age. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Mooney, L., David. K & Caroline, S. (2009). Understanding Social Problems. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Cengage Learning.
Patchin, J. & Hinduja, S. (2006). Bullies Move beyond the Schoolyard: A Preliminary Look at Cyberbullying. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice', 4(2), 148–169.
Schmidt, D. (2013). Cyber-bullying and General Bullying Laws in Wisconsin. Wisconsin: Wisconsin Legislative Council.
Ybarra, M. & Mitchell, K. (2004). Youth engaging in online harassment: associations with caregiver-child relationships, Internet use, and personal characteristics. Journal of Adolescence, 27(3):319-36.
