By Lee-Ann Khoh

The internet has revolutionised the way we communicate, interact and disseminate information in our modern society. Since the advent of the World Wide Web and, more recently, Web 2.0 applications such as blogs and social networking websites, more and more people are taking advantage of the internet’s many benefits to express themselves; discuss issues; find answers to their questions; share content; stay in touch with family, friends and acquaintances; and meet new people, among other things (Kim, et al., 2010, p. 226). However, the ease with which ordinary people can participate on the internet also makes it increasingly likely that it, like any other technology can and will be misused (Kim, et al., 2010, p. 229). Cyberbullying has become a significant issue in recent years, particularly among school students and young people, adding a new dimension to traditional bullying and in some scenarios resulting in the suicide of victims (Kim, et al., 2010, p. 230). While it is often easy to point the finger at these new unregulated technologies, to do so would not only disregard all the advantages that they provide, but also fail to address the real problem, which lies with the bullies themselves. Willard (2007, p. 13) explains that educating students about “family, school, and legal limits on online speech, negative influences on online behavior, and Internet privacy protection” is a prerequisite for tackling cyberbullying.

For an ever-increasing number of people in the digital age, the internet is no longer a strange new tool or an exotic virtual playground, but rather, an extension of themselves and an integral or normalised part of their lives. The rise of this dynamic medium, and its integration into our everyday lives, has resulted in traditional boundaries – the lines between public and private, online and offline, and educational and domestic – becoming increasingly blurred (Bryce & Klang, 2009, p. 161). Personal information is often casually disclosed, both intentionally and unintentionally on what is essentially a worldwide public forum, opening people to a greater risk of exploitation and harassment (Bryce & Klang, 2009, p. 160). Previously understood limits to self-expression and responsibility are now questioned. It may also be harder to tell whether or not someone is representing themselves accurately online, without the ability to see them or read their body language or tone. It is in this changing environment that cyberbullying has risen, facilitated by modern society’s increasing adoption of new electronic communications technologies (Li, 2007, p. 1778). On his website www.cyberbullying.org, teacher and public speaker Bill Belsey, who also runs several other bullying websites, defines cyberbullying as “the use of information and communication technologies to support deliberate, repeated, and hostile behaviour by an individual or group, that is intended to harm others” (Cyberbullying.org, n.d.). This usually involves threatening or disparaging messages and images directed at another person via e-mail, mobile telephones, websites and chat rooms (Draa & Sydney, 2009, p. 40). Willard (2007, p. 1) identifies eight forms of cyberbullying: flaming (the exchange of vulgar language and engaging in online fights), harassment (repeatedly sending insults), denigration (spreading malicious gossip about a person), impersonation (pretending to be someone else to damage their reputation), outing (revealing personal information about a person), trickery (deceiving someone into sharing personal information), exclusion (deliberately segregating someone from a group), and cyberstalking (repeated threatening behaviour).

Furthermore, cyberbullying can no longer be dismissed as merely a fringe activity. A study of middle school students from two Canadian schools found that more than half of those surveyed had been bullied, with over a quarter having been victims of cyberbullying (Li, 2007, p. 1782). More than half of the students also said they knew someone who had been cyberbullied. Significant rates of cyberbullying and serious reported incidents come as no surprise given widespread internet access and the strong prevalence of the World Wide Web in popular culture. Notably, the latest generations of young people have lived most or all of their lives in the digital age. As with so many aspects of our lives, such as communication and business transactions, bullying has been simplified by the internet. The ease with which cyberbullying can be committed makes it even more important for us to try to understand and tackle the problem.

There are a multitude of reasons why someone may become a cyberbully. Many of these reasons are shared by traditional bullies. For example, disputes over relationships, prejudice and bigotry, boredom, and retaliation for being bullied themselves may all trigger someone to cyberbully another person (Draa & Sydney, 2009, p. 42). However, the internet adds another element to bullying that often makes it harder to eradicate. For many people, their perception of the internet and communication technologies is that they are mediums with which “I can say anything I want. It’s impersonal”, as opposed to “Face to face [which] is a little intimidating” (Nelson, 2003, as cited in Li, 2007, p. 1779). Some people who engage in cyberbullying would not ordinarily bully someone face to face (Tokunaga, 2010, p. 279). The idea that people are more prepared to say things online that they would be reluctant to voice in the real world is called disinhibition (Draa & Sydney, 2009, p. 42). Cyberbullies may believe they are anonymous and untraceable; they may be less likely to stop and consider the severity of their actions because they cannot see the victim’s reaction; they may feel that traditional social norms do not apply on the internet. All these factors contribute to give the cyberbully a false sense that he or she is immune from the consequences of his or her actions (Draa & Sydney, 2009, p. 42; Willard, 2007, p. 8). Society cannot expect to stamp out cyberbullying without first dealing with this disinhibition.

Cyberbullying is also difficult to police. Since cyberbullying often occurs outside of school, it is not clear who can or should oversee and punish it (Tokunaga, 2010, p. 279). In March 2010, several students from a Perth school were suspended and hundreds more reprimanded for their participation in a Facebook group denigrating one of the teachers (Sapienza, 2010). At the time, the principal claimed the bigger issue was that of how to regulate new technology, especially when it was used outside of school (Brown, 2010). While most social networking websites, blogs and instant messaging programs forbid cyberbullying in their terms and conditions, it may be impractical to actively monitor how their services are actually being used (Wasden, 2006, as cited in Draa & Sydney, 2009, p. 41). Moreover, the teachers and school administrators who generally step in to stop traditional bullying are less aware of the problem when it occurs through electronic means (Li, 2007, p. 1778). Young people congregate on social networks that many adults do not access, often using a cyberlanguage of abbreviations and jargon adults may struggle to understand (Draa & Sydney, 2009, p. 41). The popularity of social networking websites such as Facebook has made it easier for groups of people to join forces in cyberbullying and feed off one another, while hiding behind the cloak of anonymity or safety in numbers. However, it would be problematic to indiscriminately blame the technology and thus excuse individuals of any responsibility for their own behaviour.

According to Draa and Sydney (2009, p. 42), the psychological impact of cyberbullying can be far greater than that of traditional bullying due to the nature of its platform. As with offline bullying, cyberbullying victims may have low self-esteem, become depressed, achieve poorer grades, and engage in violent behaviour. They may also be reluctant to tell anyone in case the bullying escalates. However, unlike bullying that occurs in an offline environment such as school or work, cyberbullying can take place 24 hours a day, seven days a week, removing the home as a safe haven (Draa & Sydney, 2009, p. 42). With mobile phones and internet connections now the social norm, cyberbullying victims are constantly connected to their tormentors. They often feel they have no control over the material that others post about them, which can be seen by the world (Draa & Sydney, 2009, p. 42). Disinhibited cyberbullies may be encouraged to launch more relentless attacks on victims for their own entertainment. At its worst, bullying can result in victims deciding to end their own lives, and cyberbullying has been attributed as the reason behind a number of suicides. In 2006, 13-year-old Megan Meier hanged herself after she was bullied by the mother of another girl posing as a 16-year-old boy on MySpace (“How Lori Drew”, 2007). The mother involved, Lori Drew was charged with misdemeanor counts of accessing computers without authorisation but later acquitted by a judge (“Lori Drew cleared”, 2009). 13-year-old Ryan Halligan also hanged himself in 2006 after rumours spread throughout his school about his sexuality and he was publicly humiliated by a female student who had pretended to like him online (Flowers, 2006). Harassment via question-and-answer website Formspring.me, which allows people to send users anonymous messages, has been touted as a possible factor in the death of 17-year-old Alexis Pilkington in 2010 (Eltman, 2010). Disinhibited cyberbullies may not consider the tragic ramifications of their behaviour or may detach themselves from the consequences on the basis that their actions are intended as amusement. They will therefore continue to cyberbully until they fully understand the significance of their behaviour.

Cyberbullying also raises a number of legal issues not often considered in traditional bullying incidents. Victims of cyberbullying may choose to launch civil action against the bully on such grounds as defamation or invasion of privacy. Some cases may even attract criminal proceedings; for example, if the bully threatens violence, stalks the victim, sexually exploits the victim or commits a hate crime (Willard, 2007, p. 10). However, due to the global reach of the internet, there is still conjecture over the application of laws with regards to material posted online. Pounder (2003, p. 34) cites two conflicting libel rulings as evidence of this: Dow Jones and Company Inc v Gutnick and New Haven Advocate and Hartford Courant v Stanley K. Young. In the first case, Australian businessman Joseph Gutnick claimed he was defamed in the Dow Jones published internet magazine Barron’s Online. The High Court in Victoria ruled that a libel suit could be heard in Victoria, where Gutnick conducted most of his business and thus where his reputation had been most tarnished, despite Barron’s Online being based in the US state of New Jersey (Pounder, 2003, p. 34). However, in the second case, the Fourth US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a man in Virginia could not sue two Connecticut newspapers in his home state, where he believed his reputation had been most damaged due to the newspapers being accessible online (Pounder, 2003, p. 35). When relating these cases back to the issue of cyberbullying, one begins to see that while the decentralised and deregulated nature of the internet is one of its perceived strengths, it can also be a headache for those seeking or ruling on justice. Thus the internet has also made it easier for many bullies to not only be more relentless, but also get away with their actions.

Perhaps the only effective way to reduce instances of cyberbullying, then, is to properly educate people of all ages about it. To that end, Willard (2007, p. 11) proposes a continuous school and community based approach. She advises an extensive survey of students to identify their concerns about bullying, including the rate of incidents, the impact of it and their feelings towards reporting cyberbullying (Willard, 2007, p. 12). She also states that teachers and administrators require professional development to learn to deal with cyberbullying; the schools in turn can deliver workshops and resources to parents and the community. Finally, Willard advises that students be educated about the limits to online freedom of expression and privacy protection, as well as social skills to improve their empathy, ethical decision-making and conflict resolution (Willard, 2007, p. 13). Only when the community has a firm grasp and understanding of cyberbullying can we begin to tackle it head on.

Eliminating the problem of cyberbullying involves addressing two key issues: managing bullying itself in any form and dealing with the laissez-faire attitude that bullies have towards cyberbullying. Many of the driving forces behind cyberbullying are the same factors that lead a traditional bully to pursue his or her dubious craft. However, cyberbullying can be more ruthless because it is more impersonal than face to face bullying and perpetrators commonly have a sense of disinhibition when bullying someone via the internet or some form of communications technology. Web 2.0 applications make it even quicker and easier to send hurtful material. Cyberbullying is harder to control because the internet is, by design, an unregulated medium; however, to condemn the internet itself for the way it has been misappropriated would be a failure to address the real issues. Cyberbullies, as well as parents, authorities, and those who facilitate bullying by turning a blind eye need to understand that cyberbullying is a serious act that can result in intense psychological harm for victims and legal proceedings for the perpetrators.

References

Brown, J. (2010, March 22). Open slather on websites as teachers targeted. ABC News. Retrieved April 3, 2010, from http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/03/22/2852762.htm

Bryce, J. & Klang, M. (2009). Young people, disclosure of personal information and online privacy: control, choice and consequences. Information Security Technical Report 14, 160-66. Retrieved March 31, 2010, from ScienceDirect database.

Cyberbullying.org. (n.d.). Retrieved March 31, 2010, from http://www.cyberbullying.org/

Draa, V.B. & Sydney, T.D. (2009). Cyberbullying: challenges and actions. JFCS, 101(4). Retrieved March 31, 2010, from ProQuest database.

Eltman, F. (2010, March 26). Town angry over net slurs at suicide victim. The Associated Press. Retrieved April 3, 2010, from http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/36058532/ns/technology_and_science-tech_and_gadgets/

Flowers, J. (2006, October 19). Cyber-bullying hits community. Addison County Independent. Retrieved April 2, 2010, from http://www.addisonindependent.com/200610cyber-bullying-hits-community

How Lori Drew became America’s most reviled mother. (2007, December 1). The Age. Retrieved April 3, 2010, from http://www.theage.com.au/news/web/americas-most-reviled-mother/2007/11/30/1196394672124.html

Kim, W., Jeong, O., & Lee, S. (2010). On social web sites. Information Systems, 35, 215-36. Retrieved March 31, 2010, from ScienceDirect database.

Li, Q. (2007). New bottle but old wine: a research of cyberbullying in schools. Computers in Human Behavior 23, 1777–91. Retrieved March 31, 2010, from ScienceDirect database.

Lori Drew cleared of MySpace cyber-bullying. (2009, July 3). The Age. Retrieved April 3, 2010, from http://www.theage.com.au/technology/lori-drew-cleared-of-myspace-cyberbullying-20090703-d6s0.html

Pounder, C. (2003). A tangled web of libel lies? Computers & Security, 22(1), 34-37. Retrieved April 1, 2010, from ScienceDirect database.

Sapienza, J. (2010, March 22). Leeming students suspended after bullying maths teacher on Facebook. WA Today. Retrieved April 1, 2010, from http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/leeming-students-suspended-after-bullying-maths-teacher-on-facebook-20100322-qqww.html

Tokunaga, R.S. (2010). Following you home from school: a critical review and synthesis of research on cyberbullying victimization. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 277-87. Retrieved March 31, 2010, from ScienceDirect database.

Willard, N. (2007). Educator’s guide to cyberbullying and cyberthreats. Center for Safe and Responsible Use of the Internet. Retrieved April 1, 2010, from http://www.cyberbully.org/cyberbully/docs/cbcteducator.pdf

Bullying 2.0: The Rise of Cyberbullying by Lee-Ann Khoh is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 2.5 Australia License.