Negative Side Of The Internet: The Reasons Of Cyber Violence
Today we are experiencing an entirely different world than people did thirty years ago. People thirty years ago the Internet was a relatively new technology and computers were still oversized and expensive. That is a huge contrast from today where the Internet is a part of almost everything we use from our phones, our televisions and now even our refrigerators. We have constant access to other people and what is going all around the world.
With all the developments of technology, comes new problems to overcome. The Internet has created a separate universe, where people can log on and become and do almost anything, which creates opportunities for people to commit crimes. Anonymity opens the door to cyber violence because there are fewer deterring factors, which creates new opportunities for motivated offenders.
Comment by McNab, Madison
Does this sound like a thesis? Cyber violence is not easily defined, but a general explanation is that it is the opportunity afforded by technology to create, distribute, or solicit access to injurious, hurtful or dangerous materials. This typology of cybercrime can be broken down into multiple subgroups: cyberbullying, cyberstalking, cyber-terrorism and hate speech.
This paper is primarily concerned with cyberbullying. While all categories are important facets for understanding cyber violence, cyberbullying has generated the most research. A key element to cyberbullying is the use of anonymity and how people take advantage of it. The most common forms of cyberbullying consist of threats, harassment, stalking and impersonation. It could seem like cyberbullying takes a lot of thought and effort, it really is as simple as leaving hateful comments on other user’s profiles.
There are so many people all over the world using the Internet to stay connected with the world. Through blogs, online forums and social media platforms people are able to communicate with virtually anyone. The ability to this does come with consequences. People are able to conceal their identity on the Internet, while in some instances it could be argued that this is beneficial, but when misused people could end up being victims of cyberbullying.
When someone is victimized online the effects could be detrimental. With constant access to the internet, people are also a lot more vulnerable than they were in previous years. The advancements in technology that allow people to remain constantly connected remains a double-edged sword. People can reach people all over the word and have news updates in seconds, but that also means others have around the clock access into your life. If someone is being cyberbullied it is very difficult to escape it, unlike the ability to walk away if someone is bullying or harassing them in person.
When people create accounts to use various online platforms they are able to create a username and password, which requires very little information about themselves. All someone needs to make a profile on a majority of the social media platforms is an email, which realistically is just another username for someone to hide behind. Even further, when you are able to have pictures attached to your account, there is no rule that says the picture has to be of you. The lack of information or identifiers needed to have a profile online creates anonymity for anyone using the Internet. This just continues to drive distance between someone’s online account and the person they actually are.
While this ability to have anonymity was most likely intended to protect the user’s privacy while online, it also allows people with ill intentions to protect their identities. People’s usernames act as a mask to conceal their identity while navigating the Internet. This mask creates a distance between the person behind the username and their actions. People experience reduced inhibition and personal responsibility in situations when they are more anonymous (Zimbardo, 2007). These reduced inhibitions could also be a driving force for people to commit acts of cyberviolence that wouldn’t typically do so. Cyberspace in combination with anonymity can cause people to feel like what they are doing doesn’t have real effects on their victims.
Online aggression is distinct from traditional forms of aggression in that the aggressors are invisible to their victims, and often anonymous. This unique form of violence and aggression may, therefore, attract individuals with a distinct set of internalizing traits such as depression or shyness (Peterson and Densely, 2017). Cybercriminals who choose to victimize people through hateful comments, harassment and even stalking feel they have the upper hand due to the anonymity of the Internet. When people have are posting negative or hateful things on the Internet they are most likely doing it with little to no regard for the possible consequences of their actions.
There are two separate theories that can help us understand why people commit acts of cyber violence. The first is low self-control theory which is commonly linked to a lot of criminal behaviors as well. Gottfredson and Hirschi's (1990) self-control theory argues that individuals with low self-control will find crime appealing, because they are unable to see the consequences of their actions. This theory is often linked to property cybercrime, but there is something to be said for that type of behavior and its link to personal cybercrimes.
As stated earlier, often times people often separate themselves from their actions on the Internet. When people, mostly younger individuals, leave hateful comments on someone’s profile or cyberstalk other users they are doing for their own enjoyment. People will post mean or inappropriate things because they enjoy watching people respond. However, based on the theory, people who have low self-control are not considering the long-term effects of what they are doing.
They are only thinking about the fact that they like what they are doing in the moment and do not care what is going to happen because of it. These types of people lack the foresight to see that their actions can cause physical and emotional harm to their victims and that they could also face legal repercussions for what they do and say online. People who lack self-control are more likely to maintain peer groups who share similar ideals in regard to committing acts of cybercrime.
The second theory, routine activities theory, also takes peer groups into account when looking at crime. The routine activities theory is essentially the concept that every criminal act is done logically through these three things which are: a motivated offender, a suitable target, and an absence of a capable guardian (Akers & Sellers & Jennings, 2017). This theory is could also point out why people commit acts of cyberviolence. The idea is that in order for crime to occur all three of these elements must exist. A motivated offender can be established by looking at someone who gets enjoyment or sees no harm committing acts like cyberbullying or cyber-stalking.
A suitable target is anyone who has an online profile where they can engage with users. Absence of a capable guardian can be viewed in two ways. The first being the offender doesn’t have a peer group that disapproves of this type of behavior or second that anonymity reduces guardianship. Guardianship could be anyone who could witness someone commit a crime, it doesn’t have to be law enforcement. However, if someone is anonymous online others can’t police their behavior. Anonymity reduces the element of deterrence for committing acts of cyberviolence, which in turn leaves a lot more people vulnerable to becoming suitable targets to the offender.
Low self-control and routine activities go hand in hand. The same person who lacks self-control or fear of consequences, is the same type of person who fills the role of the motivated offender for routine activities theory. While they are established as two sperate theories, one theory can act as a component of the other. Both of these concepts help to explain why people abuse the Internet’s anonymity and commit acts of cyber violence. As it stands, a lot cybercrime goes unreported, that is no different for cyber violence. Due to the fact that there is much anonymity on the internet, it makes it very hard to track to who is doing what online.
The current remedy when someone commits an act of cyber violence, specifically with the use of social media platforms, people are encouraged to report the actions, so it can be reviewed by their team. While this does help alleviate some situations that occur online it doesn’t every user on the platform. A lot of the time people submit their complaints to the review team and three to five days later they’ll receive a message that someone’s post or comment “doesn’t violate community standards.” Even though it is sent to a review board, they most likely only detect buzzwords, so hateful content can be often be overlooked.
