Preventing Cyberbullying requires constant vigilance, ongoing learning
The main component to addressing cyberbullying and online behavior is students being taught what appropriate behaviors are and how to deal with it when they see it happen. This week, most of the students in EDLD identified correctly what cyberbullying is and how it affects people.
The challenge then becomes how to develop an effective strategy teaching students about the issue. Schools and educational institutions are obligated to protect the well-being of all of its students and to ensure that all students have an opportunity to achieve to the best of their ability.
Digital citizenship needs to be instructed to all students, regardless of level, to be exposed to modelling of appropriate and professional behavior. As students progress throughout their academic career, their ability to discern appropriate on behavior should be more attuned and professional as their experience grows.
I think our behavior should mirror the Golden Rule – treat others how we would want to be treated. In my own experience, I do confront inappropriate behavior whenever possible.
A challenge on many message boards is that users hide their true identities and use these identities to bait and harass and insult people with no fear of punishment. Frankly, I think many sites, especially news sites, should do away with anonymous posting. I think that would improve the atmosphere on many sites and encourage people to improve their behavior.
Anonymity encourages users to exhibit bad behavior they might otherwise not engage in. In a 2014 study researching anonymous online posting vs. identifiable posting found that identified posting were labeled “uncivil” 29 percent of the time. Anonymous posts were labeled as being uncivil 53 percent of the time (Santana).
Psychologically, this behavior been explained by Suler as the “online disinhibition effect” (2004). The theory states that anonymity is one of the reasons users say and do things online that they would normally never do in person. Suler says since they do not have to face the consequences for their anonymous actions, they feel free to let out an uninhibited version of themselves.
As a journalist I have mixed emotions about anonymity. There are legitimate reasons for it – some people may face repercussions for speaking openly, even if it is disagreeable. Cyberbullying control needs to make sure that it doesn’t censor legitimate discussion. A user calling someone a pejorative or offensive name is not the same as someone disagreeing with a differing point view, for example, if someone doesn’t want to raise the corporate tax rate. Vigilance for cyberbullying should not overreach boundaries of free speech or freedom of the press.
Additionally, I think when the traditional aspects of interpersonal communication of non-verbal cues, context, and tone, being interpreted lends itself the notion of all users being misunderstood and for readers to be involved in conflict.
References
Anderson, A. A., Brossard, D., Scheufele, D. A., Xenos, M. A. and Ladwig, P. (2014). The “Nasty Effect:” Online Incivility and Risk Perceptions of Emerging Technologies. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19: 373–387. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12009
Santana, A. D. (2004). Virtuous or vitriolic: The effect of anonymity on civility in online newspaper reader comment boards.” Journalism Practice 8.1: 18-33.
Suler, J (2004). The online disinhibition effect. Cyberpsychology & behavior 7.3: 321-326.