The Internet and Social networking sites- should we be worried?

Ok, so maybe I have a biased view of social networking since I don’t use Facebook, Twitter any other form of social media, but are these sites more trouble than they are worth?

Crime that is conducted via the internet is known as cybercrime (Marsh & Melville, 2009, pg 154).A type of cybercrime is Cyberbullying. Recently, there was a landmark ruling where the Victoria's Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal concluded that Allem Halkic’s death was caused by an act of violence and awarded his parents compensation (Fogarty, 2011). Allem who was just 17 years old, killed himself in 2009 after he was bullied on a social networking website. No amount of money will bring their son back, but at least people are starting to recognise that cyberbullying is a growing problem that needs to be prevented in order to protect children. It was a landmark case because cyberbullying is finally being recognised as an act of violence. It is not just suicide because someone else’s direct actions have caused another person’s death.

People need to realise the seriousness of cyberbulling and its impacts on young people. Cyberbullying is not the same as traditional bullying in the playground. The internet has allowed people to anonymously inflict harm on one another. The effects are detrimental as teenagers all over the world are committing suicide over these hurtful comments. How many of these people who bully online would do so if the internet did not exist and it was not anonymous? Cyberbullying is surrounded by the idea of deindividualisation where people lose their sense of individual identity and engage in anti-social behaviour. They are less inhibited because they are less personally identifiable. People who bully online think they can get away with it because there is less chance of getting caught.

The new technologies created are not always beneficial. Yes, they enhance communication and allow people to keep in contact with friends around the globe, but deaths are also resulting because of them. Susan McLean, the director of Cyber Safety Solutions, said studies showed that between 15-30 per cent of young people have been bullied online (Fogarty, 2011). This figure is too high. Even though schools are educating children about cyberbullying, there needs to be more done to help young people so they feel like they can talk to others about being bullied because they cannot handle it on their own.

Cybercrime only exists because of the internet and therefore cyberbullying only exists because of the internet. I often wonder what life would be like without the internet. Would it be better or worse? Personally, I depend on it way too much. There is only the small minority (I hope) that choose to abuse the internet for serious crimes such as cyberbullying and it is those people who deserve to live without life’s luxuries.

References:

Fogarty, D. (2011). Tribunal find cyberbullying is violence, 30 May 2011, Sydney Morning Herald

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/tribunal-find-cyberbullying-is-violence-20110530-1fcn1.html

Marsh, I & Melville, G. (2009). Crime, justice and the media, Routledge, USA

Police Patrol

Over the weekend, police across Australia conducted their yearly weekend blitz on alcohol-fuelled violence and anti-social behaviour with Operation Unite. Extra police were sent out in force targeting drunken violence. This operation takes on the zero tolerance approach as police and the government want to let people know that they are sick and tired of alcohol violence. http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/05/15/3217211.htm 

Police need to maintain a positive public image, but some of their techniques are out of line. Some images of police getting tough on crime and arresting people can make others in the community feel safe and reassures them that something is being done to protect them.  However, police always attract much criticism about the way they choose to handle some situations. I know that people can drink excessive amounts of alcohol and get out of control, but having 7 or 8 officers pinning one guy down seems a bit much. The images seen in the media of police officers using violence to target violence does not represent a positive image.

This all relates back to “law and order commonsense” where it is said that police need greater powers to control people and that we need tougher penalties to keep society in order (Hogg & Brown, 1998). Crime is shown to be a massive problem and if it is not handled quickly, the community will spiral out of control. This weekend blitz is seen as something of a solution to alcohol-related crime. Although crackdowns seem to work for the short term, there needs to be better responses to combat this problem. Maybe the solution is not to get tougher on crime, but to educate people about the consequences of their actions.

How the police are portrayed in the media can have an effect on public knowledge and opinion (Marsh & Melville, 2009, pg 130). A positive image of police can encourage the public to cooperate and assist in reporting crime. You never want to rub people the wrong way, and this is especially important with police as they have a job to protect the community and need all the help they can get to catch criminals. The relationship between the police and media can be a double-edged sword. On one hand, it can be beneficial to promote the police as friendly and caring. However, the media (especially the news) can show police getting heavy-handed with people and using excessive violence to control them.

Love them or loathe them, the police are here to stay.

References:

Hogg, R & Brown, D. (1998). Rethinking law and order, Pluto Press, Australia

Godfrey, M. (2011). Drunk idiots too common in oz, 15 march 2011, Sydney Morning Herald

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/drunk-idiots-too-common-across-oz-police-20110515-1ent1.html

Marsh, I & Melville, G. (2009). Crime, justice and the media, Routledge, USA

No author. (2011). Police crackdown targets 'boozed-up idiots', 15 March 2011

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/05/15/3217211.htm

Modern day moral panics

A moral panic starts to develop when the media, police and the wider public overreact to behaviour that is seen as a social problem (Marsh & Melville, 2009, pg40).

An example of this is the recent Villawood violence where we saw detainees setting fire to the buildings. The information and images conveyed to the public by the media caused an outrage. Many people lashed out and said that these people do not deserve to live in this country and that they should be sent back to their country.

The topic of asylum seekers always attracts great debate. On one hand they are seen as a social problem and people do not want them entering their country, then there are those who argue human rights and say that they should be allowed in.  The panic has created people to fear foreigners. The media and other influential sources describing them as dangerous and a threat to society, and the images of them burning and destroying property makes people anxious and fearful.

This was also the case when September 11 happened as there was a mass panic erupting around the world. The effect of this event created so much chaos. This was mainly due to the information and devastating images created by the media and fed to society.  People were basically living in fear that another attack was going to happen. Since this event, security, defence forces and anti-terrorism laws have gone into overdrive. Just look at airport security and the incident that occurred when about 10 people were not screened and everyone had to be called back, which delayed flights for days. Moral panics are based on disproportionality as viewed by Goode and Ben-Yehuda, and the response was a bit disproportionate calling everyone back due to 10 unscreened people. (Marsh & Melville, 2009, pg47)We now live in a world where things are checked, rechecked and go through multiple processes to make sure everything is safe. The policies that have been changed and created since 9/11 are made to keep people safe but all it is doing is creating a heightened sense of fear.

About a week ago, Osama bin Laden was killed. When I got home to watch the 6pm news I was quite disheartened by the fact that people would ‘celebrate’ the death of Osama bin Laden. Watch here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FmHti8iBQM . I realise the killing of bin Laden is what people have been looking forward to for the past 10 years but there is no need to carry on the way they do. I think the quote that sums it up the best and has been tweeted by many is the one by Martin Luther King, Jnr  - "I mourn the loss of thousands of precious lives, but I will not rejoice in the death of one, not even an enemy."

Even with bin Laden dead people are still fearful as some have cancelled their flights in fear of revenge attacks. I guess once the panic is set in, it never leaves.

References:

Marsh, I & Melville, G. (2009). Crime, justice and the media, Routledge, USA

Williams, P & Dickinson, J. (1993). Fear of crime: read all about it? The relationship between newspaper crime reporting and fear of crime, British Journal of Criminology, 33(1), 33-56.