By Abigail Clarke: Contributing Content Blogger
Well now we’ve all heard and know all about sexting don't we? The online vermin where transmission of revealing erotic pictures of one’s anatomy to a romantic partner is sent through some form of digital media. We also know don't we how this oftentimes escalates to nasty cases of revenge porn where those pictures you intended only to be seen by a boyfriend or girlfriend you were surely to be with the rest of your life, are now painted all over the internet since you broke up with them recently? Not bad enough? Just listen to this:
Now there’s something new people are biting off their arm about called, frexting. This is the same thing as “sexting” except you send pictures of your derriere to your trusted friends, not your love interest. This happens to be much more popular amongst females looking for validation or encouragement from girlfriends they trust. Can you imagine? Who does this? Who thinks this is a good idea? Well, apparently, younger women feel a measure of safety in knowing that their BFF is not going to pass around a frext of them in their bra and panties to some random boy. Why does their BFF even want to see such a thing you ask? I've no idea.
It is also less likely that a female friend will use the image as a sexual stimulant or weapon. Why are they being send round this way again? All well and good, but what if you have a falling out with your best girlfriend? It’s not as if that doesn’t happen all the time. This may put you right into the fire, and possible in worse shape than your old beau having at you. Although women fall victim to online harassment more than men, studies show they can also be more vicious in their attacks against others online. There seems to be somewhat of an exhibitionist mentality among many young women these days as they strive to find validation and empowerment through their physical appearance. This is the most unhealthy frame of mind and a mind frame that may lead to the most damaging experience of their lives.
Keep your derriere where it belongs is my advice!
Showing posts with label By Abigail Clarke. Show all posts
Showing posts with label By Abigail Clarke. Show all posts
Thursday, July 30, 2015
Tuesday, May 5, 2015
Online addiction is no excuse and never will be.
By Abigail Clarke: Contributing Content Blogger
It has come out lately that more and more mental health administrators are recognising internet addiction as a legitimate condition. Fine. Are they only getting to this now? Yes. The internet is still a fairly new phenomenon but even I could put the dots together to call this one is it really that much a surprise? British doctors are describing those suffering from online addictions as people who have lost touch with the real world through social networks and websites. Really? They say addiction behaviours are much more common than most of us realise and that temptations to overindulge in one’s compulsions are always there for every one of us. Talk about poppycock confusing the issues and it sounds like the granting of excuses and condolences to dangerous individuals who have the power to choose not to do what they do. I refuse to accept that. Giving people an excuse to harm others is empowering to them and only works to increase the explosion of sick behaviours we are already experiencing. Victims of sick online people are seeing lives ruined and committing suicide!
Cyberharassment is the only type of addiction, if you call it that, where the behaviour is focused on harming others, not the behaviour harming the addicted. There is no doubt a phenomenon exists that is going on en masse, but I don’t believe it is an addiction per se and if it really is it can NEVER be used as an excuse or tool to help the violators get off legally from what they do to someone else. I believe what we are seeing is spawned by a new generation incapable of forming normal healthy relationships away from a screen. Look at the world today, much among youth, do they talk on the phone? No. They text. They carry out whole relationships in text. To now label online abusive behaviour as an addiction could dangerously cause more grief going forward. We should be wise to not begin educating the public that this is an addiction issue, rather the unveiling of what has been there all along which is that piece of human nature that finds fascination in seeing others suffer and is willing to harm others for nothing more than a cheap thrill and power trip.
It has come out lately that more and more mental health administrators are recognising internet addiction as a legitimate condition. Fine. Are they only getting to this now? Yes. The internet is still a fairly new phenomenon but even I could put the dots together to call this one is it really that much a surprise? British doctors are describing those suffering from online addictions as people who have lost touch with the real world through social networks and websites. Really? They say addiction behaviours are much more common than most of us realise and that temptations to overindulge in one’s compulsions are always there for every one of us. Talk about poppycock confusing the issues and it sounds like the granting of excuses and condolences to dangerous individuals who have the power to choose not to do what they do. I refuse to accept that. Giving people an excuse to harm others is empowering to them and only works to increase the explosion of sick behaviours we are already experiencing. Victims of sick online people are seeing lives ruined and committing suicide!
Cyberharassment is the only type of addiction, if you call it that, where the behaviour is focused on harming others, not the behaviour harming the addicted. There is no doubt a phenomenon exists that is going on en masse, but I don’t believe it is an addiction per se and if it really is it can NEVER be used as an excuse or tool to help the violators get off legally from what they do to someone else. I believe what we are seeing is spawned by a new generation incapable of forming normal healthy relationships away from a screen. Look at the world today, much among youth, do they talk on the phone? No. They text. They carry out whole relationships in text. To now label online abusive behaviour as an addiction could dangerously cause more grief going forward. We should be wise to not begin educating the public that this is an addiction issue, rather the unveiling of what has been there all along which is that piece of human nature that finds fascination in seeing others suffer and is willing to harm others for nothing more than a cheap thrill and power trip.
Sunday, April 12, 2015
It won't happen to me. Don't count on it.
By Abigail Clarke: Contributing Content Blogger
There is a new study released from Nottingham Trent University revealing peculiarity in how internet users look at the seriousness of cyberbullying. Young people are aware of the ongoing problem of cyberbullying, indeed yes, but the large majority perceive others being more at risk than themselves. Strange, isn't it? Interesting here that young women tend toward holding this view much more than do men. Even stranger to me. This is a perfect example isn't it of what is fueling the problem to begin with? Most people don’t realise the damage this activity causes others. Most, especially those of younger age, are preprogrammed to think they are invulnerable and that the problem will not affect them. How could this be that our young people aren't being schooled about the risks to themselves? That is a lacking in proper education and responsible advisement on internet etiquette.
This makes them either a great candidate to dish out cyberbullying or harassment without regard to other’s feelings, or the unsuspecting victim whose life is gutted because this sort of thing ‘just couldn’t happen to them’! This should be an indication that raising awareness of cyberbullying and the like, cannot end merely with showing people the statistics of what is going on, but needs to also address a more basic schooling of self-awareness. People generally have a keen misperception of how they are perceived by others and what impacts they have on those around them. To fully engage the problem and move closer to a solution, those of the younger generation especially must be educated on the psychology of realistic awareness of self. By being absorbed into the virtual world of social media as much as they are it is no wonder there is a growing separation between what is real and what is not. It is also true that girls tend to view the world in a more romantic sense which coincides with females more often falling victim to cyber-attacks, and to be fair, the reason there are a larger number of female perpetrators of cyber harassment per se. This very important research is screaming the demon loud and clear that there is more than meets the eye in this very human problem. Think about it parents and educators. If we're not teaching young people in a way that sticks that it can happen to them how can they be expected to understand what happens to others?
There is a new study released from Nottingham Trent University revealing peculiarity in how internet users look at the seriousness of cyberbullying. Young people are aware of the ongoing problem of cyberbullying, indeed yes, but the large majority perceive others being more at risk than themselves. Strange, isn't it? Interesting here that young women tend toward holding this view much more than do men. Even stranger to me. This is a perfect example isn't it of what is fueling the problem to begin with? Most people don’t realise the damage this activity causes others. Most, especially those of younger age, are preprogrammed to think they are invulnerable and that the problem will not affect them. How could this be that our young people aren't being schooled about the risks to themselves? That is a lacking in proper education and responsible advisement on internet etiquette.
This makes them either a great candidate to dish out cyberbullying or harassment without regard to other’s feelings, or the unsuspecting victim whose life is gutted because this sort of thing ‘just couldn’t happen to them’! This should be an indication that raising awareness of cyberbullying and the like, cannot end merely with showing people the statistics of what is going on, but needs to also address a more basic schooling of self-awareness. People generally have a keen misperception of how they are perceived by others and what impacts they have on those around them. To fully engage the problem and move closer to a solution, those of the younger generation especially must be educated on the psychology of realistic awareness of self. By being absorbed into the virtual world of social media as much as they are it is no wonder there is a growing separation between what is real and what is not. It is also true that girls tend to view the world in a more romantic sense which coincides with females more often falling victim to cyber-attacks, and to be fair, the reason there are a larger number of female perpetrators of cyber harassment per se. This very important research is screaming the demon loud and clear that there is more than meets the eye in this very human problem. Think about it parents and educators. If we're not teaching young people in a way that sticks that it can happen to them how can they be expected to understand what happens to others?
Monday, February 16, 2015
Cyberharrassment and bullying is not a myth.
By Abigail Clarke: Contributing Content Blogger
I happened upon an article the other day trying to downplay cyberharassment and bullying. It claimed to be dispelling cyber harassment myths as if these myths were recognised as established. Not so. The article asserted that one of the most common myths is people being turned into cyberbullies by using social media. To me, this seems absurd. Of course nobody is claiming social media itself creates cyberbullies. The creation of a cyberbully mentality starts well before someone becomes acquainted with social media. Social media is merely the conduit, not the cause. The article then went on to make the token reassurance that there aren’t as many cyber harassers on the web as it may seem and that a “techno-panic” has been created to give people the impression the problem is much worse than it actually is. Well I disagree. The problem is indeed much worse than most realise and we are seeing dramatic increases in activity not the reverse. This appears to be more due to the ease at which the Internet can be accessed these days as well as the amount of personal information available that can be exploited against victims. It is also due to the pervasive element of anonymity that is intrinsic to the nature of online activity. The ability to express latent anger and rage at others without accountability, creates the cyberharasser, not the websites hosting it. This is not to say social media sites are free from blame, they are enabling the problem. But we definitely mustn’t be lulled into thinking cyber harassment is not as bad as it seems. It most certainly is, which most people having any experience on social media can tell you.
I happened upon an article the other day trying to downplay cyberharassment and bullying. It claimed to be dispelling cyber harassment myths as if these myths were recognised as established. Not so. The article asserted that one of the most common myths is people being turned into cyberbullies by using social media. To me, this seems absurd. Of course nobody is claiming social media itself creates cyberbullies. The creation of a cyberbully mentality starts well before someone becomes acquainted with social media. Social media is merely the conduit, not the cause. The article then went on to make the token reassurance that there aren’t as many cyber harassers on the web as it may seem and that a “techno-panic” has been created to give people the impression the problem is much worse than it actually is. Well I disagree. The problem is indeed much worse than most realise and we are seeing dramatic increases in activity not the reverse. This appears to be more due to the ease at which the Internet can be accessed these days as well as the amount of personal information available that can be exploited against victims. It is also due to the pervasive element of anonymity that is intrinsic to the nature of online activity. The ability to express latent anger and rage at others without accountability, creates the cyberharasser, not the websites hosting it. This is not to say social media sites are free from blame, they are enabling the problem. But we definitely mustn’t be lulled into thinking cyber harassment is not as bad as it seems. It most certainly is, which most people having any experience on social media can tell you.
Saturday, February 7, 2015
Memes aren't always humorous.
By Abigail Clarke: Contributing Content Blogger
Do you know what a meme is? You see them every day of your facebooks and twitters. A meme is an image, video, or piece of text, typically copied, modified and then circulated about rapidly throughout the internet. These can be humorous I must admit but they also can be used for much damage and hurt. It's an all too common practice for cyberbullies to use memes based around harassment, bigotry, and general mean spiritedness. This cuts into the problem of anonymity, which allows these bully types to be far more willing to engage in aggressive hurtful behaviours for the sole purpose of embarrassing and humiliating a targeted person.
If you ask me people who generate memes derive from an immature ilk. Only immature and mean-spirited individuals are capable of conceiving and then using such a mode to taunt and make fun of others in very lewd and crude ways. For example it is common for a cyber harasser to cut and paste the image of a target person’s face to that of an animal, object, other person, or to place their photo in the context of something sexually explicit and humiliating. This is along the same lines as revenge porn but usually always in a mocking and sick joke kind of way. The downside to it all is the fact that memes are very popular. Why? Because there are just as many immature people out there who will give audience to them. We should all take a lesson from this. What if the memed individual was a dear friend or a close member of your family? What if it were your child or parent? The fact is cyber harassment of any kind degrades human integrity and chips away at the spirit. Though it is a certainty immature cyber harassers and bullies will continue to harm others online, the rest of us should not condone by giving audience. To do so makes us no better than the mob.
Do you know what a meme is? You see them every day of your facebooks and twitters. A meme is an image, video, or piece of text, typically copied, modified and then circulated about rapidly throughout the internet. These can be humorous I must admit but they also can be used for much damage and hurt. It's an all too common practice for cyberbullies to use memes based around harassment, bigotry, and general mean spiritedness. This cuts into the problem of anonymity, which allows these bully types to be far more willing to engage in aggressive hurtful behaviours for the sole purpose of embarrassing and humiliating a targeted person.
If you ask me people who generate memes derive from an immature ilk. Only immature and mean-spirited individuals are capable of conceiving and then using such a mode to taunt and make fun of others in very lewd and crude ways. For example it is common for a cyber harasser to cut and paste the image of a target person’s face to that of an animal, object, other person, or to place their photo in the context of something sexually explicit and humiliating. This is along the same lines as revenge porn but usually always in a mocking and sick joke kind of way. The downside to it all is the fact that memes are very popular. Why? Because there are just as many immature people out there who will give audience to them. We should all take a lesson from this. What if the memed individual was a dear friend or a close member of your family? What if it were your child or parent? The fact is cyber harassment of any kind degrades human integrity and chips away at the spirit. Though it is a certainty immature cyber harassers and bullies will continue to harm others online, the rest of us should not condone by giving audience. To do so makes us no better than the mob.
Wednesday, January 28, 2015
Cyber harassment is not a patch problem.
By Abigail Clarke: Contributing Content Blogger
I've always been of the mind it's a mistake to approach the fixing of any problem from the outside in. How many times have we seen the patch method applied to anything from relationships to government policy? We do this time and again even though we know truly solving any problem is to deal with it at its root! The same concept applies to that of cyber harassment. General beliefs of legislators are to handle the issue by passing new laws and laws are beginning to pop up everywhere. Having good laws in place restricting or at least discouraging the criminal actions of those who harm others on the Internet is a proper and necessary thing to do. A framework and structure is quite necessary but this is merely a step toward the solution.
A complete solution can only occur when in conjunction with laws cyber harassment is addressed in the home. It starts firstly with the parents and should be reinforced by those adults managing young people in educational systems. The real solution to this problem requires an overhaul in the thinking of young people or what you might say a reprogramming of human interaction. It's here where the consistent teaching and encouragement of empathy for others comes in. It's also important to keep communication open assuring young people they are safe to tell about what is going on.
I shouldn't have to tell parents or other adults to demonstrate by example! It's well known that young people from all cultures observe adults in the home and use these observations as the framework for their own beliefs and behaviours. This is not a patch fix,so let’s not get caught in the mind trap of thinking it is.
I've always been of the mind it's a mistake to approach the fixing of any problem from the outside in. How many times have we seen the patch method applied to anything from relationships to government policy? We do this time and again even though we know truly solving any problem is to deal with it at its root! The same concept applies to that of cyber harassment. General beliefs of legislators are to handle the issue by passing new laws and laws are beginning to pop up everywhere. Having good laws in place restricting or at least discouraging the criminal actions of those who harm others on the Internet is a proper and necessary thing to do. A framework and structure is quite necessary but this is merely a step toward the solution.
A complete solution can only occur when in conjunction with laws cyber harassment is addressed in the home. It starts firstly with the parents and should be reinforced by those adults managing young people in educational systems. The real solution to this problem requires an overhaul in the thinking of young people or what you might say a reprogramming of human interaction. It's here where the consistent teaching and encouragement of empathy for others comes in. It's also important to keep communication open assuring young people they are safe to tell about what is going on.
I shouldn't have to tell parents or other adults to demonstrate by example! It's well known that young people from all cultures observe adults in the home and use these observations as the framework for their own beliefs and behaviours. This is not a patch fix,so let’s not get caught in the mind trap of thinking it is.
Saturday, January 3, 2015
Doxing poses real dangers to online victims.
By Abigail Clarke: Contributing Content Blogger
A mere days ago I heard about a doxing incident. It wasn't named for what it was in the press of course! You would have to live in a bog to have missed the news. The story involved a situation where a woman claimed
to have been gang raped. She took her story to Rolling Stone magazine who decided to publish it. The doxing came about when a blogger dug into the woman’s past
finding her real name and other personal information which he used to
threaten and intimidate her with. To justify his illegal degree of privacy invasion he
claimed to be a vigilante of the truth and told her that he would post her
personal information unless she admitted the story was false. He posted the information
about her anyway.
Doxing is the activity of obtaining publicly listed or
private information about a person to then use as a leverage of threat against
them. Yes it was proven that the
Rolling Stone story was indeed false, the larger point I want to make is the way which it
was exposed. The privacy invasion, pressuring or
intimidation of anyone, regardless of their alleged offense, should never be
executed in the manner it was in this circumstance. This is cyber harassment in disguise
and the blogger a cyber bullying criminal.
I was always taught that two wrongs don’t make a right! What this blogger achieved was not a win for some kind of good. It was a strong message condoning the practice of ransoming a person’s private information and intimidating them. Using the internet to muscle people about or violate their privacy for your own means or gains, even under some alleged cause, is not an act of integrity or one any of us should applaud. Doxing is a crime and crimes should be punished!
I was always taught that two wrongs don’t make a right! What this blogger achieved was not a win for some kind of good. It was a strong message condoning the practice of ransoming a person’s private information and intimidating them. Using the internet to muscle people about or violate their privacy for your own means or gains, even under some alleged cause, is not an act of integrity or one any of us should applaud. Doxing is a crime and crimes should be punished!
Monday, December 15, 2014
What happens when social media forums are used for credible threats?
By Abigail Clarke: Contributing Content Blogger
Quite recently, the Supreme Court in the US heard a case concerning what exactly constitutes a threat made through social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter. A man was sentenced to 44 months in prison for making credible threats toward his ex-wife over Facebook and properly so in my view of things. What maddens me is this bit. This man somehow caught the ear of the high court in the states who were willing to hear his case as to why his sentence was wrong. Pardon? This was allowed? There should be no interpretation about the matter. We already know that threats made online are often carried out in the real world. People are killed or injured. Despite the reality scare, in court it was argued under the US Constitution and federal threat statute that a jury there must not only find that a reasonable person would interpret words seen online as threatening but that the harasser actually intended the words to be threatening. This sounds like picking at horse hairs to me. The man who made the threats that were identified at the time as credible, in court tried to say of course he was “joking” around and just having a bit of “venting” so that he never intended to act on any of the statements he made. What else might he say when trying to get off a 44 month prison sentence? Assuming for a moment that he was really just joking it wasn't taken that way by his ex-wife who experienced mental trauma as a woman. She knew him, had been married to him, and knew well and firsthand of his violent tendencies and behaviours. Therefore these threats were credible and an ongoing demonstration of the abuse she'd already endured in the marriage. The US Supreme Court is set to make a ruling on this case this year but what really is there to consider in this case? Using social media in the way this man did is another method of cyber stalking and should be treated as such.
Quite recently, the Supreme Court in the US heard a case concerning what exactly constitutes a threat made through social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter. A man was sentenced to 44 months in prison for making credible threats toward his ex-wife over Facebook and properly so in my view of things. What maddens me is this bit. This man somehow caught the ear of the high court in the states who were willing to hear his case as to why his sentence was wrong. Pardon? This was allowed? There should be no interpretation about the matter. We already know that threats made online are often carried out in the real world. People are killed or injured. Despite the reality scare, in court it was argued under the US Constitution and federal threat statute that a jury there must not only find that a reasonable person would interpret words seen online as threatening but that the harasser actually intended the words to be threatening. This sounds like picking at horse hairs to me. The man who made the threats that were identified at the time as credible, in court tried to say of course he was “joking” around and just having a bit of “venting” so that he never intended to act on any of the statements he made. What else might he say when trying to get off a 44 month prison sentence? Assuming for a moment that he was really just joking it wasn't taken that way by his ex-wife who experienced mental trauma as a woman. She knew him, had been married to him, and knew well and firsthand of his violent tendencies and behaviours. Therefore these threats were credible and an ongoing demonstration of the abuse she'd already endured in the marriage. The US Supreme Court is set to make a ruling on this case this year but what really is there to consider in this case? Using social media in the way this man did is another method of cyber stalking and should be treated as such.
Monday, December 8, 2014
What's behind internet trolls?
By Abigail Clarke: Contributing Content Blogger
We're all in for a bit of a shock when taking a look at the mentality behind Internet trolls. How a person can find fulfillment spreading their hateful remarks on others is hard for those normal of us to understand. It's said that trolls share the same aggressive tendencies as pedophiles, rapists, serial killers, and other abusive characters – and I would agree. There is still research being done to determine if Internet social media platforms act as a catalyst for physical aggression or if they actually work to draw attention away from carrying out aggression in the physical realm. To me it seems both could be argued but I tend to believe there is a much greater probability that a troubled person, already predisposed to acting out hate against others online, would be more likely to carry out physical aggression than not. Simply put, social media caters to the cyber troll’s destructive nature and encourages them to act out, not retreat. Studies in bio sciences have actually shown that aggression builds especially strong pathways in the brain to which more and more stimulation is required in order to feel satisfied. This vicious cycle can easily be seen by the countless incidents of aggressive trolls crossing the line – breaking into homes, stalking their victims, and ultimately taking physical action that has led to numerous criminal acts of harassment, rape, and murder.
Every Internet troll should be regarded as dangerous. The first mistake would be to trivialise or disregard any threats of physical harm. This is not to mean that we should ever engage these people, it only means that sick people do act on their aggressive and violent thoughts. Today, with the growing ease in which personal information can be obtained, no one is really perfectly safe. This is why awareness, vigilance, and swift-acting law enforcement are key components when it comes to establishing effective cyber-safety measures. At the same time, we must not fear Internet trolls to the extent they prevent us from living our lives.
We're all in for a bit of a shock when taking a look at the mentality behind Internet trolls. How a person can find fulfillment spreading their hateful remarks on others is hard for those normal of us to understand. It's said that trolls share the same aggressive tendencies as pedophiles, rapists, serial killers, and other abusive characters – and I would agree. There is still research being done to determine if Internet social media platforms act as a catalyst for physical aggression or if they actually work to draw attention away from carrying out aggression in the physical realm. To me it seems both could be argued but I tend to believe there is a much greater probability that a troubled person, already predisposed to acting out hate against others online, would be more likely to carry out physical aggression than not. Simply put, social media caters to the cyber troll’s destructive nature and encourages them to act out, not retreat. Studies in bio sciences have actually shown that aggression builds especially strong pathways in the brain to which more and more stimulation is required in order to feel satisfied. This vicious cycle can easily be seen by the countless incidents of aggressive trolls crossing the line – breaking into homes, stalking their victims, and ultimately taking physical action that has led to numerous criminal acts of harassment, rape, and murder.
Every Internet troll should be regarded as dangerous. The first mistake would be to trivialise or disregard any threats of physical harm. This is not to mean that we should ever engage these people, it only means that sick people do act on their aggressive and violent thoughts. Today, with the growing ease in which personal information can be obtained, no one is really perfectly safe. This is why awareness, vigilance, and swift-acting law enforcement are key components when it comes to establishing effective cyber-safety measures. At the same time, we must not fear Internet trolls to the extent they prevent us from living our lives.
Friday, November 14, 2014
Ignoring cyberbullies?
By Abigail Clarke: Contributing Content Blogger
When I was young, my eldest sister was bullied at secondary school. I remember her getting the proper sort of advice to ignore it and promised that it would eventually go away. As it turned out for her, the bullying did finally stop. But bullying has changed since then and her situation was tied to in person school days with peers looking to cause trouble. Now, the internet provides a platform for a new type of bullying that operates differently so why is the advice in dealing with it still the same? Ignore it and hope it goes away? Sorry but this really does not work most of the time unless it's schoolyard bullying. Bullying is basically the same but the way it's perpetrated online is wildly different, and therefore, I think, needs wildly different defenses and countermeasures to fight it.
When a cyber bully is ignored, they usually ramp up their aggressive behaviours knowing they will eventually get a rise out of their target if they keep at them. They can easily recruit the aid of others to either inadvertently or directly gang up on a target. This is a way for them to share the blame by hiding behind others whilst carry out their aggression and creates the illusion they are actually in the right in what they are doing. By ignoring the cyberbully, several negatives are reinforced. One, silence may give the perception that the bullied person is guilty of whatever is being leveled at them and makes it easier to convince others to join in on the aggression. Two, silence may signal weakness to the bully giving them the impression they are getting to the victim which prompts them to continue their activities and even increase them. The goal of many bullies is to coax and pressure their victim to suicide like it's some kind of sick dare. Three, silence shows the cyberbully that nothing is being done to stop them and that they can get away with the behaviour without responsibility. This encourages them to continue on and start to attack others. Silence can ironically condone the bullying.
So how do you deal with a cyberbully? First of all, I suggest you don’t engage them directly. Doing this is not the same as ignoring them but it is a way of cutting off the gratification they derive from their aggression. Without delay you should speak to whomever possible to reveal the bully’s activities. This may be simply going to adults or the websites hosting the activity. Cyberbullies prefer not to be revealed for what they do. It also shows that in messing with you they will be held accountable and face consequences. One of the worst things a person can do is to be silent and internalise what is happening to them to the point they begin believing what is said about them and blame themselves. For adults who are being cyberbullied, my advice is the same. Report bullying activity to company officials and to law enforcement. Never hesitate by thinking cyberbullying is trivial and will pass. It rarely does and should be addressed immediately. It is so important to realise that the problem will not go away if you ignore it. Cyberbullying and abuse isn't the same is childhood bullying amongst children who can be stopped. When it's happening amongst adults that's a different playing field and the same rules don't apply.
When I was young, my eldest sister was bullied at secondary school. I remember her getting the proper sort of advice to ignore it and promised that it would eventually go away. As it turned out for her, the bullying did finally stop. But bullying has changed since then and her situation was tied to in person school days with peers looking to cause trouble. Now, the internet provides a platform for a new type of bullying that operates differently so why is the advice in dealing with it still the same? Ignore it and hope it goes away? Sorry but this really does not work most of the time unless it's schoolyard bullying. Bullying is basically the same but the way it's perpetrated online is wildly different, and therefore, I think, needs wildly different defenses and countermeasures to fight it.
When a cyber bully is ignored, they usually ramp up their aggressive behaviours knowing they will eventually get a rise out of their target if they keep at them. They can easily recruit the aid of others to either inadvertently or directly gang up on a target. This is a way for them to share the blame by hiding behind others whilst carry out their aggression and creates the illusion they are actually in the right in what they are doing. By ignoring the cyberbully, several negatives are reinforced. One, silence may give the perception that the bullied person is guilty of whatever is being leveled at them and makes it easier to convince others to join in on the aggression. Two, silence may signal weakness to the bully giving them the impression they are getting to the victim which prompts them to continue their activities and even increase them. The goal of many bullies is to coax and pressure their victim to suicide like it's some kind of sick dare. Three, silence shows the cyberbully that nothing is being done to stop them and that they can get away with the behaviour without responsibility. This encourages them to continue on and start to attack others. Silence can ironically condone the bullying.
So how do you deal with a cyberbully? First of all, I suggest you don’t engage them directly. Doing this is not the same as ignoring them but it is a way of cutting off the gratification they derive from their aggression. Without delay you should speak to whomever possible to reveal the bully’s activities. This may be simply going to adults or the websites hosting the activity. Cyberbullies prefer not to be revealed for what they do. It also shows that in messing with you they will be held accountable and face consequences. One of the worst things a person can do is to be silent and internalise what is happening to them to the point they begin believing what is said about them and blame themselves. For adults who are being cyberbullied, my advice is the same. Report bullying activity to company officials and to law enforcement. Never hesitate by thinking cyberbullying is trivial and will pass. It rarely does and should be addressed immediately. It is so important to realise that the problem will not go away if you ignore it. Cyberbullying and abuse isn't the same is childhood bullying amongst children who can be stopped. When it's happening amongst adults that's a different playing field and the same rules don't apply.
Saturday, November 1, 2014
Cyber harassment is not a gender war.
By Abigail Clarke: Contributing Content Blogger
I don't want to harp on gender wars but I have to speak up over my frustrations. I read another article daring to compare cyberharassment against men as comparable to women. I've no issue with men, I love them, but the prevailing notion keeps flopping about telling us men are targeted more often than women. Wait, what's this nonsense? It's an idea based on statistics claiming male celebrities receive more abuse overall on Twitter than their female counterparts. Straight off we're in trouble if we're using celebrities as our goal posts but beyond that this is a shallow study that takes the matter remissly out of context. Facts are, men are rarely targeted online for just being “men,” yet women tend to be harassed as a result of ingrained cultural beliefs that have been around since the beginning of time, that women are subordinate creatures needing to be put in their proper place.
For girls and women, being harassed online is not just about trivial unpleasantries or catcalls, as the media might have us believe, rather it is very often about men asserting dominance by intimidating women to silence and submission. Unlike men, women must endure threats of rape and other gender based violence that is simply not a factor for men. It is common to see the sharing of gifs, images, and lewd jokes depicting gross violence against women as “humour.” Unfortunately the humour can spill over into the real world leading to mob behaviours or individual physical stalking and attacks.
Women are in the majority of those targeted for revenge porn aren't they? Only recently more than 100 female celebrities fell victim to their private photographs being maliciously posted online with the intent to humiliate. It wasn't men. These things can happen to anyone, but in reality they don’t so let's keep it real. Men are online victims but to say what they experience online is comparable to women is insulting and takes us away from where we should be in developing strategies to deal with cyber abuses on the large. Abuses that do yes happen to men, but happen overwhelmingly to women with the abusers overwhelmingly being men. Let's not make comparisons where there aren't any. This is a war against cyber hate and crimes not a battle of which sex has it the worst.
I don't want to harp on gender wars but I have to speak up over my frustrations. I read another article daring to compare cyberharassment against men as comparable to women. I've no issue with men, I love them, but the prevailing notion keeps flopping about telling us men are targeted more often than women. Wait, what's this nonsense? It's an idea based on statistics claiming male celebrities receive more abuse overall on Twitter than their female counterparts. Straight off we're in trouble if we're using celebrities as our goal posts but beyond that this is a shallow study that takes the matter remissly out of context. Facts are, men are rarely targeted online for just being “men,” yet women tend to be harassed as a result of ingrained cultural beliefs that have been around since the beginning of time, that women are subordinate creatures needing to be put in their proper place.
For girls and women, being harassed online is not just about trivial unpleasantries or catcalls, as the media might have us believe, rather it is very often about men asserting dominance by intimidating women to silence and submission. Unlike men, women must endure threats of rape and other gender based violence that is simply not a factor for men. It is common to see the sharing of gifs, images, and lewd jokes depicting gross violence against women as “humour.” Unfortunately the humour can spill over into the real world leading to mob behaviours or individual physical stalking and attacks.
Women are in the majority of those targeted for revenge porn aren't they? Only recently more than 100 female celebrities fell victim to their private photographs being maliciously posted online with the intent to humiliate. It wasn't men. These things can happen to anyone, but in reality they don’t so let's keep it real. Men are online victims but to say what they experience online is comparable to women is insulting and takes us away from where we should be in developing strategies to deal with cyber abuses on the large. Abuses that do yes happen to men, but happen overwhelmingly to women with the abusers overwhelmingly being men. Let's not make comparisons where there aren't any. This is a war against cyber hate and crimes not a battle of which sex has it the worst.
Saturday, October 18, 2014
Cyber harassment and stalking crimes affecting women.
By Abigail Clarke: Contributing Content Blogger
They say cyberharassment crimes affect men and women equally. Maybe this may have some truth to it, but I can’t help but disagree. When cyber stalking shakes out and the statistics are organised, I believe women suffer at the hands of male perpetrators far more. There was an article in the Japanese Times spelling out a case involving a 33-year-old woman living in the city of Zushi. She had repeatedly asked police for protection from her ex-boyfriend who had been stalking her online and making threats. Her pleas fell on deaf ears as police unbelievably even managed to leak information about her private whereabouts. What kind of rubbish is that to hand a victim? The ex-boyfriend lost his lid, tracked her down and stabbed her to death. Swing and a miss on police protection then.
Another case involved a man cyberharassing a young Japanese woman whose family pleaded with police to have him detained. The family was told nothing could be done unless an actual act of violence took place. Conveniently idiotic. The man broke into the girl’s home intending to confront her but not finding her there he turned on the family instead and killed them all. In this day and age it is not unusual for stalking activity to escalate online to the extent that the first physical confrontation is fatal. The outdated practice of police waiting for a physical acting out to occur before they themselves move to act is a crime in and of itself as far as my opinion reaches but irresponsible at least.
Nearly all victims stalked online in Japan are women and 93.2 percent of police officers are men. As a male policeman, if you haven’t experienced the mental and physical suffering that being stalked causes to women, it may be difficult to take it seriously. I have heard it's very common in Japan that police responses to cyberstalking reports are generally unenthusiastic and slow in following up. Fairness first, this isn't exclusively a Japanese police problem, the very same problem occurs worldwide. My point is cyberstalking is a problem – women are targeted more than men – and police forces whose ranks are mostly male, seem to have a somewhat casual dismissive response when it comes to women reporting their cyberstalkers. We should be paying attention to what is going on in Canada. They are on the verge there of passing legislation allowing police to identify and root out online stalkers, creating huge risk for stalkers in being found out. We need more up-to-date laws for police agencies everywhere so that they can be held to a standard of acting quickly and effectively to prevent the next victim of cyberstalking. Finally, police agencies need to acknowledge that women fall victim to cyberstalking much more frequently and that their concerns are valid. If police don't quit bugging out of the problem they'll be dealing with more murders alright.
They say cyberharassment crimes affect men and women equally. Maybe this may have some truth to it, but I can’t help but disagree. When cyber stalking shakes out and the statistics are organised, I believe women suffer at the hands of male perpetrators far more. There was an article in the Japanese Times spelling out a case involving a 33-year-old woman living in the city of Zushi. She had repeatedly asked police for protection from her ex-boyfriend who had been stalking her online and making threats. Her pleas fell on deaf ears as police unbelievably even managed to leak information about her private whereabouts. What kind of rubbish is that to hand a victim? The ex-boyfriend lost his lid, tracked her down and stabbed her to death. Swing and a miss on police protection then.
Another case involved a man cyberharassing a young Japanese woman whose family pleaded with police to have him detained. The family was told nothing could be done unless an actual act of violence took place. Conveniently idiotic. The man broke into the girl’s home intending to confront her but not finding her there he turned on the family instead and killed them all. In this day and age it is not unusual for stalking activity to escalate online to the extent that the first physical confrontation is fatal. The outdated practice of police waiting for a physical acting out to occur before they themselves move to act is a crime in and of itself as far as my opinion reaches but irresponsible at least.
Nearly all victims stalked online in Japan are women and 93.2 percent of police officers are men. As a male policeman, if you haven’t experienced the mental and physical suffering that being stalked causes to women, it may be difficult to take it seriously. I have heard it's very common in Japan that police responses to cyberstalking reports are generally unenthusiastic and slow in following up. Fairness first, this isn't exclusively a Japanese police problem, the very same problem occurs worldwide. My point is cyberstalking is a problem – women are targeted more than men – and police forces whose ranks are mostly male, seem to have a somewhat casual dismissive response when it comes to women reporting their cyberstalkers. We should be paying attention to what is going on in Canada. They are on the verge there of passing legislation allowing police to identify and root out online stalkers, creating huge risk for stalkers in being found out. We need more up-to-date laws for police agencies everywhere so that they can be held to a standard of acting quickly and effectively to prevent the next victim of cyberstalking. Finally, police agencies need to acknowledge that women fall victim to cyberstalking much more frequently and that their concerns are valid. If police don't quit bugging out of the problem they'll be dealing with more murders alright.
Monday, September 29, 2014
The question of online behaviours.
By Abigail Clarke: Contributing Content Blogger
I've not been sure what to write about as of late but today thought of the question present when it comes to online behaviours. In this day and age of cyber technology, it's true children are having to deal with a new world even adults are ill equipped to handle. I did a bit of reading and learned Richard J. Hazler, a professor of counseling education at Penn State University in America stated that children, for the most part, are unable to comprehend the damage their behavioural actions online can cause in the lives of others offline. He said that when it comes to bullying and its consequences, kids simply haven’t fully developed emotionally and that young people behave in such ways because that part of the brain controlling cognitive decision-making is not physiologically completely formed. There does seem to be some truth to this, but I thought it seems to be sidestepping the looming question that if this is indeed the case, why then do we see the same behaviours in adults online?
Either there are many more adults with underdeveloped emotional brains or it is something more fundamental that supersedes emotional development. I'm predisposed to ponder the latter. Kids can be unusually cruel to one another and it does tie in to the fact that they do not possess the power of empathy, but because adults can be equally if not more vicious when in an online environment, it might have more to do with the detachment factor. The inability to see direct damage. In the perspective of many, their ventings are lost in cyber space, falling on deaf ears. Because they do not see a direct response or reaction, they assume that their remarks don’t have the same effect as if in person. This then doesn’t have a thing to do with emotional development than a lack of understanding of technology.
What Mr. Hazler stated seems to almost allow young people an excuse to behave in these detestable ways. Should we not be refusing to allow the making of excuses to explain away online abusive behaviours? One does not need to be emotionally developed to be kind to others or to know it is the appropriate course. Do they? I think not.
I've not been sure what to write about as of late but today thought of the question present when it comes to online behaviours. In this day and age of cyber technology, it's true children are having to deal with a new world even adults are ill equipped to handle. I did a bit of reading and learned Richard J. Hazler, a professor of counseling education at Penn State University in America stated that children, for the most part, are unable to comprehend the damage their behavioural actions online can cause in the lives of others offline. He said that when it comes to bullying and its consequences, kids simply haven’t fully developed emotionally and that young people behave in such ways because that part of the brain controlling cognitive decision-making is not physiologically completely formed. There does seem to be some truth to this, but I thought it seems to be sidestepping the looming question that if this is indeed the case, why then do we see the same behaviours in adults online?
Either there are many more adults with underdeveloped emotional brains or it is something more fundamental that supersedes emotional development. I'm predisposed to ponder the latter. Kids can be unusually cruel to one another and it does tie in to the fact that they do not possess the power of empathy, but because adults can be equally if not more vicious when in an online environment, it might have more to do with the detachment factor. The inability to see direct damage. In the perspective of many, their ventings are lost in cyber space, falling on deaf ears. Because they do not see a direct response or reaction, they assume that their remarks don’t have the same effect as if in person. This then doesn’t have a thing to do with emotional development than a lack of understanding of technology.
What Mr. Hazler stated seems to almost allow young people an excuse to behave in these detestable ways. Should we not be refusing to allow the making of excuses to explain away online abusive behaviours? One does not need to be emotionally developed to be kind to others or to know it is the appropriate course. Do they? I think not.
Wednesday, September 3, 2014
The Troll
By Abigail Clarke: Contributing Content Blogger
What's a troll? I've often wondered. Whenever I come across this word, I first picture a dumbly over sized monster so often depicted in films. I might not be far off the mark really, at least personality wise.
The word “troll” has reinvented itself in the modern slang of the internet. A troll on the internet is someone who intentionally tries to upset others by starting arguments or posting unnecessarily inflammatory messages on blogs, in chat rooms, or forums. This is essentially the same thing as flaming where “flamers” go about their ways posting nasty comments to start angry dialogue. As is the usual theme, anonymity plays a central component in this cowardly immature activity so many are prone to.
There's been an effort to understand the psychology of the internet troll, in a study conducted that questioned over 400 participants on their internet activity and behaviours. As it shakes out, those who actually enjoy trolling or flaming also have a disproportionate sadistic nature to their personalities which is formally characterised as psychopathic. In fact, statistical analysis places a significant overlap between the troll and the sadist. They are indistinguishable. It can basically be said that these people writing nasty comments are doing so because they have need to harm other people. The sadist or troll, is someone who is vicious and degrading toward others. Keep in mind these traits are commonly seen in serial killers and sex offender personalities. The sadistic troll combs through chat forums and the like, spending over an hour per day spreading their invective. This is a sickness and we are just now coming to realise the internet exacerbates the condition at the unfortunate expense of others.
Trolls are a scare and even the most dumbly over sized monsters can do a terrible amount of damage in films and online. Should we not be doing something about seeing to it the clubs these trolls bang on with are taken away from them?
Trolls are a scare and even the most dumbly over sized monsters can do a terrible amount of damage in films and online. Should we not be doing something about seeing to it the clubs these trolls bang on with are taken away from them?
Thursday, August 21, 2014
An internet of enablers.
By Abigail Clarke: Contributing Content Blogger
When people are stalked or harassed on the internet, something should be done about it immediately. I’ve grown rather weary of all the talk about what police cannot do or what social medias cannot do. There is something police can do. They can investigate these rampant crimes. Hate speech, harassment, bullying, and stalking are crimes. It is my opinion, and not lacking of common sense, that if the police don’t have the resources to deal with these, they certainly need to be given them. Victims of these crimes are not barmy and should never be made to feel they are. I realised many years to the prior you must speak up to be heard, especially when what is being spoken is less than popular. I don’t want to live in a society that just throws up its hands when people are routinely lashed on the internet only to say “it’s not so bad. Just live with it.”
There is also something social media companies can do. They can make it known that abuse is not acceptable in any capacity. They can work to reshape the expression, environment, and context of their sites so that hate crime cannot thrive. They can make reporting a little easier as well and support a trained staff to deal with these reports. They can make a genuine effort to listen to their users and take action on what they are saying instead of burying away complaints. These are all proactive things that could happen and would make a difference however even these don’t get to the root of the problem. They are band-aids treating symptoms and not the cause. Social media doesn’t cause cyber harassment and the police cannot cure it. What really needs to happen is for society to take a genuine look at itself. To change the status quo of the internet requires consistent and long-term education beginning at a young age. Society must be reconditioned to be able to function properly, as a whole, on the internet.
At present there is no doubt the internet is enabling abusive behaviours, allowing people to vent and throw their hate at others, but by the same token it also provides a platform for positive voices to be heard and for knowledge to be shared and advanced.
When people are stalked or harassed on the internet, something should be done about it immediately. I’ve grown rather weary of all the talk about what police cannot do or what social medias cannot do. There is something police can do. They can investigate these rampant crimes. Hate speech, harassment, bullying, and stalking are crimes. It is my opinion, and not lacking of common sense, that if the police don’t have the resources to deal with these, they certainly need to be given them. Victims of these crimes are not barmy and should never be made to feel they are. I realised many years to the prior you must speak up to be heard, especially when what is being spoken is less than popular. I don’t want to live in a society that just throws up its hands when people are routinely lashed on the internet only to say “it’s not so bad. Just live with it.”
There is also something social media companies can do. They can make it known that abuse is not acceptable in any capacity. They can work to reshape the expression, environment, and context of their sites so that hate crime cannot thrive. They can make reporting a little easier as well and support a trained staff to deal with these reports. They can make a genuine effort to listen to their users and take action on what they are saying instead of burying away complaints. These are all proactive things that could happen and would make a difference however even these don’t get to the root of the problem. They are band-aids treating symptoms and not the cause. Social media doesn’t cause cyber harassment and the police cannot cure it. What really needs to happen is for society to take a genuine look at itself. To change the status quo of the internet requires consistent and long-term education beginning at a young age. Society must be reconditioned to be able to function properly, as a whole, on the internet.
At present there is no doubt the internet is enabling abusive behaviours, allowing people to vent and throw their hate at others, but by the same token it also provides a platform for positive voices to be heard and for knowledge to be shared and advanced.
Monday, August 4, 2014
Free speech confused.
By Abigail Clarke: Contributing Content Blogger
If there is one thing that boils me it's people using the argument of free speech to justify the behaviours of cyber haters attacking others with their hate. This is offensive to any victim and I've no issue saying it's an outright stupid thing to say. Even though many countries do not have the right to free speech embedded in their constitutions, the concept is still pulled out of the bag by cyber attackers everywhere regardless of country. These people feel completely justified jabbing and ripping at others through the internet unbelievably feeling they have the right to do so. If confronted, these people claim the right to freely say what they like as if there is an implicit right to free speech everywhere, but more than that they equate a right to free speech as an open license to harm others to the extent of death.
Right of free speech is one of the most bastardised and contorted justifications used on the internet today. Younger generations are misunderstanding the original intent of the concept. In the United States, right to free speech was a protection put in place to allow citizens to openly criticise the government without retaliation. It has now somehow morphed into individuals thinking they have the right to wield abusive and hateful cyber attacks on whomever they choose for whatever reason they deem appropriate. This is not restricted to just within the United States. The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, states “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers”. Several countries such as in Africa, India, Australia, and many others, have specific free speech laws extended to their citizens. This ingrained misconception of free speech has become a universal standard by which cyber harassment is condoned worldwide.
The right of free speech and the freedom to attack others with hateful poisonous language, need to be distinguished from one another and then enforceable laws in place to prevent the damaging effects of online hate attacks.
Monday, July 21, 2014
Bullycide = real suicide = real death.
By Abigail Clarke: Contributing Content Blogger
Bullycide is defined by most as the act of an individual who takes their own life as a result of being bullied. It is a term that has just recently begun to gain traction in bigger circles as a real problem. Bullying has traditionally been considered a rite of passage for everyone as they go through childhood. It is viewed as a toughening up of a person and helps one to deal with the hard knocks of the adult world. This couldn't be further from the actual reality. Cyberbullying has flown under the radar as a major cause of suicides committed every day not only by children but by adults as well. The tendency is to write off a suicide death as being carried out by someone who is troubled or having emotional problems that led to their final act, but in many cases this wrongly places more fault on the suicide victim than those who are really responsible. In fact it allows bullies to dodge accountability through arguing and justifying their actions by placing blame on the victim’s mental instability.
We must raise awareness to the fact bullying is not just something people need to buck up and deal with. It's clear now that its damage is more profound than ever thought before, unequivocally eroding away the confidence and self worth of a victim causing unrecoverable damage in their life which in many cases ultimately ends in suicide. It is also becoming well known that bullying doesn’t just occur with children but is extremely common in the adult workplace. Studies have been done showing that suicides in adults can be linked directly to some kind of bullying taking place at work or through the internet in association with work. The commonality with children and adults is the same. Physical death. In what country, in what world, can we possibly be agreeable to this?
Friday, June 27, 2014
Do you know what doxing is?
By Abigail Clarke: Contributing Content Blogger
Here's a fright nobody much speaks about. There is a disturbing aspect of cyber harassment called Doxing. Doxing is the researching and publishing of personally identifiable information about an individual to create a public perception about them. This can be accomplished by searching public databases and social media websites to locate pieces of information. The information may initially be fragmented and so the doxer goes about collecting and piecing together the picture they want to create about a victim. Some internet harassers thrive on this as they are able to strengthen their control over a victim by swaying the opinion of others. This is just another way of social engineering where large groups of people are influenced by information framed in such a way as to give an overwhelming perception of an individual. The information may be factual but intentionally presented out of context to project the image they are going for, which is usually to make their target look as bad as possible. The threat of something like this, well it's just about enough when understood to make anyone want to live under a rock!
Doxing is difficult to combat because it is technically not illegal. Cyber harassers are merely dispensing public information. This type of harassment can be especially harmful to an individual not only because it takes a toll on their mental well-being through potential intense embarrassment, but their reputation can be irreparably damaged. If the individual holds a public position or has a career that depends on public perception, doxing could literally end their livelihood despite additional information presented exonerating the victim. In other words, once the damage is done it is difficult if not impossible for a targeted individual to recover.
Monday, June 2, 2014
Risky business
By Abigail Clarke: Contributing Content Blogger
Cyber victims around the world need to know they are not alone! There are people out there who understand this problem and can be trusted. They need to know there are still people with integrity and honor. The abusive and hateful nature we see on the internet today is a result of people allowed too much freedom. Human nature tends toward chaos and lawlessness when not governed. Laws must be in place to give society structure, and they are in place for a multitude of other situations already. The internet however is not structured as much as it should be and lacks proper laws that would prevent the heartache and severe damage occurring in people’s lives right now worldwide.
Adults act like children and children act like reckless adults. Existing cyber laws vary from country to country and in many cases are lacking completely. There is no international governance and no consistency. How then can we expect people to be kind to one another when they have the avenue to unleash their own pent up pain and self hate against others they don’t even know and in many cases they can do it without being identified.
Thursday, May 29, 2014
Rising Awareness
By Abigail Clarke: Contributing Content Blogger
It astonishes me when I think of the rise in awareness toward cyber bullying and other cyber hate crimes. There is so much great work done now to spread the word and expose the problem. More people today know about the life consuming nature of cyber hate than ever before in history and the number is growing. I've not got the numbers, but it may appear cyber hate crimes and the resulting deaths caused by them are increasing and this is spite of all the progress. Any monumental problem requires monumental effort to tackle it. Hope is not lost! This is one of the primary reasons the Global Institute for Cyber Safety and Standards was established. The importance of sustaining the momentum set well in motion throughout the world is to not only uncover injustices terrorising our children and other internet users, but to offer a launch pad for fighting the issue head on. Through education, we are reaching millions, but education alone may not be enough. We must inspire people who hear the message, to act. This is an age old difficulty that can be seen even in the chambers of lawmakers in all countries.
Certain countries are getting tough by passing laws that hold cyber terrorists accountable for the damage they cause. It is not as easy as it sounds. The majority of countries are still concerned about the overall effect such laws will have on their citizens and are thus hesitant to implement anything similar. Those bold enough to pioneer new laws governing cybercrimes are true global leaders. They set a precedent for the rest, allowing others a front row seat as to their effectiveness.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)