1. Social networks and cyberbullying: implications for students
and teachers
Ryan MacDougall
ED6931 Memorial University
June 28th, 2011
2. Purpose
The purpose of this presentation is to examine legislation and some
legal cases involving cyberbullying and freedom of speech via
social networks.
3. Overview
Legal Cases:
D.C, a minor et al. v. R.R, a minor et al. (California)
Finkel v. Facebook (New York)
United States v. Lori Drew (Missouri)
4. Why Cyberbullying is a Challenge
5. Adopted Legislation
Tinker Standard: schools may not silent student speech/opinion
because they dislike it. They must reasonably forecast that a) a
substantial disruption of the school environment would occur and/or
b) that the rights of others would be invaded.
This standard, adopted by the Supreme Court, arose from the case of
15 year old John Tinker who, along with his sister and a friend
wore black armbands to their Iowa schools to protest the Vietnam
War. It was ruled that students and teachers do not shed their
right to freedom of speech and expression at the schoolhouse
gate.
6. Adopted Legislation
United States:
Washington S.1706 reads:8
(5) By August 1, 2008, each school district shall amend its
harassment,
intimidation, and bullying prevention policy to include a section
addressing acts of
bullying, harassment, or intimidation that are conducted via
electronic means by
a student while on school grounds and during the school day.
The existing Oregon Revised Statute addressing harassment,
intimidation, and bullying
reads:
339.351 Definitions for ORS 339.351 to 339.364. As used in ORS
339.351 to
339.364, harassment, intimidation or bullying means any act that
substantially
interferes with a students educational benefits, opportunities or
performance,
that takes place on or immediately adjacent to school grounds, at
any schoolsponsored
activity, on school-provided transportation or at any official
school bus
stop, and that has the effect of:
7. Adopted Legislation
Canada:
In 2007, Ontario adopted a policy where cyberbullying was added to
a list of offences in which a student could be suspended or
expelled from school, known as part of the Safe Schools Act
Premier Dalton McGuinty said at the time that "bullying is
bullying..whether you do it online by way of the latest technology
or you're doing it in person or over the old fashioned telephone,
it still causes pain and suffering."
8. Court Cases Involving Cyberbullying
Case #1:
A 15 year old student in California, known as D.C, creates a
website to promote his aspiring career as a performer
Fellow students at his school post various derogatory messages on
his website
Police rule that this does not fall under hate crimes but free
speech; no investigation will take place
D.Cs father files a lawsuit against those involved; one of the
defendant parents files a motion that remarks were jocular in
nature judge dismisses the motion
Case goes to California appeals court; lower courts decision is
upheld it was clear that these derogatory remarks were not intended
as free speech
Hate crimes and defamation charges may now proceed
9. Court Cases Involving Cyberbullying
In this case, the debate was based upon whether the statements made
on the website were actually derogatory or whether they constituted
free speech under the first amendment. The authorities originally
refused to launch an investigation as they believed this to be free
speech. However, when a civil suit was finally launched, the judge
deemed this to be a case of hate crimes and defamation.
10. Court Cases Involving Cyberbullying
Case #2 Finkel v. Facebook:
Teenager Denise Finkel sued classmates, their parents along with
Facebook for defamation after the classmates created a Facebook
group and posted derogatory messages about her.
The case alleges that the students should be held liable for
defamation, the parents held liable for failure to adequately
supervise their children and Facebook held liable for failure to
verify the genuineness of the postings.
Facebook filed a motion to dismiss motion was granted due to
Facebooks immunity under section 230 of the CDA.
state judge dismissed the remaining claims, writing that, "Taken
together, the statements can only be read as puerile attempts by
adolescents to outdo each other"
11. Court Cases Involving Cyberbullying
In the Finkel case, the primary issue was that the prosecution felt
that Facebook should have gotten involved to restrict these
individuals from posting statements that the company should have
known were not true. While the students and their parents were also
named as defendents, it appeared that the lawsuit was primarily
aimed at Facebook. Interestingly enough, the entire case was
dismissed. Based on the evidence, the comments made did not seem as
harsh as those made in the first case.
12. Court Cases Involving Cyberbullying
Case #3 United States v. Lori Drew
Drew, a Missouri woman, had a daughter that was friends with 13
year old Megan Meiers. Meiers eventually transferred schools and
decided she did not want to be friends with Drews daughter.
Drew became suspicious that Meiers may be spreading rumors about
her daughter.
Drew decided to create a fake MySpace profile of a 16 year old boy
to find out what Meiers was saying about her daughter.
Meiers and the fake profile begin a flirtatious relationship.
Eventually, Drew, using the fake profile, tells Meiers that the
world would be better off without her.
Meiers mother entered her room later on to find out the girl had
committed suicide.
Drew was convicted of a misdemeanor under the Computer Fraud and
Access Act. This conviction was later set aside on the grounds that
the conviction does not align with the CFAA.
Missouri updated their legislation to cover
cyberbullying.
13. Court Cases Involving Cyberbullying
Case #3 continued:
The updated version of the law removes the requirement for illegal
harassment to be either written or over the telephone. These
changes make the law applicable to harassment from computers, text
messages, and other electronic devices
A federal Megan MeiersCyberbullyingPrevention Act was also
introduced. The purpose of this bill was to set a federal standard
definition for the term cyberbullying. According to Rep. Linda
Sanchez, the behaviour must be repeated and hostile to fall under
the definition.
If the bill is passed, it would officially criminalize online
behaviour intended to coerce or intimidate.
14. Court Cases Involving Cyberbullying
This is a really interesting case simply for the fact that the
individual doing the cyberbullying is actually an adult. This is a
scenerio where an individual used the computer in a fraudulent
manner but due to an apparent loophole, could not be charged under
the CFAA.
15. Cyberbullying: Curriculum Connections
How can cyberbullying connect to curriculum and what we
teach?
Cyberbullying: A Prevention Curriculum for Grades 6-12 Scope and
Sequence by the Hazelden Foundation.
Causes and effects of cyberbullying
How to create a positive cyber site (rather than a negative
one)
Materials for parents (get them involved!)
16. Implications for Students and Teachers
While students must maintain their right to freedom of speech, they
can be held accountable for what they say online, on or off
campus.
As in the case of A.B v. State of Indiana, teachers may be the
subject of what appears to be derogatory flaming, but may
constitute students exercising their freedom of speech (according
to constitutions). Should teachers accept this treatment just
because they are public figures? This is a question that will be
widely debated in the coming years.
17. Conclusion
In conclusion, important to point out that situations discussed in
this presentation may not be dealt with the same in all
jurisdictions.
Manns (2008) article regarding social networking and cyberbullying
points out a few important conclusions. A study was conducted by
Lacey on how cyberbullying could be stopped. An important response
included parental involvement being a key factor. Parents need to
supervise their children with much more scrutiny while they are on
the internet.
Education is also key. Students and their parents must be aware of
the risks associated with social networking sites not only with
cyberbullying but with divulging personal information, reading
privacy policies, etc.
18. References
A.B v. State of Indiana, 2007, ICA.
http://online.mun.ca/d2l/lms/content/viewer/view.d2l?tId=762092&ou=80741
Bullying. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullying
City News. Cyber-Bullying Law Introduced to Ontario. Published
April 16th, 2007. Accessed June 25th, 2011.
http://www.citytv.com/toronto/citynews/life/family/article/16010--cyber-bullying-law-introduced-in-ontario
Finkelv. Facebook, 2009, SCNY.
http://www.citmedialaw.org/threats/finkel-v-facebook
http://www.citmedialaw.org/section-230
The Hazelden Foundation. Cyber-Bullying: A Prevention Curriculum
for Grades 3-5 and 6-12. Accessed June 22nd, 2011.
http://www.hazelden.org/web/go/cyberbullying
Herring, S. C. (2002). Cyber violence: Recognizing and resisting
abuse in online environments. Asian Women, 14, 187-212.
Hoff, D, & Shariff, S (2007).Cyberbullying: Clarifying Legal
Boundaries for School Supervision in Cyberspace, accessed June
25th, 2011. http://www.cybercrimejournal.com/shaheenhoff.pdf.
Li, Q. (2005). Cyber bullying in schools: The nature extent of
adolescents experience. Paper presented at the American Education
Research Association (AERA) Conference in Montreal, Quebec, Canada,
April, 2005.
Mann, B.L. (2009). Social networking websites: A concatenation of
impersonation, denigration, sexual and aggressive solicitation,
cyber-bullying and happy slapping videos. International Journal of
Law & Information Technology, 17(3), 252-267.
19. References
Social Networking.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Networking
Tinker Standard.
http://www.firstamendmentschools.org/freedoms/faq.aspx?id=12991&printer-friendly=y
Willard, Nancy (2007). Cyberbullying Legislation and School
Policies: Where are the Boundaries of the School-House Gate in the
New Virtual World?. June 25th, 2011.
http://www.cyberbully.org/cyberbully/docs/cblegislation.pdf
Wikipedia. United States v. Lori Drew. Updated June 20th, 2011.
Accessed June 25th, 2011.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Lori_Drew
Zetter, K (2010). Court: Cyberbullying Threats are not Protected
Speech in Wired. March 18th, 2010. Accessed June 25th, 2011. <
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/03/cyberbullying-not-protected/>