Last week, i was sent this, and judging by the responses at the bottom of the post, i wasn’t the only one.
It’s a blog set up by a 19 year old lad who’s on his way on a back packing trip around the world. As you’ll see from the comments posted once people get a whiff that he MIGHT be the son of someone who writes for the Guardian, in come the tirades about nepotism, him being middle class and cossetted etc….
Well, he’s stopped blogging now , shocked and no doubt upset at the vitriol that was aimed at him. Max was, the same paper says this morning, a victim of an “electronic mob“, while Rafael Behr writing in yesterday’s Observer says “there is no community spirit online “ and concludes by saying that the one thing the web doesn’t do is democracy.
Ok, a few things we should get clear here : firstly, when the piece was sent to me, i laughed. And yes, i forwarded it to other people who also laughed. I questioned it’s authenticity yes, but i also definitely laughed.
Also, the above papers “hosted” Max’s blog so they are bound to be defensive but it does make me feel a little uncomfortable this morning. Ok,there are worse things out there- Max is in India and it will soon be forgotten but there is something ugly about this process – and in a small way i took part.
When i was at 5 Live, there was a message board for listeners to talk about programmes which swiftly degenerated into the same few people slagging off the same presenters. Those few people (who clearly didn’t have anything else in their lives) took it over, and it soon fell into disrepute. It’s the same with text messages- they are used as flamethrowers- pour out any old bile, and when someone calls you back, and you have to account for your views, it’s a “wrong number” or “i did it for a joke”.
The problem of cyber-bullying is more serious in schools…look at this story from yesterday, about kids as young as 7 being bullied by phone or computer by other kids “attracted by the easy method and lack of physical confrontation”.
What can we do about this ? Is it just a fact of life ? Has the web just given a license for the bullies to stay anonymous and unaccountable ? And do you think we should discuss it on our (usually well-behaved and courteous) blog or on-air ?
RSS feed
For the life of me I cannot figure out how the leaders of Pakistan talk of elections and democracy. Don’t they know they are a theocratic Islamic state which has no room for democracy & elections. Caliph yes selected by a nomination process and hereditary but not elected. Lokk at the fifty five Islamic States and their 1200 million population. How many of them are democracies. Just a sprinkling – Turkey which of late is showing signs which are not encpouraging. Malaysia – a non-Muslim woman lost her rights in a matrimonial case where her non Muslim husband became a Muslim and claimed that his marriage did not exist. There are examples galore that suggest the Islamic world is not comfortable with democracy.
I really feel for the poor guy, travelling around alone and suddenly being confronted by that overwhelming wall of hatred. It was shocking to read some of the comments, and quite frankly Britain and its culture (or what was left of it, from the looks of things!) have lost yet more respect from me. What an absolute stinker.
Cyber-bullying can get very personal, speaking as a former “administrator” on Wikipedia who’s had to experience it. It’s not fun. It’s disgusting. It needs to be dealt with.
Excellent topic!
I laughed too. Some of the worst was moderated out and the kid had a fair amount of support as well, but it’s a good example of the nasty side of the web.
Hi Mark.
i did not see the keyboard bashers remarks, but i know what you mean.
Imagine some frustrated, with nothing to say (verbally) person sitting at his keyboard, taking his fruss. out on someone that has something to say.
That is the negative side of a good democratic Blog set-up.
i used to write on a WDR Forum in my best German, unrtill i found out it was always the same persons, and a sort of Heirachy had been formed. i must admit i gave up, because i was intellectually sub standard according to them.
Please never give up at the BBC, i enjoy writing, and reading every thing i can, and listen regularly. Mark the bad-uns red, and see what happens???.
Greetings
John in Germany
I purposely do not have a Facebook, MySpace, or personal blog because of cyber-bullying. Some of my friends (we’re all teenagers) do use these tools on the internet and the kind of bile I have heard about on the web is astonishing. There is a constant stream of abuse, gossip and blackmail that goes on, among petty, cowardly people, especially young people. The perpetrators feel no guilt because they don’t have to look at the faces of their victims, while some web-abuse has even caused its victims to contemplate and commit suicide. As useful as the interenet is, it can be a “guilt-free” forum for the worst inside each of us.
Mark, cyberspace brings out the worst in people. I’ve been online since 1991, back when the “Internet” was just a bunch of bulletin boards hosted by universities, the military and major corporations (mine was Intel). I’ve been “cyberraped,” stalked, harrassed — everything you can think of. For years I used a male name online to avoid being attacked. (I didn’t start posting as a woman until 1997.) Back in 1994 I had the opportunity to be on a team of graphical virtual world designers for Fujitsu and I learned a great deal from the virtual communities guru, Randy Farmer, the man who first used the word “avatar” to describe a graphical representation of oneself in cyberspace. (The term was then used by Neal Stephenson in Snow Crash.) What I learned from Randy that dovetailed into my own experience is that online communities often are self policing in terms of developing their own values and deterring bad behavior. However, individuals — especially women — need to have the power to stop harassment, I told him. This resulted in various safeguards being built into the virtual world we created. It seems these days there’s hardly a system out there that doesn’t allow you to ignore a person or, in the case of LiveJournal, disallow anonymous comments.
Still, there’s not nearly enough research about this, I feel. I was reading an article the other day in the Standford University Alumni magazine about how they’re paying this virtual world researcher to learn how to use avatars to train people to think differently — for example, people create avatars and watch themselves exercise and engage in other healthy behaviors. This is all well and good as some future form of psychotherapy, but dammit we need more research into why people become such deleterious asses as soon as they have a shred of anonymity and how we can combat that in a world that ever-increasingly relies on cyberspace for all kinds of social, informational and financial transactions. It’s a major problem in my book.
Aaah, Mark: you do the bullies an injustice.
I think they were just as annoyed at the inanity of the blog as they were by the blogger’s apparent nepotistic connections and middle class background. I only read a few comments. Most were more interesting and amusing than the blog. I suppose I haven’t come to the really nasty bits yet. I can look forward to those.
From what little I’ve read I’m not sure what the fuss is about (though as I’ve admitted, I’ve probably not seen the really cruel stuff). But it’s not as if WHYS has entirely clean hands when it comes to this kind of thing. George Bush is not merely criticised by contributors to your blog: he is often vilified mercilessly and no epithet (‘criminal’, ‘imbecile’, ‘murderer’, ‘moron’, etc) seems too vicious to be posted about him. The BBC’s disdain for him is clear not only from this but also from the habit of referring to him as ‘Bush’. The kind of ‘Presidential’ courtesy that is usually extended to despots and dictators is often denied a genuine ‘President’. Similarly with the US, Britain and the West in general. Posts are never wanting to denounce all three in the most unmeasured terms for their racism, colonialism, imperialism, conspiracies against various parts of the third world, and support of Israel. Some of them are expressions of pure hatred that would never pass the moderator if they were written from a Western stance about the third world. And speaking of Israel, some of the posts about the Jewish state – and about Jews generally – fall squarely within the definition of ‘anti-semitic’. And what it’s hard not to notice is that the kind of bullying and abusive language that is permitted tends to be in support of the BBC editorial line on this or that subject (though of course the official and public line is that the
BBC is nothing less than impartial on topics like Israel, George Bush, Iraq, Guantanamo, the role of the UN, the racist and colonialist sins of the West, etc).
So I do think that there is a little bit of the old pot and kettle dynamic at work here here. Abuse is sometimes the price to be paid for free speech. I’m not sure that it always or even usually amounts to bullying, though. A little robustness never did anybody any harm. ‘Bush’ and Israel don’t seem to have suffered from the tidal wave of abuse that they face regularly, often courtesy of media outlets like the BBC. And neither should the Guardian’s Max. Sticks and stones, anybody?
Thanks for the thoughtful response to this topic- as if i’d expect anything less.
* Victork – i take your points about George Bush, though i suppose a mitigating factor (rightly or wrongly) is that being the U.S president means he is in a lot better position to handle it. Not saying it’s right, but he’s not Max…or, for that matter, Maria , who’s experience is salutary to say the least.
* Claire you make a good point too about the “worst in us” but i would slightly take issue with the idea it’s especially young people- some of the abuse aimed at BBC presenters (and i know they are a protected species in many ways) was, on further investigation, found to be from older members of “society”.
* and ZK, from your Wikipedia experience,and John from your WDR experience, what would you suggest could be done about it ?
Worth continuing the conversation ?
The worst bullying I have ever seen on the internet takes place in the comments of just about any YouTube video. It is a fact of life, the anonymity of the internet allows it to happen. There is probably little to do about E-thugging without extensive moderating. Just don’t let them get under your skin. Its funny how angry people get on blogs or comments on various sites and show just how ignorant they really are. I normally just sit back and read comment after comment on the YouTube videos and marvel at how stupid some people really are.
The anonyminity of the internet allows E-thugging, as such, don’t let it get personal if your on the recieving side of it. These people don’t know you, you don’t know them, just let them take all of their personal issues out online in an attempt to get that last witty remark ‘IB4TL’.
Brett ~ Richmond, Va.
Dearest Mark : Thanks for this great debate ! May be it’s just about the way that we express our opinion with whether agreeing or disagreeing with the other side. Imagine with me two persons, A and B : A comes to work wearing a yellow shirt. B thinks that A looks awful in that yellow shirt. There’re two ways B can express this to A : 1-B says to A : ‘Oh my God A ! You look awful in that yellow shirt !’. 2-B says to A : ‘A, I do think that the blue shirt will look more beautiful on you than this yellow shirt !’. Guys, what’s your choice gonna be ?! Way 1 or Way 2 ?! With my love ! Yours forever, Lubna !
Try as hard as you can Mark, to make it live debate on WHYS,so that people will know when and how to write comments without promoting hatred against others.Many thanks and looking forward to hearing from you soon.
Just make them publish their real name instead of a nom de plume.
Once on BBCI used my real name to complain about not being able to get on your Blog. I just used the first comment I came across . Now this rather well worded and polite complaint is attached to my Google search “Under fat people on planes”! I never fly anywhere.
Serves me right for using my real name and taught me a lesson.
Hmmm…I have a blog, and I like comments on it, I actually advertise that comments are welcomed. I believe in free speech, even if that free speech is opposed to what I believe. I once was attacked by a cyber-bully, it was an interesting encounter – but I am not one for letting a bully of any kind getting under my skin.
The short drift of this was he didn’t like (hated) the team I support, Manchester United – he insisted in calling me a derogatory name which I won’t spell out on here but it did begin with ‘Sad and was followed by the ‘B’ word. After latching on to me like a limpet I went and changed my screen name to what the person called me – funnily enough he didn’t know who I was and after telling him that I, too, disliked Man Utd he tried to befriend me – against myself! Odd person but sad when you think of it.
I pity cyber-bullies, I think they are in need of some love! Real life bullies should be treated with the same contempt that they give others – a bully is only empowered if you give him/her that power – or you could simply smack them in the teeth, which I don’t advocate, of course.
A young man goes out to the circuit with a rucksack.
Nothing surprising there: he goes to the India and Thailand circuit rather than the South American or Africa circuit.
The circuit is the must see places that back packers go to stay in a group and avoid the general population.
This was going on long before computers, so backpackers on “the circuit” are nothing new.
Blogging it draws sharp criticism.
No surprise there. Blogs with pretenses reap pot shots.
It could be argued that the Guardian giving him a plug for the blog is self serving,
and it could be argued a 19 year old on the circuit has little worthy of being plugged.
But the bullying aspect of all this is the focus here and it does not seem more vicious than most blogs.
A backpacker on the circuit is a fool if he or she does not keep a journal.
A backpacker on the circuit who blogs that journal rather than simply learning from is also foolish.
You cannot be angry at the remarks for striking at the pretense or the backpacker for writing it.
If the backpacker wants to write something worthy of respect- join the army and deploy to the war.
There is an authenticity to blogs from soldiers at war.
“The circuit” is not authentic by definition- ask anyone who has been on or crossed paths with “the circuit”.
Sorry, no sympathy for the backpacker or condemnation for the critics from me.
I read a letter from a Major in the US Army, who had been a blogger regularly.
The letter was sent to a friend who was to put it on the blog in the event of the Major’s death in combat.
It was published on the blog as requested.
The letter was filled with humor, love for his wife, observations on the unusual situation of writing his own obituary, remarks with serious yet light hearted insight, and a great deal of thankfulness.
I laughed, I cried, and I sat in wonder.
If you read a letter from a man facing death with humor, courage and grace you are humbled yourself.
How can we speak of trivial things when such serious ones surround us if we care to look?
Okay, multiple things (amidst studying for an exam tomorrow!):
1) Regarding George USA’s second post about the army Major, I believe he’s referring to Maj Andrew Olmsted, whose blog attracted significant attention following the unfortunate events. (New York Times article) Maj Olmsted’s site has been taken down but the Google cache of his Final Post is here.
2) A new form of cyber-bullying? This CNN article rather surprised and disgusted me. I know many Americans who are staunchly in favour of the First Amendment who’re against this nonsense. It’d be interesting if you could invite the creator of the site on to discuss it.
3) To Mark, regarding my own experiences:
The Internet is such that legislating it is and always will be insanely difficult, and quite possibly impossible. There is little that can be done except to ignore it (difficult to do, especially when you’re the target), to fight back (not something I would recommend, as the saying goes it’s like feeding the Internet trolls), or to consider legal action (which I have, but never went ahead with).
One just hopes that the person/people perpetrating the cyber bullying realise they could be harming the person on the other end. It’s no different from real physical bullying except for anonymity, but with the same (potentially deadly) circumstances.
I probably ought to clarify one thing quickly, legal action only when the harassment and bullying turns into defamation or accusations which could have implications for the victim’s future. Otherwise it’s pretty much you suck it up and you move on, as Max Gogarty appears to have done in this case.
Thanks for the vote to do the subject on-air Chernor, and thanks for your practical thougths Euphorbia and ZK. And Will, a very nice turn-the-tables story, thanks also.
Mark, are we going to be doing this topic any time soon? It’s rather relevant right now and would be good. In case it wasn’t obvious already count this as another vote yes that we should do this topic.