Cyberbullying

Cyberbullying
ENG1200 Composition II SU03
February 4, 2018 

Abstract
Cyberbullying is the intentional harassment by a group or an individual with the aid of the internet and technological devices that are invasive, for example, mobile phones. Bullying in the traditional form of the term has been around as long as capitalism and competition have existed in this world. In the belief system that equates success to wealth, capitalism advances bullying as a survival tactic among the citizens. Of worry, is the reason governments waited for so long to realize that cyberbullying is just as harmful as traditional bullying. The prevalence of the cyberbullying problem is at an elevated level among teens. In most studies concerning cyberbullying, school going children are the majority of victims. In this age, it is possible to create anonymous accounts on the internet where bullying takes place, but the perpetrator is not known. The impossibility of curbing cyberbullying becomes a possibility each day as technology advances. Cyberbullying prevalence remains high and continues to soar among the youth.

Cyberbullying
Bullies have always existed, but, cyber bullies are a relatively new species. The term cyberbullying was first used in by Bill Belsey in 2004 to describe the nature of intimidation and harassment conducted through communication technologies (Mehari & Farrell, 2016). Cyberbullying is intentional harassment by a group or an individual via the internet and technological devices that are invasive, for example, mobile phones.

Technology and internet access are the basis for cyberbullying. Hence, the establishment of the internet preceded the vice. The term cyber refers to the virtual space created by the internet. Many victims of cyberbullying are the youngsters, which can be attributed to the fact that they form the bulk of internet users (Mehari & Farrell, 2016). Also, researchers concern themselves with the effects of cyberbullying among the youth and the spin-off effects of the happenings more than they do with the adults. Hypothetically, going by this argument, it follows that cyberbullying is more prevalent among the youth than adults (Weber &Pelfrey, 2014). Virtual as it is, cyberbullying is as much detrimental as traditional schoolyard bullying, if not more.
Bullying in the traditional form of the term has been around as long as capitalism and competition have existed in this world. With the notion that success and wealth are the same thing, capitalism advances bullying as a survival tactic among the citizens. However, the virtual but equally damaging form of bullying, which is cyberbullying came to be with the advent of affordable personal computers towards the end of the 20th century (Donegan, 2012). The levels of cyberbullying today are relatively higher than they were when a couple of computers were in use in the 90s (Caffrey, 2013). Technological advancement in recent years has fueled the growth of cyberbullying. It is sad when the advancement of technology gets associated with the sudden rise in cyberbullying, yet the same technology has been hailed for the advancement of human social life.
Systems all around the world struggle each day to legislate on effective laws that can curb cyberbullying. Why governments are waiting for so long to realize that cyberbullying is just as harmful as traditional bullying is worrisome (Mehari & Farrell, 2016). Today, many nations have the right to free speech entrenched in their constitutions. In the United States of America, the First Amendment protects the rights of free expression of opinions. Cyberbullying occurs through utterances and statements made via the internet. When it comes to the formulation of laws to govern conduct in the cyberspace, it is likely, and often it is the case that activists and citizens would invoke their rights to free expression of opinions. Unfortunate!
Since the youth, more specifically those of the school going age are the victim of cyberbullying schools are left with the duty of ensuring bullying does not occur at all times. In the case of J.S. v. Bethlehem Area School (2000), the appellant was ousted from school for posting derogatory comments about the school administration on an internet page. At the Supreme Court, the verdict favored the Bethlehem Area School and upheld its drastic actions against the student. From this case, schools acquired the go go-ahead to control what happens on the internet even when students are off campus. In this age, it is possible to create anonymous accounts on the internet where bullying takes place, but the perpetrator is not known. The impossibility of curbing cyberbullying becomes a possibility each day as technology advances. However, the solution to cyberbullying is far off the horizon.
The prevalence of the cyberbullying problem is at an elevated level for teenagers. Most studies concerning cyberbullying, established school going children as the majority of the victims. Prevalence rates vary depending on race, age, upbringing, gender, and the level of computer knowledge. Close to a third of students in a sample report being victims of cyberbullying in their lifetime. Some of the forms of bullying reported include hurtful and mean comments as well as rumors (Caffrey, 2013). Strangely, 15% of sampled students agree to have bullied their peers in their lifetime; with the gossip at the top in the previous 30 days (Caffrey, 2013). Adolescent girls suffer the consequences of cyberbullying at the rate of 40% (Donegan, 2012). Girls are more inclined to post mean comments online while boys prefer posting pictures or videos. The percentages given in this analysis are those of a middle school from in the Midwestern United States.
In a 2015 study hat employed 16000 students as the subjects, cyberbullying indicated an upward trend. According to Donegan (2012), girls are the most likely victims of cyberbullying while boys are the main perpetrators. The study happened over a period of six years, where the percentage of cyberbullying rose from 14% to 21%. Thanks to the availability of cheap smartphones in the market, the menace continues to rise. Social sites like Facebook and Twitter attract 93% of persons between the ages of 12 and 17, and these are the same sites where bullying is orchestrated (Donegan, 2012). As connectivity becomes easier with the advent of more sophisticated instant messaging applications on top of Twitter and Facebook and this has worsened the hazard.
Continued cyberbullying leads to low self-esteem on the victims. From low self-esteem, depression may result, and in extreme cases, depression does lead to suicide. Not long ago, Ryan Halligan and Megan Meier took their own lives as a result of the deleterious effects of cyberbullying. Bullying results in emotional damage and brings with it everything that comes as a consequence of the damaged emotional wellbeing (Donegan, 2012). If unchecked, cyberbullying may result in a broken society if the culprits are left to run the show. Personality changes, anger, depression, and withdrawal are all predicates of a broken race. The consequences of cyberbullying are not any less adverse than those of traditional bullying (Donegan, 2012). It goes without saying that anonymity presented by the cyberspace brings a slight difference in comparison, but all other factors remain the same. In a way, this anonymity confers a certain amount of confidence to those individuals who traditionally were victims and hence equalizing the arena (Barlett et al., 2017). It is, therefore, safe to say that bullying today is done by the weak and the strong in equal measure as factors other than physical strength come into play, for example, online computer proficiency. Cyberbullying is a transformation of the ancient bullying that has existed over the ages. The youth and teenagers are the most affected segment of society since they are the majority of internet users. Technological abuse has continued to flourish as an epidemic in the 21st century. The effects of cyberbullying are not any different from those of schoolyard bullies. Indeed, cyberbullying has been known to cause suicidal tendencies among the victims, a far more severe consequence compared playground bullying.
The esteemed first amendment grants rights to individuals, but people have used this a leeway to abuse the freedom of speech and engage in acts of harassment, teasing, and mistreatment. One principle in law enforcement maintains that law officers should only step in a matter when there is an actual threat to personal safety or life is at risk (Donegan, 2012). This principle makes it harder for legal officers to curb cyberbullying since there is no imminent harm.
Literature available on cyberbullying suggests that the youth and teenagers are the victims as well as the aggressors. However, the studies are only limited to the young, and therefore inconclusive. It may be a possibility that adults are perpetrators and victims as well, but the available literature focuses more on the teens and youth. Limited studies on the topic may be a consequence of not reporting cyberbullying by the victims. The intangible nature of cyberbullying makes conducting studies on the subject problematic. However, it is not entirely impossible to determine the effects of cyberbullying when enough literature is presented (Barlett et al., 2017).
Cyberbullying is an epidemic in the 21st century where the embracing of technology is at an all-time high, and there is a likelihood of increasing in its adoption. The victims of anything have always been the biggest beneficiaries of the same (Donegan, 2012). In the case of cyberbullying, the young are the victims of the epidemic are at the same time the oppressors. Even though most literature suggests the prevalence of the vice is among teenagers, there is a possibility of having adults as victims too. Cyberspace allows the weak to hide behind keyboards and do what they could not do physically to their victim. Governments try each day to protect their people through legislation, but the continued advocacy on human rights makes it impossible to track what people do in the cyberspace. In the USA, the First Amendment has become an impediment to realizing secure cyberspace free of cyberbullying. Schools have been left with the responsibility of curbing cyberbullying, but with no resources.
Cyberbullying repercussions are not any different from those of traditional schoolyard bullying; depression, anger, withdrawal, and suicide occur in cyberbullying victims (Mehari & Farrell, 2016). The fact that it can be perpetrated both anonymously and virtually makes it even a bigger menace. How self-defeating it is that freedom of speech is the number one hindrance to obtaining justice for such a heinous felony. Regardless though, the prevalence of the vice continues to soar each day. 
References
Barlett, C. P., Prot, S., Anderson, C. A., & Gentile, D. A. (2017). An empirical examination of the strength differential hypothesis in cyberbullying behavior. Psychology of violence, 7(1), 22.
Caffrey, C. (2013). Cyberbullying. Salem Press Encyclopedia.
Donegan, R. (2012). Bullying and Cyberbullying: History, statistics, law, prevention, and analysis. The Elon Journal of Undergraduate Research in Communications, 3(1), 33-42.
Mehari, K. R., & Farrell, A. D. (2016). Where Does Cyberbullying Fit? A Comparison of Competing Models of Adolescent Aggression.
Weber, N. L., & Pelfrey, W. V. (2014). Cyberbullying: Causes, consequences, and coping strategies. Lfb Scholarly Pub Llc.