Blog

Recently, a case came up before the Missouri court involving a 40-year-old woman and a 17-year-old girl, with the former having been charged with felony harassment as she posted the girl’s personal contact information and photo on Craigslist in their subsection for individuals seeking “Casual Encounters” (you can imagine what that means).  To note, this is the first application of Missouri’s new cyberharassment and cyberbullying law, which went into effect in June of 2008 following the media coverage of Megan Meier’s suicide.

The defendant and her attorney claim this was simply a practical joke.  Her attorney also claims that had this same information been written on a bathroom wall, she would not have been charged.

I disagree with both of these assertions. First, there must be a line drawn as to what constitutes a practical joke, and that boundary was crossed when the defendant put the plaintiff at risk for actual, tangible harm.  Secondly, to compare the writing on a bathroom wall to posting on the Internet is preposterous when considering the differential size of populations that would view each. Third, I believe it is completely appropriate for a judge and jury to consider the reality of recent Craiglist-related victimizations when interpreting the content and context of this case.  Much like we don’t shrug off facetious statements about bombs in airports, we can’t shrug off the reality that the disclosure of personal information online can lead to serious harm offline.  Finally, minors are (and should be) afforded even greater protection from these types of actions.

It goes without saying that youth are exploiting new technological developments (even though everyone is saying it).  I wondered if you all saw the story from Maryland over Christmas break discussing how teenagers are punking their peers by impersonating their vehicles while flying past speed cameras.  This is done by taking a digital photo of an “enemy’s” license plate, printing it out with a laser printer, and taping that sheet of paper onto their own license plate.  Then, they drive past cameras that cannot distinguish between real license plate numbers and the laser-printed ones.  Called “speed pimping,” it leads to a $40 citation for the victim.  So, this begs the question we’re always wrestling with as we work with IT companies, educators, and parents – do we just need better technology, or do we need more education and the teaching of ethics and morals, or do we just shrug it off because adolescents will always pull pranks like this?

Also, could this be considered a form of cyberbullying?  The article makes me think of how some other misbehaviors might be “staged” in a creative fashion by youth using hardware and software to make “evidence” that incriminates another person.  We’ve already heard of impersonation where images of parents’ signatures are inserted by their kids into official documents they (the parents) are to sign.  And we’ve heard of youth impersonating their peers through sites that anonymize emails and text messages – which sometimes has led to conflict and violence in the real world.  When we discuss various forms of cyberbullying, impersonation is rare as compared to other types.  I’m thinking, though, that it’s a pretty serious form that merits closer examination.  I also wonder if policy and practice needs to be targeted and specific in highlighting the wrongfulness of impersonation, or simply addressed through general prevention and response strategies for cyberbullying….