Often times being an online user allows people to come out of their shell and express themselves how they want to deep inside without fear of harassment or negative reactions. This modern way of social media is a great way to express yourself without the fear of repercussions because you are safely behind your computer often searching or conversing with like-minded individuals….But is there a negative side? Does this online world sometimes create a doorway for Dr. Jekyll’s Mr. Hyde who lurks in the shadows preying and bullying on others?
It seems so and we are constantly hearing about online predators and online bully’s but why is this? These people are often spoken very highly of in the “real” world and show no signs of bad behavior or anger towards others. It seems people become not only more comfortable online but sometimes it allows for a darker side to come out and play a larger role than it otherwise would have because there seem to be no direct and immediate consequences from their actions.
The latest case is from Tennessee where two young children were constantly harassed online for being gay. Sadly, the relentless hatred that was spewed over the internet towards these children was too much to bear and they took their own lives. Will tragedies like this continue to happen or will someone step in and do something? Where does the responsibility lie? Should the government, parents, schools, or who be placed in charge of this growing problem that is both heartbreaking and groundbreaking? We are faced with such difficult questions because the internet is such a relatively new forum of conversation and media in the scheme of things.
Because of these Tennessee suicides Sen. Bill Ketron of Tennessee is trying to introduce laws that would protect everyone from cyber bullying and punish those who dish it out while unfairly hiding behind their computer. This would surely put a huge dent in the problem if it didn’t solve it all together but it’s not that simple. While everyone agrees something needs to be done not everyone believes this is the proper plan of action. Many feel it is a direct violation of our constitution and our right to freedom of speech. It could be taken too vaguely and people could be unfairly prosecuted. Who would be in charge of deciding what was hurtful and what is acceptable? Where would we draw the line? It’s a simple fact you can’t please 100% of the people 100% of the time
