Are parents liable for kids' school cyberbullying?

Teenagers do things behind our backs.  They hide things from their parents just like we did.  But suppose they’re involved in cyberbullying?  Even if they’re not the original perpetrator, suppose they simply get drawn in to pile-on? Are we liable when they’re cyberbullies?

Sometimes, people make nasty, sarcastic, critical remarks to a friend about someone else but they don’t expect it to get forwarded to everyone at school.  Lesson learned, I hope.

But how about our children being relentlessly nasty and vicious to everyone they don’t like on social networks?  How about if they tell people to kill themselves?

How about our children sending obscene remarks to lots of people under the name of someone they don’t like?  How about our kids asking people to pile on to call someone they don’t like obscene names?  How about our teenager setting up a fake Facebook page in the name of someone they don’t like, filled with altered pictures of the person, a fake history and rants about all the other kids at school?

About 50 percent of teens with internet access report having been bullied online.  About the same number report doing the cyberbullying.  More than one in three report having received cyber threats.  Only 10 percent of kids who are bullied tell their parents.  Only 15 percent of parents know what their kids doing online, especially on social networks.  Of course, these numbers are rough estimates, but in my experience, they’re low estimates.

If these things are done at school, schools will get involved.  What might a permanent record of these actions do to your teenager’s chance of getting a good job or getting accepted into college?

If the cyberbullying is done from our home computers, the school will probably not get involved.  But the police will.  And our liability as parents will be increased.

Notice, I didn’t approach cyberbullying as a moral wrong.  We grownups know that.  But how far would we go on moral grounds to stop cyberbullying by our children if that meant a pitched battle with angry teenagers.  They will object because we’re spying on them or we’re stopping them from joining some “in-crowd” they desperately want to belong to.

So I approached stopping cyber bullies by asking about our liability.

Suppose the bullied kids and their parents go to the police about our children as a cyber bullies?  Do we want the police coming to our door?  Do we want to defend ourselves by saying that we didn’t know?

Suppose the targets file a suit against our children and against us for damages?  Even if we win, how much money will the lawyers cost?  How will we stand the publicity on every television and newspaper in town?  Suppose it goes nationwide?

The lines of responsibility are in flux now because the area of law is so new.  We don’t know where a judge or jury might come down in our case.

Suppose the target of our children’s venom commits suicide or gets a gun to wreak vengeance?  Suppose we could lose our house in a civil suit?  Suppose we could go to jail?  Does that change our willingness to limit the freedoms our children want when they’re living in our home and using a computer we bought?

The bottom line is that we’re responsible for our children.  They live under our roofs.  We must know what they’re doing.  They don’t have privacy.

If we don’t set limits when they’re younger, they’ll grow up to be teens who think they can do whatever they want.  They’ll know they can wear us down if we try to limit them.  Even though we may pay the price.

If they’ve become teenagers already who think they’re entitled to do what they want, we’d better set boundaries before they do something that can ruin our lives as well as theirs.

Since all tactics depend on the situation, expert coaching by phone or Skype helps.  We can design a plan that fits you and your situation.  And build your will and skill to carry it out effectively.

Three Cheers for "That Girl in Pink""

When Benni Cinkle was 13, she appeared in a YouTube music video that went viral, receiving over 200 million views.  At first, Benni was ridiculed by millions around the world for her awkward dancing, often referred to as “That girl in pink that can’t dance.”  They called her names and told her she should kill herself. A few of the printable names she was called were “lame, terrible, awkward, horrible, stupid, freak, loser, awful, worthless, annoying, fat and ugly, dumb.”  Other comments included, “She should probably look into suicide,” “Please just die” and “I’ll bet she wants to kill herself now.”

Did she let the jerks drag her down?   Did she lose her self-esteem and get depressed?  Did she commit suicide?

No.  Benni was a target, but she was not a victim!

Instead of reacting defensively, Benni didn’t take it personally.  She kept her spirits up.  She met their criticism with humor, honesty and understanding.  She was open and didn’t hide.  Soon, anonymous cyber bullies became fans and Benni's online reputation as an approachable, down-to-earth teen began to grow.  In the months following her unexpected popularity, Benni received tens of thousands of requests for advice from teens around the world.

Realizing she had been gifted with a platform that offered international reach, Benni decided to use her 15 minutes of fame for something positive. So she:

• Started “That Girl in Pink Foundation” as a non-profit organization dedicated to the prevention of teen suicide.  TGIP focuses on any issue that may directly or indirectly lead to teen suicide, including: Teen Depression, Bullying, Cyber-Bullying, Teen Self-Mutilation, Teen Gay/Lesbian Support, Child Violence, Sexual Abuse, Teen Dating Violence, Eating Disorders and Teen Pregnancy.
• Authored “That Girl in Pink’s Internet Survival Guide,” offering teens strategies for handling life online.
• Organized a flashmob dance to raise donations for American Red Cross Japan Earthquake Relief.
• Organized a walk for the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation that included hundreds of kids from 14 countries walking with her, virtually.
• Recorded her single, “Can You See Me Now,” and donated profits to TWLOHA and GLSEN.
• Visited schools across the U.S. delivering her “Don’t Just Stand There” anti-bullying presentation.

Let’s hear three cheers for Benni!

Find her at www.thatgirlinpink.org.  Invite her to speak at your school.  She’ll help you stand up to cyber bullies and stop bullying in its many forms.  She’ll inspire students to become defenders instead of remaining merely bystanders.

Will Colorado's Anti-Bullying Bill Stop School Bullies?

The Colorado House of Representatives is considering a bill to stop school bullying (House Bill 1254).  In an effort by some legislators “to be proactive…so we don’t have a sensational suicide in [Colorado],” the core of the bill will:

• Create a committee to study the problem.
• Set up an agency to solicit funds for training of teachers on how to combat bullying (when funds are available from public and private sources).
• Require use of uniforms to “encourage school pride and unity and promote uniformity of dress.”
• Set up a voluntary statewide survey of schoolchildren about bullying in their schools.
• Bar teachers or school administrators from punishing students who report bullying.

The program would continue until July 1, 2016, at which point its effectiveness would be reviewed.

To be kind, this is nice but falls far short of what’s needed to protect children and prevent more suicides.

To be honest, this means nothing.  But it allows legislators to say they’re doing something to stop bullies and bullying.

Notice there is:

• No requirement that principals, teachers, counselors and district administrators are required to have proactive programs designed to stop harassment, taunting, teasing, bullying or abuse.
• No requirements for school officials to be responsible for working with law enforcement officers to stop cyberbullying.
• No consequences or legal penalties for school officials who don’t stop bullies or who actively protect bullies or who remove victims from classes and activities while still allowing bullies and their friends complete access to their targets.

If you don’t think that principals and other school officials ignore bullying, then read about the many suicides that have occurred in the past year.  In almost every case, the parents say that they talked to principals many times over 6-12 months, but the principals now claim that they didn’t know what was happening.  Also, consider why they need a law to “Bar teachers or school administrators from punishing students who report bullying.”

Even worse are people who pretend that present laws are enough or that it’s too hard for school officials.  For example:

• “Jane Urschel, executive director of the Colorado Association of School Boards, said the bill would not only be burdensome for schools who will have to form and adopt a new bullying policy, but it also asks them to address an issue they are already acutely aware of.  This bill would put mandates on districts that they can’t afford.  The school districts are not ignoring this issue and want every child to be safe.  Schools already have a handle on this.”
• “Rep. Robert Ramirez, R-Westminster, has already said he is skeptical of the need for it. ‘I have a huge problem with legislating personal behavior.  Bullying is something that is already addressed by schools as incidents occur. A state law isn’t going to change anything.’”

I’d point out that:

• School officials do not have a handle on this.  In answer to Ms. Urschel and Representative Ramirez, the problem is that there are no laws that require principals to stop bullies.  That’s why there are so many cases in Colorado in which bullying is tolerated, which means condoned.  For example, see the investigative report by Theresa Marchetta of KMGH-TV (ABC affiliate in Colorado).  Without laws, principals can do nothing to stop bullies and be safe from personal consequences.  In addition, with no additional funding, many schools in Colorado with principals who want to prevent bullying manage to do so.  I live in Colorado and have grandchildren in some of those schools.
• When there are no laws or there are no penalties for breaking laws, people do what they want with impunity.  Can you imagine how effective laws against robbery and murder would be if there were no penalties?  How effective would child labor laws or laws to prevent unsafe working conditions be with no penalties?
• Individual school and district officials are now the ultimate and only judges.  With no laws or penalties, they are the final court of appeals.  Parents of children who are being relentlessly bullied cannot force officials to protect their children.  The only recourse for parents is adverse publicity.
• We know what will change the whole system.  It’s not suicides.  It’s when principals, teachers, counselors and school district administrators are fired for not protecting our children.  It’s when law suits are successful against officials who are being paid to be responsible for protecting children but fail in that primary duty.  Suddenly, all the excuses and foot dragging will be gone.  A few principals will quit and I’ll applaud.  The rest will magically discover reasons why and how they can make programs that stop bullying.  In other contexts it’s called “skin in the game.”  Right now, school officials don’t have any skin in the game.

I’d think that Ms. Urschel and Representative Ramirez were actually interested in stopping bullying if they came forward with strong, realistic, effective proposals of their own, complete with penalties, instead of merely being critics.

The problem is not lack of money of lack of an effective system.  The problem is that we don’t have good enough people responsible for the safety of our children.

According to the Colorado Trust Bullying Initiative, of students surveyed in 2008: * 57 percent reported verbal bullying * 33 percent reported physical bullying * 10 percent reported online bullying

We need laws that criminalize the behavior of bullies and of principals, counselors, teachers and school district administrators who put our children at risk by not stopping bullies.  And then we need people with courage who are willing to act.

If your children are the targets of bullies and school officials who aren’t protecting them, you need to take charge.  With expert coaching and consulting, we can become strong and skilled enough to overcome principals and other officials who won’t do what’s right.  We can plan tactics that are appropriate to us and to the situation.

“How to Stop Bullies in Their Tracks” and “Parenting Bully-Proof Kids,” have many examples of children and adults commanding themselves and then stopping bullies.  For more personalized coaching call me at 877-8Bullies (877-828-5543).

Bill Cosby Lashes Phoebe Prince's Bullies, Principal, Teachers

Bill Cosby is right. On a special anti-bullying segment on Larry King Live, Cosby lashed out at the bullies who tormented Phoebe Prince for months before she committed suicide.  He also took on the teachers, principal and school administrators who said that they didn’t know what was going on.

For months, Prince was assaulted, pushed and shoved, called a “slut” and a “whore” and even had soft drink cans thrown at her – all in school.

The eight students involved are all being prosecuted.  Already two students have been expelled from the school and other students will face felony charges in connection with their actions against Prince.

Among the charges against the teens are statutory rape, violation of civil rights, criminal harassment and disturbance of a school assembly.  Prosecutors accuse the students of tormenting Prince “relentlessly” online and in school, often in plain sight of school administrators, right up until the day Prince hanged herself.

On the day Phoebe Prince took her life, one of the bullies wrote the word “accomplished” on Phoebe’s Facebook page.

I also agree with parent Luke Gelinas, who says superintendent Gus A. Sayer, principal Daniel Smith and school committee chairman Edward J. Boisselle should go.

Of course, many failing principals, teachers and administrators hide behind the phrase, “We didn’t know.”  That shows why the most important thing you can do as a parent is often to document your contact with those supposedly responsible adults who actually won’t help you or your child.

Then they’ll hide behind the same plea that was given by the mother of one of the accused bullies, another girl, “Prince was not fully innocent and they’re teenagers.  They call names.”

Can you imagine if principal Smith, standing with the teachers, superintendent Sayer and school committee chairman Boisselle before the assembled parents of South Hadley High School in Massachusetts back in August had said:

• We’ll ignore this whole problem of bullying despite many studies showing that:

• At least 50 percent of high school students are bullied and over 75 percent of the kids in school know who the bullies are.
• When the first incidents of bullying aren’t punished, the number of bullies and bullying incidents grow hugely, and the severity of bullying increases tremendously.
• When we allow harassment, bullying and abuse the victims who are left unprotected by the responsible adults suffer from increased anxiety, stress, shame and depression, and low self-confidence and self-esteem for life.
• Bystanders and witnesses who don’t come forward or who aren’t supported by the authorities suffer from guilt and shame their whole lives.
• Bullies who get away with bullying in youth tend to become relentless adult bullies as adults, in their personal lives and at work.

• We’ll also ignore the many suicides that have occurred because of bullying in middle schools and high schools.
• We won’t have school policies that prohibit bullying or a program that trains us to recognize bullying in the school.  We won’t patrol the classrooms, hallways, bathrooms or cafeteria to see if bullying is occurring.  We won’t work with the police to do anything to the bullies.  When incidents occur we’ll say later that we weren’t responsible because we didn’t know.
• We won’t involve students in recognizing and reporting bullying to us.  If we accidently hear about any bullying, we’ll minimize it and pretend its just “kid stuff.”  If you tell us about your child being bullied, we’ll tell you that we’re too busy to do anything about it and we don’t want to violate the rights of the bullies.
• The bullies in our school are really good kids with anger and self-esteem issues of their own.  They just haven’t had good enough parenting.  That excuses their behavior.  We have to be more sympathetic toward them than toward their targets.

And imagine him finishing with, “Now, parents, we’d like you to hire us, vote for us and pay increased taxes to support your local school and its staff.  We’re going to be your top executives but we won’t know what’s going on.”  Do you imagine the parents at South Hadley High School leaping to their feet with wild applause because they thought that their children would be protected in the next academic year?

I think the lazy, uncaring cowards that are now finding justifications and asking us to excuse their behavior deserve the strongest consequences.

Of course I start with the bullies themselves and their parents, who turned a blind eye and will now protect their little darlings.  They’ll blame Phoebe Prince for being a weakling.  As if they think that what the teenagers did was okay and Phoebe should have taken it like a good victim because it was her fault.

I also say the same about the supposedly responsible adults at school who failed in their primary responsibility; creating a safe environment in which character and values are modeled by adults and in which academic learning can be maximized.

We do know what to do to easily stop 75-90 percent of school bullying.  Are you holding your school administrators and legislators accountable for doing their share?

If you’re a parent of a teenager, do you know what to do to teach your child to be as bully-proof as possible and to hold your principal and staff accountable?

Effective Laws can Stop Cyber Bullying, Harassment and Abuse

Missouri has responded effectively to cyber bullying via web sites and text messaging; has your state? After the Lori Drew case in Missouri, in which a MySpace account was used to bully 13-year old Megan Meier, who committed suicide, Missouri legislators passed laws criminalizing cyber-bullying, harassment and abuse, and schools created zero-tolerance policies.  School authorities and police are determined to enforce these laws.

Last week, …

Last week, a ninth-grade girl was arrested for creating a cyber bullying web site to attack another teenaged girl.  In addition to photos and sexually explicit statements, the online poster stated that the target “would be better off if she just died.”

It’s one thing to say those things in the heat of an angry face-to-face exchange and a very different thing to create a web site that can spread those statements throughout the world.

The ninth-grader has confessed and the case has been turned over to juvenile authorities.  The school has also instituted disciplinary action.

Lori Drew got off because previous statutes were “constitutionally vague” and not specifically directed at cyber bullies.

The law went into effect August 2008 and by December Missouri prosecutors had filed charges against seven people accused of violating the statute.  Hopefully, the new laws are written well.

Although we all want to protect free speech, I think the more important value here is tightening laws in order to protect kids from vicious, false and often anonymous attacks by other disgruntled kids or adults.

There will always be people in angry spite-fights with each other.  And every society draws boundaries about what can be said or done, privately and publically, in these fights.  By trial and error, we’re drawing those lines now concerning the use of new media like cyber space and text messaging.

Part of the message to parents is to check on our children.  Are they engaged in cyber bullying?  Are they being harassed and abused by cyber bullies?  Do you know how to find out?  Do you know how to respond most effectively?

Good for the Missouri’s legislators, school officials and police who are spearheading this effort.  Good for the parents who took effective action.

Stop Cyber Bullies: Vague Cyber bullying Laws Aren’t Effective

According to an editorial in the New York Times, “Vague Cyberbullying Law,” “Lori Drew acted grotesquely if, as prosecutors charged, she went online and bullied her daughter’s classmate, a 13-year-old girl who ended up committing suicide.  A federal court was right, however, to throw out her misdemeanor convictions recently.  The crimes she was found guilty of, essentially violating the MySpace Web site’s rules, are too vague to be constitutional.” Whether or not we’d agree with the constitutional interpretation of the US District Court judge, I think the ruling illustrates clearly why we need clear, specific laws to stop cyber bullies.

Freedom of speech is not the issue.  We abridge freedom of speech in many ways because, in some situations, there are values more important than freedom of speech.  That’s why we prohibit yelling “fire” in crowded public places and why we have laws against libel and slander.  Difficulties in enforcing some laws like libel and slander are no reason not to have such laws.  We recognize that such difficulties mean that there are a lot of gray areas in human behavior in these areas.  Therefore, we expect human judgment to be required in these difficult areas.  But if we didn’t have laws, we’d never be able to respond to cases that are clear.

Angry, vindictive and relentless bullies will continue to abuse their targets by whatever means they can.  If we avoid the difficulties in trying to stop cyber bullying, if we say that we can’t distinguish between lying about our age, weight or physical appearance online, and plotting to cause emotional distress or persecuting someone or spreading malicious, false gossip and rumors online, we only encourage cyber bullying – especially if it can be done anonymously.

Therefore, we need laws that are as specific and clear as we can write them, as well as human judgment in enforcing them.  I’d rather have the option to effectively prosecute people like Lori Drew than to be unable to because there are no clear and specific laws.

Because internet use is nationwide, we need the laws to be Federal laws.

On the other side of the equation, we hope we’ll be able to raise our children to be more sturdy than Megan Meier was.  We hope we’ll recognize the signs that our children are targets of cyber bullies.  But we’ll never succeed in raising all our children to be mentally and emotionally strong enough to resist all pressures and stress.  Not all children will develop the self-esteem and self-confidence to thrive in the real world.  Negative input and negative self-talk will always be a problem.  But in many cases, strong Federal laws will help protect people, especially teenagers.  Cyber safety for as many people as possible takes precedence over freedom of speech.

Stop School Bullies: The Number One Risk Factor is Well-Meaning Parents

Current statistics show that bullying is prevalent – over 50% of kids report being bullied or observing bullying.  Bullying by girls is just as prevalent as by boys (although they often use different tactics) and bullying in “good” neighborhoods is just as prevalent as in “bad” ones. Most parents want to understand why bullies bully, “Is it because bullies have low esteem, or they lust for power or that’s the only way they know how to get control and admiration?”  Those parents usually tell their children never to use violence to stop bullies.  “Violence never solved anything.  Don’t stoop to the bullies’ level.”

Those parents hope that understanding bullies will help them create programs that will rehabilitate bullies.  Then their kids will be safe when they’re away from home or when they’re online.

Parents who say those things are the number one risk factor in making their children targets of repeated bullying.

Their strategy is based on the false idea that if children love and forgive bullies enough, they’ll melt bullies’ hearts and bullies will stop bullying and become their friends.  That strategy rarely stops bullies.

Real bullies won’t stop harassing or abusing our children because they’re nice to them.  Ask the peace-loving people of every country run over by colonization or empire building.  Ask women who have tried to stop harassment, bullying and abuse at work.

Bullying patterns or coping strategies are usually life-long.  Unless they’re stopped, bullying children usually grow up to become bullying adults.  They’re bullies in their love lives, they’re parents who bully their children, they’re bullying soccer-parents and they’re bullies at work.

Similarly, bullied kids grow up with low self-esteem and low confidence; they expect to be beaten down – mentally, emotionally and physically – to be taken advantage of, to lose.  They become repeat victims.

The number one risk factor in our children’s becoming targets of repeated bullying is not bullies or schools – the number one risk factor is us, the parents of the targets.  Bullies have always existed and will always exist, most schools never protected kids and many still won’t.

Take your focus away from psychotherapy of bullies.  Focus instead on stopping bullying right now.  After you stop the bullying, then you can spend all the time you want rehabilitating individual bullies.  As you well know, rehabilitating bullies can take a long time.  I want to protect target children right now.

In order to protect our children, we, as parents, must change our mindsets and then we must learn skills.  We must develop a real-world mindset – that the only way to stop real bullies is to stop them.

In the real world, bullies are predators, like hyenas, looking for the weak and isolated people who don’t know how to protect themselves.  Real bullies have a language all their own – they take our children’s kindness, reasonableness or holding back as weakness and a sign of easy prey. Our kids’ weakness brings out the worst in bullies.

A real-world perspective is that it’s more important to stop bullies first; that counseling, therapy and rehabilitation efforts come second.  In fact, stopping bullying behavior and having stiff consequences for kids who bully repeatedly is one of the best steps in changing their behavior.

We must teach our children to protect themselves from bullies who haven’t learned impulse control or to use non-violent means to navigate in the world.  A few real-world steps are:

1. Of course, try ignoring the bully or try peaceful and kindly understanding tactics, but don’t stop there.
2. Learn to fight back verbally.
3. Have friends who’ll stand with you and come back at the bully.
4. Learn to fight back physically – especially boys, but also girls.
5. Learn when and how to get school principals, counselors, teachers, staff and administrators involved.

A few real-world tips for parents are:

1. Let our children know we’ll protect them.  If they’re being bullied, it’s not their fault – they just haven’t learned how to protect themselves.  Keep their courage, hope and fighting spirit alive.
2. Learn how to force your school principals, counselors, teachers, staff and administrators to protect your kids.  Organize a small core group of parents to help the principal create and implement an effective stop-bullying program.  Be pro-active.  Don’t wait for a bullied kid to commit suicide, get that program going right now!

Lori Drew Acquitted by Judge in Cyber Bullying Suicide Case

On July 2, a federal judge overturned guilty verdicts rendered by the jury against Lori Drew, 50, who was accused of participating in a cyber bullying scheme against 13-year-old Megan Meier, who later committed suicide. This case demonstrates why we need federal laws to stop cyber bullying, harassment and abuse.

The facts in the case were agreed upon even by Drew.  She set-up a MySpace account under an assumed name, “Josh Evans,” that was used by her daughter and an employee to harass, bully and abuse 13-year-old Megan Meier.  It is not clear what other actions Drew took to use or promote the use of the site.  After many attacks on Megan, the fake identity eventually encouraged her to commit suicide.  The three perpetrators would not admit who sent that message.

While that sounds straightforward and obviously wrong, and most people react with outrage, there are no Federal laws to prevent such attacks.  Since there are no laws making the cyber bullying, harassment and abusive actions of Lori Drew, her daughter and her employee a felony, prosecutors had to bring weak charges based on unauthorized computer access under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.

Despite difficulties in stretching the application of these laws to cover the cyber bullying, a jury found Lori Drew guilty of three misdemeanor counts in the case.  However, the judge overturned the jury and acquitted Drew of the charges.  Some of the arguments for the defense were: * The three bullies didn’t know the terms of agreement for setting up their MySpace account because they hadn’t read the MySpace contract they agreed to. * Stretching the laws to cover their actions could set dangerous legal precedents.

Even though we can follow the legal arguments, the sense of outrage still remains.

This situation makes an obvious case for the need for strong Federal anti-cyber bullying laws. If there were clear laws and stiff penalties against, for example, using sites to defame, embarrass, harm, abuse, threaten, slander or harass third parties the case against the three people would have been different.  In addition, we must not offer people anonymity or secret identities to attack other people online.

Of course these laws would infringe on free speech and some people’s desires to create secret identities online.  Which is more important, protecting adults and children against anonymous attacks or free speech?

In the case of the suicide of Megan Meier, had Lori Drew’s daughter accosted Megan in person, laying forth whatever complaints she had, saying whatever vindictive and nasty things she wanted to say, the situation would have been very different.  Megan would have been able to face her accuser.  She would have known her accuser’s personal agenda.  She could have argued or ignored the attacks.  But online attacks through a false identity are a very different matter.

Of course lawyers debate legal precedents.  But we all know the protection we’d want against anonymous people who put signs or graffiti on our homes or burn crosses on our lawns.  We clearly see the need to regulate these actions, even if they aren’t direct attacks with a deadly weapon.  Cyber bullying, harassment and abuse require the same regulation.

Lori Drew and her attorney are trying to drum up sympathy for her.  They say that she’s had to pay legal fees and move from Missouri due to the publicity and anger her family has faced.  They may not have envisioned the final consequences of their hoax, but once we go down the pathway of harassment, bullying and abuse, we can’t control the results.

As parents, this case also should make us question our children’s use of social networking sites like MySpace.  I always recommend drawing firm lines that encourage face-to-face friends and prohibit virtual friends, who, by definition, aren’t real friends.

Federal Anti-Cyber Bullying Laws Needed to Stop Harassment, Bullying and Abuse

According to the Wall Street Journal article, “CyberBullying Report Opposes Regulation,” a recent report on cyberbullying suggests that, unlike other Internet scares, this one is well-founded, but it questions some of the regulatory efforts that are gathering steam.  “The report, by the Progress & Freedom Foundation, a right-leaning Washington think tank that focuses on technology public policy, says that data from child-safety researchers” indicate that much of the furor is overblown. I disagree strongly: The furor is not overblown and we do need Federal laws to stop cyber bullying, harassment and abuse.

The right-leaning think tank’s objections to new anti-cyber bullying laws are that:

• Worries over online predators are overblown because one study of arrests from 2000 to 2006 showed that most of the offenders approached undercover investigators, not kids.  I’m glad the offenders approached undercover investigators.  But that’s no reason not to have laws.  Between 2006 and now, offenders have gotten smarter.  And, of course we want laws so we can protect the kids who are approached.
• They estimate that threats due to peer-to-peer bullying are more serious than those due to cyber bullying.  Even if that’s true, that’s no reason to abandon kids who are targets of cyber bullying, harassment and abuse.  As shown by the case of Lori Drew, without Federal laws, cyber bullies can’t be prosecuted effectively.  The Judge acquitted this adult even though she set up the MySpace site that was used to harass and abuse teenager Megan Meier until she committed suicide.
• Laws pose “thorny issues” that are entwined with free speech.  Again, that’s no reason not to enter the thicket.  That simply lets us know that the laws will have gray areas and both the law and the interpretations will be continuously evolving as hardened criminals find loopholes.  Laws encourage angry, potentially vindictive people to think twice before doing anything impulsive and rash.
• Laws would make statements that defame, embarrass, harm, abuse, threaten, slander or harass third parties illegal online, even though such statements would be allowed if said on a playground.  That’s not a problem; that’s an obvious benefit.  That acknowledges the truism that statements made in a local context or face-to face usually have very different consequences than hostility put out to the whole world on the internet, especially if the statements are anonymous or made through the safety of false identities.
• We can solve the problem best through better education.  Nonsense.  Of course, education and vigorous stop-bullies programs are very helpful, but they’re not enough.  Education alone does not yield the most benefits.  Education, anti-bullying programs and enforced laws all together yield the most benefits.
• Teaching people to behave civilly online is no different than teaching children to use proper table manners, to cover their mouths when they sneeze or to say, “thank you.”  That’s also nonsense.  If an adult is a slob at home, no one else is harmed.  If someone gets drunk and disruptive at a restaurant, a movie theater or a ball game, they can be asked to leave or ejected or arrested.  The harm caused by eating with the wrong fork or not saying “please” or “thank you” is minor compared to the harm that can be caused by cyber bullying, harassment or abuse.  Ask the families of Megan Meier or Jessica Logan, both of whom committed suicide after they were made the targets of cyber bullying.  Ask the families of the thousands we don’t hear about them in the media.  They suffer, helpless to stop their abusers, but valiantly and quietly to struggle through life.

Online attacks are becoming an epidemic.  Some sites even specialize as forums for anonymous bashing and attacks.

Laws are made to state the standards to which we aspire and to diminish people’s ability to harm others as much as possible.  Laws may be imperfect and enforcement may be difficult and spotty, but that’s better than nothing.  I’d rather have anti-bullying laws that protect kids 90% of the time and have difficulties 10% of the time, than have no laws to stop cyber bullying and leave kids vulnerable 100% of the time.

Our laws and even our system of checks and balances are founded on our understanding that no matter how much education people have, they will often seek power and revenge.  They won’t always be good and sweet and kind.  If given the chance, people will be mean, nasty and vicious to others, especially if they can act anonymously or the target can’t fight back effectively.

We must rise to the challenge posed by new technology and keep evolving laws and enforcing them the best we can.  We must stop cyber bullying.

Coalition Stops Go Daddy Cyber Bullying Web Site

Numerous articles, including Sandy Maple’s on parentdish.com, “Teen Insult Web Site Shut Down,” have reported that online free speech has bowed to the pressure of community values.  In an effort to stop online harassment, cyber bullying and abuse, a coalition has pressured Go Daddy, the internet host, to pull a web site, “People’s Dirt,” out of cyberspace.  Calling it an “insult site” is misleading.  The site was forum for anonymous hate mail. What did it take to pressure Go Daddy to drop the site?

The site was very popular with vindictive and vicious high school students who used it anonymously to publically trash-talk, harass, abuse and embarrass their targets.  The combination of slander and defamation on the hate board was illegal, but the anonymity offered by the site protected the abusers.

A joint effort by parents, students, school administrators and the Maryland Attorney General brought sufficient pressure on the Go Daddy Group and the “People’s Dirt” advertisers – the advertisers pulled their support and Go Daddy acted to preserve its reputation.

Whether protecting kids from physical bullying or from cyberbullying, that grouping is always necessary to stop bullying at school or online.

The Go Daddy hosting service agreement with its users allows Go Daddy to end service for sites whose content includes activities that “defame, embarrass, harm, abuse, threaten, slander or harass third parties.”  The contents on the site, including a threat to kill students and staff, racial slurs, claims of promiscuity about named high school students, and accusations against named teachers fit into those prohibited categories.

Go Daddy could have resisted the effort and forced the group to go to court to prove some sort of illegal activity.  But this is a much better solution: common cause to stop bullying and abuse.  Go Daddy will find other ways to make money.

Every society or community limits complete free speech because of a more important value: The balance necessary to maintain the strong sense of community that enables the people to live together peacefully.  Neither end of the scale – complete free speech or complete censorship and repression – yields a society worth living in.  Some form of compromise, some balancing of individual and communal desires and needs is always reached in communities that move ahead amicably.

Whether the site will remain offline is still an open question.  Other internet hosts may be willing to carry it.  Alfredo Castillo, the site's founder, has previously said that if the site was removed by Go Daddy, he would move it to an international host, where it could skirt any American prosecution.

Mr. Castillo is a person who doesn’t care about his community.  He’s an individual isolated from his community’s values.  He’s interested only in his own desires to make money.  Those are some of the identifying characteristics of bullies and sociopaths.  Anyone know where he lives and where his children go to school?

Rules to curb online bullying raise concerns

In his article for MSNBC, “Rules to curb online bullying raise concerns,” Alex Johnson discusses the need for laws to prevent cyberbullying and also details situations in which schools can overreact in the enforcement of those rules.  The case of teenager Avery Doninger is particularly glaring. The underlying thrust of the article is the need to create exactly the right laws that will give the right result in every situation.  Situations like the cyberbullying suicide case last year make good laws critical.

The real problem is not necessarily the law; it’s the hidden assumption that cyberbullying laws can ever be made “just right” for all situations – never too lax, never too harsh.  That assumption overlooks history and human nature.  The letter of the law can never cover all situations with “just right” justice.  We always depend on human wisdom in the law’s application to specific situations.  That’s just the way it is – for better or for worse.

Our society is in the stage of figuring out where we want to draw the lines about a new method, cyberbullying, that bullies and perpetrators use to harass, abuse and attack adults and children.  That’s our normal trial and error process.  There’s no easy answer for protecting kids online. Actually, we make laws in hopes that they’ll yield justice in, say, 95% of the cases that come up.  No matter what laws we make in any area of life, there will be specific situations in which a literal or dumb interpretation leads to an under or over-reaction.  That’s where we hope the individuals involved use good sense and good judgment.

In the case of Avery Doninger, the real question is: Is the law bad or did the school principal get defensive and over-react by not giving a second chance to a good and contrite student who learned an important lesson or is there more we don’t know about Avery?

We’re stuck with the fact that laws, by themselves, will never cover every situation, no matter where we draw the lines; whether it’s about cyberbullies, verbal bullies or physical bullies. I look carefully at the application of any law in a specific situation before rushing in to change the law.  Often the problem is in the application, not in the law itself.  That’s why we have Appeals Courts.

Separate from the general laws are the specific situations involving my kids and your kids (and adults).  My job is to monitor my children:

• Do they look like they’re having a hard time and may be being attacked by a cyberbully?  Are they having difficulty dealing with it?  How can I help them deal with it by themselves or do I need to intervene?
• Are they witnessing cyberbullying and are they struggling to know whether or how to intervene?
• Are they creating a hard time for someone else (are they cyberbullies)?  How do I stop them and help them develop the character to make amends and do better next time?
• Should they even be using MySpace or FaceBook or any social networking sites?  What else would be a better use of their time and energy?

I’m going to get my answers to those questions by observing them, talking to them and, maybe, using good software like PC Pandora to monitor what they’re doing (http://blog.pcpandora.com/2009/01/29/do-new-cyberbullying-laws-go-to-far/).

Cyberbullies and cyberbullying will be with us no matter what laws we make.  We hope the laws will help us deal effectively with most of them.

As I show in my books and CDs of case studies, “How to Stop Bullies in their Tracks” and “Parenting Bully-Proof Kids,” bullies are not all the same, but their patterns of behavior, their tactics, are the same.  That’s why we can find methods to stop most of them.  If we don’t stop bullies, they’ll think we’re easy prey.  Like sharks, they’ll just go after us more.

When children and teens learn how to stop bullies in their tracks, they develop strength of character, determination, resilience and skill.  They’ll need these qualities to succeed against the real world bullies they’ll face as adults. Coaching designed for the specific situations faced by individual parents and teenagers is critical.

No easy answer for protecting kids online

A new pseudo-scientific and misleading study has been reported on by the Wall Street Journal, “No Easy Answer for Protecting Kids Online” and the New York Times, “Report Calls Online Threats to Children Overblown.” I’m sorry the headlines on this article allow people to draw the wrong conclusions, like “Threats exaggerated.”  It’s a mistake to base decisions on comparisons stating that cyberbullying isn’t much worse than other bullying.  A study that concludes that there’s no easy solution is a waste of time and money.

Of course there’s no easy solution.  No one is really dumb enough to think there’s an easy solution.  No amount of software will make the internet any safer than giving your money to Bernard Madoff or crossing the street.

Ignore the pseudo-science of the report.  Instead, pay attention to our individual kids and teach them that “friends” on social networking sites aren’t really friends, they’re merely virtual contacts; no matter how sympathetic they sound or how friendly they claim to be.  Obviously, dealing with malicious and vindictive virtual people (kids or adults) is much more difficult than dealing with people face-to-face.  And we all know how difficult that can be.

Remember the adults who encouraged a teenager to commit suicide.

Cyberbullies and predators on social networking sites are with us.  Of course we’ll find some software to help track down malicious rats and sexual predators, but we can never guarantee safety in the real world.  Striving for absolute safety is the wrong approach.

There are no safe environments.  That was the message I always got from reading the great hero stories when I was growing up.  And each tale challenged me to prepare myself for similar dangers.

Schools and the real-world have never been safe.  I remember a biography of Harpo Marx (remember the Marx Brothers).  He went to school for one day.  The kids threw him out the window (first floor).  He came back in.  They threw him out again.  After the third time he didn't go back in.  And never did again.

Schools and social networks are testing grounds for the real world.  And the real world is not and should not be safe.  Facing risks and danger helps us develop good sense, good character and the qualities necessary to survive.

Imagine growing up on a farm, in the wilderness or in the middle ages.  Not safe.  I grew up in New York City.  Not safe.  Millennia ago we had to learn what a saber-toothed tiger’s foot prints looked like and how long ago they were left.  The world still requires survival skills, even if different ones.

As parents, we have the responsibility to monitor and guide our children and teenagers.  Of course kids will object.  How many of us thought our parents were right when they tried to limit what we wanted to do?  As parents, we must be wise enough to know more about the dangers of the real world than they do and strong enough to stand up to their anger.

We must teach children how to face the real world in which they’ll meet bullies all their lives, even if our children are small and outnumbered.  That’s independent of the type of bullying – cyberbullies, physical bullying or verbal harassment or abuse.

As I show in my books and CDs of case studies, “How to Stop Bullies in their Tracks” and “Parenting Bully-Proof Kids,” bullies are not all the same, but their patterns of behavior, their tactics, are the same.  That’s why we can find ways to stop most of them.

When children learn how to stop bullies in their tracks, they’ll develop strength of character, determination, resilience and skill.  They’ll need these qualities to succeed against the real world bullies they’ll face as adults.

Of course, coaching can help you design tactics that fit your specific situation.