Anda di halaman 1dari 8

Should cyber-bullying be a criminal?

Group 1
Ngoc Ha Dinh
Nhat Linh Bui
Cam Thi Vu
Mai Que Anh Nguyen
Due date: 2 May, 2016
BC 301
Submitted to
Prof. Liz Stevens

1
Introduction

1. Ngoc Ha Dinh
Prevnet (2016). Legal Consequences of Cyberbullying. USA: Queens University. Retrieved
from: http://www.prevnet.ca/bullying/cyber-bullying/legal-consequences

The above reference has been chosen to use in the assignment of cyberbullying issue with
some reason. Firstly, this reference can give an answer to the question of Should cyberbullying
be a criminal? In addition, it actually meets the needed standards of reliable, credible and
scholar source. For more detail, this is a scholarly source that has a high quality for academic
writing. It is quite easy to find the information about the publisher which is Canadas authority of
the bullying prevention named The Promoting Relationships and Eliminating Violence Network
of Queens University. All rights reserved are published with detailed privacy policy and the
terms of use. The audience is unlimited. All people who want to know about the legal
consequences of cyberbullying and whether or not it is a criminal can be the reader of the article.
The content of this reference or the type of writing is in-depth. It gives specific information
about the law and the cyberbullying issue in different situations with explicit contents, in-text
references and a link for the permission. The given information can be verifiable and checked in
other sources as well.
The main question needed to answer is Should cyberbullying be a criminal? In this
reference, the viewpoint of the author is the answer for the main question. The cyberbullying is
not just bullying, it is also criminal. The author chose a choice of viewpoint which was shaped by
third-person words to give the detailed information about cyberbullying as a criminal under the
terms of law. This type of standpoint provided the answer for cyberbullying issue with

2
omniscient understanding. According to Marlys Mayfield (2014, p.201-202), viewpoints may or
may not be consciously recognized. It was also pointed that the unconscious viewpoint includes
egocentric and ethnocentric. This writing, however, grew out of self-interest or egocentrism to
see the problem of cyberbullying through the eyes of others or from the outside, objectively. It
also did not evaluate other cultures or take self-identification which includes ethnocentrism.
Thus, the viewpoint of author was conscious. Through the framing of the writing or the different
legal consequences of cyberbullying, it is quite easy to recognize the point that the cyberbullying
was considered as a criminal with various cases under the law.
The chosen reference shows an explicit position by using legal reasons addressed
cyberbullying problem. The viewpoint of author is actually the source of this argument. Because
of the claiming words Its not just bullying its criminal, the author provided the real example
and a lot of legal consequences which are used to punish cyberbullying person based on Federal
Law, Provincial and Territorial Laws. The intent of the author when describing the specific acts
and objectives of cyberbullying and putting the legal elements is to persuade readers that
cyberbullying is the criminal act and is being addressed by the law. The reasons actually
supported the statement of the author. However, this writing lacked real examples needed to
support the given terms of law. It also lacked citations and dates. Besides, some elements written
in the Provincial and Territorial Laws not just mentioned the legal consequences or punishments
for cyberbullying acts to support the main view. It sounds like the author was trying to persuade
readers prevent cyberbullying in school by reporting if any students witness, accepting and
developing policies on how to prevent disrespectful behavior of bullying.
Although this argument has its own strengths and weaknesses, the elements given by the
author are still good enough to convey the main viewpoint that claimed cyberbullying as a

3
criminal under the terms of law. It also could convince the reader of the argument to accept that
point of the authors view.

2. Nhat Linh Bui


Lungu, A. (Ed.). (2013).Cyberbullying is nasty but dont make it crime, Opinion. Canadian
Press. Retrieved April 14, 2013, from
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2013/04/14/cyberbullying_is_nasty_but_do
nt_make_it_crime.html

Cyberbullying is intentional and repeated cruel or hurtful behavior that is carried out over
SMS, e-mail, blogs, web journals, visit rooms, talk sheets and social networking pages, for
examples, Facebook or Myspace. A few case of cyberbullying include: sending cruel and
undermining message or material; putting embarrassing photos of people on the web; making
fake profiles that are mean or frightful; and sending unwanted massage online, and teasing and
making fun of others. Is cyberbullying illegal? Cyberbullying is illegal when: it becomes
harassment that is illegal; or someone makes threats against a person that are illegal. Still, in
most case, it should be considered and analyzed carefully through terms of Supreme Laws.To
open an opinion of Anthony Lungu (2013) about Cyberbullying Is Nasty But Dont Make It
Crime by the unfortunate death of Rehtaeh Parsons who is driven to commit suicide due to be
sexually assaulted and be insulted after spreading many sexually photos in school and town by
four teenage boys. However, why was not those boys convicted of criminal harassment? Was the
authorities not doing whats needed to protect young women or avoid bullies from over the
internet and social media? In this article, the writers literally answered by pointing out the true

4
meaning of Cyberbullying. It is worth to mention that the third person viewpoint of the writer is
to confirm the statement Cyberbullying should not be considered as the criminals. Indeed, most
occasions of criminal harassment are stated as purposive behaviors make one fear for their
safety or the safety of anyone know to them. Meanwhile, the cyberbullying- related conducts,
planed just to insult and humiliate the objectives or defame them in the eyes of others. As
argumentative progresses, the reader comes to understand that it also relates to harm mental or
psyche, however does not trespassproperty of victim which is recognized as criminal types.
Nevertheless,in case of A.B. v. Bragg Communication Inc., which mentioned in Anthonys
article, Cyberbullying is defined as:
Behavior that is intended to cause, or should be known to cause, fear, intimidation,
humiliation, distress or other forms of harm to another persons body, feelings, self-esteem,
reputation or property.
The intent of author when giving a specific event is to prove readers that the defendant in
this case is accused of committing acrimewhen one relates or harms in other property.The
standpoint of the author gives the audience a general overview, like omniscient, into the explicit
position of a crime which is different fromCyberbullying. Another point of view given in
Anthonys opinion is that measuring and evaluating a cyberbullying issue by laws is too vague
and arbitrary in any constitutional perspective. A behavior of cyberbullying is interpreted based
on emotion or ones mental that will be an ineffective work. Indeed, Cyberbully-relating conduct
is affected by the vagaries of mental and human feeling which are truly difficult to
solve.Assuming that when someone harm to ones feeling or ego, will they truly need police and
justice system to dealt with these instances in public resources and social networks?What people
do not realize is that most of evidences on the internet can be deleted or removed. By the way,

5
the authority need a bright line to deal it.Ultimately, instead of condemning ones crime, the
writer strongly mentioned that the justice system should have a prohibition against cyberbullying
before it becomes far more criminal allegations were involved in any instances; such as sexually
harassment, extortion.

3. Thi Vu
Leichtling, B. (2013). Anti-Cyberbullying Laws Are Needed to Fight Cyberbullying. In N.
Berlatsky (Ed.), Opposing Viewpoints. Netiquette and Online Ethics. Detroit:
Greenhaven Press. (Reprinted from Federal Laws Needed to Stop Cyber Bullying,
Harassment and Abuse, Huffington Post, 2009, July 8) Retrieved from
http://proxy.cityu.edu/login?
url=http://ic.galegroup.com/ic/ovic/ViewpointsDetailsPage/ViewpointsDetailsWindow?
failOverType=&query=&prodId=OVIC&windowstate=normal&contentModules=&displ
ayquery=&mode=view&displayGroupName=Viewpoints&limiter=&currPage=&disableHi
ghlighting=false&displayGroups=&sortBy=&search_within_results=&p=OVIC&action=
e&catId=&activityType=&scanId=&documentId=GALE
%7CEJ3010868215&source=Bookmark&u=cityu_main&jsid=5552024b2a7cabf2e2d2ae
808db07ee3

There are many reasons why I choose this reference for my article. Primarily, this
reference came from a reliable source and has been verified by the library of the City University
of Seattle. Another justification is that this reference is directly related to our topic "Should

6
cyberbullying be a criminal law? - a controversial issue in our society. The article is the
Viewpoint of author Leichting; writer on school violence issues with several published book
such as Below the Radar Bullies, How to Stop Bullies in Their Tracks, and Eliminate the High
Cost of Low Attitudes..; on the need a law against cyber-bullying.
As we all know, a viewpoint, which also can be known as a point of view or perspective,
is the mental position from which a person observes, considers or judges an object or event.
According to Collin English dictionary viewpoint is "A place from which something can be
view". In this article, Leichting view from the point of a mature person with the desire to protect
the kids from the cyberbullying problem. Taking a closer look at the article, I think the viewpoint
that author take is quite a balance. Because the author refutes each alternative viewpoints of the
opponents which made his argument become more powerful
According to Mayfield (2012, p. 227), any argument first needs an objective reading or
hearing. Afterward, criticism can begin with five questions:
What viewpoint is the source of this argument?
What is the issue of controversy?
Is it an argument? Or is it a report?
How is the argument structured in terms of reasons and conclusion ?
What are arguments strengths and weaknesses?
The first two questions have already been discussed in above section. Now we will
analyze the article on last three questions to see if this really is a good argument or not. First, we
can confirm this is an argument rather than a report. The article was written with the aim of
persuading the audience to agree with the views of the author, not to be written to offer
information. About the structure of the article, the author brought out the conclusion right at the

7
opening of the article "we do need federal laws to stop cyber bullying, harassment, and abuse"
and use deductive reasoning for his article. The author gives out six opponents popular reasons
includes: Worries over online predators are overblown, Threats due to peer-to-peer bullying are
more serious than those due to cyber bullying, Laws may threaten free speech, Laws would make
statements that defame, embarrass, harm, abuse, threaten, slander or harass third parties illegal
online, Better education may solve the problem and Teaching people to behave civilly online is
no different than teaching children to use proper table manners . Then Leichting in turn critics
backs them with his viewpoint. All reasons are adequate to support the final conclusion. This
made the author's article become more coherent and logical. Furthermore, the article also has
citations from several reports and studies which helps the article becomes more convincing.
However this article still has some weaknesses is that sometimes authors integrating words
expressing personal feelings and overgeneralization such as "nonsense", "no reason" ... which
makes the article became a lack of professionalism.
Overall this is a pretty good argument if we need ideas to against opponents reasons.
While the use of many words expressing personal feelings but the article still complete its
mission in convincing the reader.