Slashdot Mirror
Ontario Proposes School Cyber-Bullying Law
nursegirl writes "Ontario announced today a proposal to change their education act to add both physical bullying and cyber-bullying to the list of behaviors that can get a student suspended or expelled. Posting comments, pictures, or videos attacking other students or teachers outside of school hours will carry the risk of school punishment, if the incident is believed to have an 'impact on school climate.'"
Not sure about Canadian law, but here's my view on this matter.
Can a school legally (or morally) get away with punishing a student for an action committed outside of school grounds if the action isn't illegal in the first place? Wouldn't it be better to seek legal action and then the school take action based on whether there is a conviction or not?
Has anyone ever heard of a restraining order up there in Canada?
If people actually are documented attacking others on video or in a picture, then they deserve to be charged with assault and dealt with accordingly.
A specific statement regarding "cyberbullying" potentially could trample om free speech.
From the grade and high schools I've gone to, bullies are usually good at what they do, because punishments can't affect them for one reason or another. Besides, it's not that hard to figure out how to shield yourself from punishment, even while doing some of the most prohibited things in a school. You can shield yourself using threats, you can shield yourself by counter-accusing others, you can shield yourself using politics and parents, and most of all, you can obscure any evidence that would justify a weighty punishment.
Harsh rules usually end up working rather well for bullies. Bullies can threaten other children with false accusations just as well as they always have with a plausible "he started it" claim in the case of a fight. And if this ends up anything like fights were handled at schools I've went to, that means the victims stay quiet, because they know they get punished at a much higher rate than any rule-savvy bully.
This seems functionally more of a rule to punish technically-oriented non-bully kids who happen to anger faculty. I don't know of any kid who didn't constantly insult other kids, especially their friends, so technical kids are virtually guaranteed as targets here because of the visibility of online interactions for bullies or angry teachers to report. From living right on the Canadian border for my last high school years, I don't think Canada is any different.
Ryan Fenton
No, having to grow a thick skin is the price of living in a _free_ society. People are free to say what they like about you (short of libel or slander), even if it hurts your feelings.
We're talking about children here. Most adults would brush off what is called cyber bullying. But a large proportion of the teenage population doesn't yet have the maturity to deal with these things. As an adult, I don't really care if people say mean things about me, and by and large people don't. But high school is a place where you are forced to go with a lot of people who often don't like each other and who spend their time inventing new and cruel ways to torture each other. Often it works because most teenagers care deeply about what the community thinks of them.
For example: http://www.paulgraham.com/nerds.html
Laws against adult bullying are a lot more lax because adult bullies have a lot less opportunity to actually have an effect. Children are a lot more vulnerable to this sort of behaviour, both because of their age and the fact that they are pretty much stuck in school and not allowed out. If you hate your co-workers, you can always try to find a new job. In many societies you can't change schools that easily, if at all. Children are also more likely to engage in sociopathic behaviour towards their peers.
Yes. Having a thick skin is the price of living in a free society... but for adults, not for children.
"by that I mean people who don't sit on slashdot all day wondering why everyone else isn't building robots" DECS
Nobody? Didn't think so.
Now - will somebody please tell me the difference between that full-page add, and a video posted to youtube?
There *is* none. It's the same act.
"Information-based society" is a cop-out. It's still libel, and it's about bloody time the law started CATCHING UP to the "information-based" society. I don't give a damn about the technology that is or is not involved - People still should be held responsible for their actions.
Adults don't magically gain maturity on reaching 18 or 21. Maturity is gained through a process of learning to have a thick skin ... and that starts very young.
Bullying can only occur when there is a disparity between the aggressor's ability to attack, and the victim's ability to defend. Thus "nerds" being the victims of bullying "jocks".
Now along comes the Internet, and Oh Crap! Jonny Football Hero can't physically bully Nedrick the Nerd anymore, or he's going to have himself photoshopped into a very compromising position and plastered on the bathroom walls.
Taunting has long been the only weapon of the victim of physical bullying. The Institution doesn't give a rat's arse unless they manage to catch a bully in the act. The only "problem" here is that now nerds have given taunting a power-up with technology, to the point that it is actually an effective weapon for a counter-attack.
Although that this statement is completely unfounded, it makes a good point for enforcing rules against physical bullying and leaving free speech the hell alone. It's not coincidence that school shootings are carried out by unpopular, downtrodden kids. If a little more attention was paid to making the True American Football Players realise that being a wimp isn't Unamerican and worthy of being pushed around, then (a) the 99.8% of school football players who don't turn it into a career will get better jobs working for the wimps, and (b) the wimps are less likely to prove that they are clever enough to take out the entire class by applying a bit of forethought (bring a gun) and less weightlifting.
i-name =twylite [http://public.xdi.org/=twylite], see idcommons.net
Now you see, that's called "assault", and it's a crime no matter what the age or location. Capturing and distributing it means you are making evidence against yourself widely available (read: stupid), so that the cops can enforce the law against "assault". No need for special laws involving bullying.
i-name =twylite [http://public.xdi.org/=twylite], see idcommons.net
I can guarantee that if there were cell phone videos when I was in school, I could point you to a web page with a video of a truckload of boys throwing rocks at me as I walked home from school. Naturally, these were the big strong tough guys who thought it was amusing to pick on a little (5'3") girl. Maybe a video would have been what it took to get an adult to do something about it, but it would have made the rounds before anything action was taken, and I probably would have taken more abuse first because of it. I was told at the time that the school could not discipline students for anything not taking place on school grounds, which is kinda funny since they had a policy suspending kids from sports if they got caught at a party with alcohol. (They didn't have to be drinking, just in the same building as the alcohol.) Nobody offered to call the cops, or suggested that I file a police report. Nobody's parents were called. I wasn't offered counseling. Nothing happened. This was in a "good" school district in a small "progressive" town. I suspect that they thought that I couldn't possibly be having problems with anyone since there weren't even any minorities in our lovely little town to cause trouble. *Their views, not mine! *
Not only did the adults never do anything, they participated in the emotional bullying. I recall one incident where a female friend had suffered a loss and I was taking her to the school pshychologist. As we sat in the front office waiting, I was hugging her and doing the supportive friend thing, and one of the office ladies made some remark to another office lady about us being lesbians, which we heard. When we complained to the principal, we were basically told he couldn't do anything about it since he didn't hear it. So I don't know why I thought they'd care about the damn stoning.
I applaud the effort to have some repercussions for *any* type of predatory behavior. I only hope they don't zero-tolerance policy the thing into persecution. I know TFA said they're taking out the ZTP, but sadly I see this potentially devolving into kids getting suspended for posting something on Myspace like "Jenny's a bitch she stole my boyfriend," or "I hate Mr. Smith, he's such a tool."
As far as just "getting over it," or developing a "thick skin" from it, as someone mentioned, I'll say this: My skin might be thicker for the experience, but it's scar tissue.
As a scrawny nerd in high school, being bullied by those larger and more popular than I taught me a valuable lesson. I learned to hold grudges and to plan and wait for the best moment to exact my revenge.
In today's society, this seems like a valuable skill to have. The legal system is too expensive for what you get, so you might as well DIY.
Blar.