DOCSLIB.ORG

Civility, Safety & Interaction Online

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Civility, Safety & Interaction Online Civility, Safety & Interaction Online February 2020 1 Study Methodology Adults 18-74, Teens 13-17 The 2019 report is based on the views of 12,520 14-minute Web survey adults and teens questioned across 25 countries Interviews conducted May 1-31, 2019 Argentina 502 Belgium 501 Brazil 502 Canada 500 Chile 503 Colombia 502 France 502 Germany 501 Hungary 500 India 502 Indonesia 501 Ireland 500 Italy 500 Malaysia 500 Mexico 500 Netherlands 504 Peru 500 Poland 500 Russia 500 Singapore 500 South Africa 500 Turkey 500 United Kingdom 500 Countries in Bold United States 500 new in 2019 Vietnam 500 2 42,000+ Interviews since 2016 25 Countries 21 Online Risks 2019 22 Countries 21 Online Risks 2018 23 Countries 2017 20 Online Risks 14 Countries 17 Online Risks 2016 3 3 Key Research Questions Core Trends New questions Digital Civility Index Current & future state of digital civility Sources of online risk Consumer’s aspirations for digital civility Pain caused by online risks Topics that generate uncivil behavior Consequences & Actions taken The number of times a risk has occurred Know where to find help 4 The Rising Tide of Incivility Pessimism and Hope The Digital Civility Index increased 4-points to 70%. About half of the twenty-five country DCI scores rose significantly, with fifteen countries registering their worst DCI since the study began in 2016. Many countries in the study have seen a rise of populist movements or politicians who employ incendiary rhetoric, fueling confrontational discourse that extends into the online world. Nearly four in ten adults said politics was at the center of rude, uncivil or abusive interactions online. Harm from online risks rose. The pain, anxiety and real-world consequences associated with risks accelerated in 2019. There has been a global decline in people taking positive actions including elements of the Digital Civility Challenge. People hold a pessimistic view on the state of digital civility. More than half of respondents rated the current state of online civility as bad and did not foresee major improvements in the coming year. Respondents were more optimistic when asked about the prospects for civility improving in the decade ahead. Hope and expectations that Technology can help. Half of respondents believe technology and social media companies will create tools and policies that encourage respectful and civil behavior. Respondents have an expectation that technology will give them ways to better protect their personal information and privacy in the future. A desire for a more civil online world. Users hoped that the online world of the 2020’s would be characterized by respect and safety, along with freedom and civility. The Digital Civility Landscape Digital Civility Index Top 5, Bottom 5 countries ranked by DCI Global DCI 70% 2. Netherlands, 56% 1. U.K., 52% 22. Russia, 79% 68% 5. U.S.A, 60% 3. Germany, 58% 21. Vietnam, 78% 66% 23. Colombia, 80% 4. Malaysia, 59% 65% 24. Peru, 81% Add your text here text your Add 25. South Africa, 83% Top Risks 2019 Unwanted contact Hoaxes, frauds & scams Unwanted sexting 2016 2017 2018 2019 Treated mean Trolling Adjusted for YOY country lineup differences 7 Digital Civility Index Biggest moves of 2019 Global DCI 70% 3. Belgium, 66%, +9 2. France, 62%, +10 68% 4. U.S.A, 60%, +9 1. India, 71%, +12 6. Vietnam, 78%, +7 66% 5. Colombia, 80%, +8 65% Add your text here text your Add Top Risks 2019 Unwanted contact Hoaxes, frauds & scams Unwanted sexting 2016 2017 2018 2019 Treated mean Trolling 2017-2019 adjusted for YOY country lineup differences 8 Intrusive & Behavioral Risk Trends Intrusive, +2 YOY Behavioral,+5 YOY 43% 24% 40% 22% Treated mean Unwanted contact 21% 20% Trolling 29% 28% 17% 18% Online harassment Hoaxes, scams & frauds Microaggression 13% 14% 12% Cyberbullying 18% Hate speech 16% 9% 15% Discrimination 10% 7% 4% Swatting 6% Misogyny 3% 1% 2% Terrorism recruiting 2016 2017* 2018* 2019* 2016 2017* 2018* 2019* * Adjusted for YOY country lineup differences Q2: Which of these has ever happened to you or to a friend/family member ONLINE? 9 Sexual & Reputational Risk Trends Sexual, +3 YOY Reputational, +3 YOY 26% Unwanted Sexting 24% 12% Doxing 18% 16% Unwanted sexual attention 9% 11% Damage to personal rep 14% 14% Sexual solicitation 9% 6% Damage to work rep 4% Sextortion 3% 4% ”Revenge porn” 2016 2017* 2018* 2019* 2016 2017* 2018* 2019* * Adjusted for YOY country lineup differences Q2: Which of these has ever happened to you or to a friend/family member ONLINE? 10 Risks happened more recently 40% 29% 28% Past Month 22% 20% Past Week 11% 10% 12% Risk happened in the Base: Total sample 2017 2018 2019 past week/month (Any risk) Q6: When was the last time these events happened to you 11 Three in four experienced risks repeatedly (two times or more) 1x 2x 3x + Any Risk 25% 21% 55% Unwanted sexual attention 40% 20% 40% Sexual Sexual solicitation 39% 22% 40% risks Unwanted contact 38% 22% 40% Unwanted Sexting Received 40% 21% 39% Online harassment 41% 22% 37% Hate speech 38% 25% 37% Unwanted Sexting Sent 29%43% 20% 37% 75% Discrimination 42% 23% 36% Hoaxes, scams, frauds 41% 24% 35% Treated Mean 38% 27% 35% Misogyny 47% 20% 34% Cyberbullying 42% 25% 33% Microaggression 47% 22% 31% Trolling 47% 23% 30% Sextortion 53% 25% 22% Damage to Personal rep 54% 24% 22% Experienced a risk 2 Damage to work rep 58% 22% 20% Revenge pornography 56% 25% 19% (Any risk) or more times Doxing 64% 21% 15% Terrorism recruiting 66% 19% 14% Swatting 62% 24% 14% Q5.2A: How many times did you experience these risks 12 Risks are a bigger problem How big a problem is… Unwanted Hoaxes, scams Behavioral Sexual contact & frauds 80% Big 73% 79% problem 71% 73% 63% 63% 49% Small 42% 33% problem 30% 25% 23% 22% 17% 18% 9% Not a 7% 5% 5% 5% 4% 2% 3% problem 2018 2019 2018 2019 2018 2019 2018 2019 Q2_014: How big a problem are <insert risk> online? 13 92% Suffered pain from online risks is up 8 points No pain Mild pain Moderate pain Severe pain 8% (-8 YOY) 24% (-5 YOY) 31% (+4 YOY) 37% (+9 YOY) Q5.1: How much emotional, psychological or physical pain did you suffer because of <insert risk> 14 The five most painful online risks (% suffered moderate or severe pain, minimum 5% risk incidence) 80 77 74 71 71 Damage to Damage to Cyberbullying Misogyny Discrimination personal professional reputation reputation YOY p +6 +6 +6 +15 +5 Q5.1: How much emotional, psychological or physical pain did you suffer because of <insert risk> 15 64% Worry that risks will happen again is up 8 points Extremely, very or somewhat worried 52% 64% 2018 Base: experienced risk 2019 Q5.7: How much do you worry about this happening to you again 16 Topics that drive the most incivility 31% 26% 31% 30% 25% Politics Religion Physical Sexual Race appearance orientation Q2B: Thinking about your online interactions, which topics have generated the most rude, uncivil or abusive behavior? 17 Risks from family & friends edged higher 9% 8% 21% 20% Family 4% 9% Friends 13% 9% Co-workers, colleagues 21% 23% 19% Aquaintances Know online only 25% 26% 27% Strangers 37% 37% 39% 2017 2018 2019 Q2: Which of these has ever happened to you or to a friend/family member ONLINE? 18 Familiarity with the perpetrator is associated with more risk & consequences Nearly half had met the Number of risks is higher Consequences are perpetrator in real life for those who met the higher for those who perpetrator met the perpetrator Not met Met Met 53% 5,3 5,3 88% 88% 51% 52% 52% 85% 4,1 49% 48% 48% 70% 47% 2,6 67% Met 56% Not met 3,0 3,0 2,4 Not met 2,0 2016 2017 2018 2019 2016 2017 2018 2019 2017 2018 2019 Q5: Have you ever met the person(s) in real life who treated you in an unsafe or uncivil manner when you were online? ? 19 Three in four experienced a consequence 7 biggest changes 39% Less likely to participate in social media, blogs & forums Personal reputation was damaged 76% 25% Lost money 24% 23% Intentionally spent less time at school 15% Had thoughts of suicide 14% 14% 13% 11% Quit my job 9% 7% Experienced a 5% Was physically harmed offline 3% consequence +6 YOY 2017 2018 2019 (Any consequence) Q9: Please tell us if any of the following has ever happened to you or to a friend/family member as a consequence of being treated uncivilly 20 Many actions were taken less often 7 biggest changes since 2017 Bold = digital civility challenge items 45% Reduced the personal 40% 40% information I share online 39% 35% 35% I used tighter privacy settings on social media 34% 30% 30% I stood up for myself 91% 28% 29% 25% I paused before replying to 22% someone I disagreed with 20% 21% 19% 19% I defended someone who 15% 16% was treated unsafe or uncivil 14% 10% I showed respect for other people's point of view 5% Actions taken I treated the other person +1 YOY 0% with dignity and respect (Any action taken) 2017 2018 2019 Q9: Please tell us if any of the following has ever happened to you or to a friend/family member as a consequence of being treated uncivilly 21 Perceptions about Digital civility was Slightly more pessimistic Digital Civility: rated poorly today for the coming year Present & Future Good Neutral Bad Better Same Worse People are contacted online without 9% 31% 60% 25% 36% 39% their permission or consent People are bullied, harassed or 11% 39% 51% 25% 36% 39% abused online People experience unwanted 24% 38% 39% relationship requests or sexual 12% 37% 51% advances online People’s personal or work reputation 12% 41% 46% 25% 40% 35% is attacked and or damaged online Q2019.1.1: What would you say is the current Q2019.1.2: A year from now, do you expect the state of digital civility in your country regarding state of online civility in your country to be: 22 A longer time horizon Expectations for the 2020’s gives rise to greater Technology can optimism help encourage civil behavior Better Worse Same Technology and social media companies' tools and policies to encourage respectful and civil behavior 50% 17% 33% while punishing bad behavior will be..
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Silenced by Free Speech: How Cyberabuse Affects Debate and Democracy
    Silenced by Free Speech: How cyberabuse affects debate and democracy Chapter in: Rethinking Cybercrime, Palgrave Macmillan. In press, publication date January 2017 Editors: Tim Owen, Wayne Noble, Faye Speed The early days of the internet promised much. Posting online seemed to offer a freedom from expectation and prejudice. In the words of the New Yorker cartoon, on the internet, nobody knows you’re a dog. We believed nobody knew your gender, age or race either. Your beauty or lack of it was of no account, your mind was disembodied, pure spirit, freed from the hidebound judgements of society. You could remove the mask you wear every day, revealing your true nature online to other disembodied spirits in a way that you never could to your family or colleagues. Perhaps you would find a new community to live in online, a community that thinks and feels as you do. Or instead of revealing yourself, you could create a new self. You could play with your identity more easily than playing with your hair colour, you could have a whole wardrobe of new selves if you want them. The internet offered freedom from the space constraints and word counts of newspapers, as well as from their gatekeepers, political stances and editorial guidelines. Here, anyone could be their own publisher for free, and could be heard all over the world without having their opinions edited down to fit a hole at the bottom of a column or a gap in a 90-second feature. You can’t fill the internet, so you could say everything you always wanted to say, as many times as you like.
    [Show full text]
  • Crafting Online Harassment and Abuse Reporting Policies
    crafting online harassment and abuse reporting policies Amanda Levendowski Internet Law & Policy Foundry Fellow Data & Society Databite December 17, 2015 1 CRAFTING HARP what’s the problem? 2 CRAFTING HARP “We suck at dealing with abuse and trolls on the platform and we’ve sucked at it for years. It’s no secret and the rest of the world talks about it every day. We lose core user after core user by not addressing simple trolling issues that they face every day.” - Dick Costolo, CEO of Twitter 3 CRAFTING HARP 40% 4 CRAFTING HARP According to a 2014 survey, over 40% of online adults report being targets one or more types of harassment: called offensive names 7% purposefully embarassed 8% 27% stalked 6% 8% sexually harassed 22% physically threatened sustained harassment Maeve Duggan, Online Harassment, PEW Research Internet Project (Oct. 22, 2014), http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/10/22/online-harassment/ 5 CRAFTING HARP WHO 6 CRAFTING HARP There may be a correlation between the types of people who engage in harassment and where that behavior is likely to occur: co-worker 7% former partner 10% family 12% friend 23% acquaintance 24% unknown 26% stranger 38% 7 CRAFTING HARP WHERE 8 CRAFTING HARP There may be a correlation between the types of people who engage in harassment and where that behavior is likely to occur: online dating site 6% co-worker 7% forum 10% former partner 10% family 12% email 16% friend 23% online gaming 16% acquaintance 24% the comments 22% unknown 26% stranger 38% social media 66% 9 platform permeability matrix CRAFTING
    [Show full text]
  • MIAMI UNIVERSITY the Graduate School
    MIAMI UNIVERSITY The Graduate School Certificate for Approving the Dissertation We hereby approve the Dissertation of Bridget Christine Gelms Candidate for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy ______________________________________ Dr. Jason Palmeri, Director ______________________________________ Dr. Tim Lockridge, Reader ______________________________________ Dr. Michele Simmons, Reader ______________________________________ Dr. Lisa Weems, Graduate School Representative ABSTRACT VOLATILE VISIBILITY: THE EFFECTS OF ONLINE HARASSMENT ON FEMINIST CIRCULATION AND PUBLIC DISCOURSE by Bridget C. Gelms As our digital environments—in their inhabitants, communities, and cultures—have evolved, harassment, unfortunately, has become the status quo on the internet (Duggan, 2014 & 2017; Jane, 2014b). Harassment is an issue that disproportionately affects women, particularly women of color (Citron, 2014; Mantilla, 2015), LGBTQIA+ women (Herring et al., 2002; Warzel, 2016), and women who engage in social justice, civil rights, and feminist discourses (Cole, 2015; Davies, 2015; Jane, 2014a). Whitney Phillips (2015) notes that it’s politically significant to pay attention to issues of online harassment because this kind of invective calls “attention to dominant cultural mores” (p. 7). Keeping our finger on the pulse of such attitudes is imperative to understand who is excluded from digital publics and how these exclusions perpetuate racism and sexism to “preserve the internet as a space free of politics and thus free of challenge to white masculine heterosexual hegemony” (Higgin, 2013, n.p.). While rhetoric and writing as a field has a long history of examining myriad exclusionary practices that occur in public discourses, we still have much work to do in understanding how online harassment, particularly that which is gendered, manifests in digital publics and to what rhetorical effect.
    [Show full text]
  • Doxxing, Swatting and the New Trends in Online Harassment 22 April 2015, by Andrew Quodling
    Doxxing, swatting and the new trends in online harassment 22 April 2015, by Andrew Quodling citizens about "swatting" (see below) since 2008. It has become common to see articles about how these attacks have affected politicians (both Republican and Democrat in the US), celebrities, journalists, businesses, video game streamers and public servants. What is doxxing? Doxxing – named for "documents" or "docs" – is the act of release of someone's personal and/or When the SWAT team bursts into your bedroom, it’s not identifiable information without their consent. This only unpleasant but potentially deadly. Credit: Jason can include things like their full legal name, social Eppink/Flickr, CC BY security numbers, home or work addresses and contact information. There's no set format for a "dox"; the doxxer simply Imagine this: there's a knock at your door. "Pizza publishes whatever information they've managed to delivery!" It's the fifth time in the last hour that turn up in their searches. Sometimes this even you've had to say to a delivery-person: "No, I really includes the names and details of their target's didn't order anything." That's irritating. family or close friends. Half an hour later, there's another noise at the As a tactic of harassment, doxxing serves two door. This time it's forced open as your house is purposes: it intimidates the people targeted by stormed by the heavily armed and aggressive invading and disrupting their expectations of special response unit of your local police force. privacy; and it provides an avenue for the They're responding to a tip off that warned them of perpetuation of that person's harassment by a hostage situation at your address.
    [Show full text]
  • What Is Cyberbullying?
    Cyberbullying Contents 1. What Is Cyberbullying 2. The Dangers Of Cyberbullying 3. How Is Cyberbullying Different From Regular Bullying 4. How To Tell If Your Child Is Being Cyberbullied 5. How To Tell If Your Child Is Cyberbullying Someone Else 6. Why Do Children Cyberbully 7. What To Do If Your Child Is Cyberbullying 8. What To Do If Your Child Is Being Cyberbullied 9. Parents Top 10 Questions About Cyberbullying 10. Statistics Of Cyberbullying 2015 Page 2 www.keepchildrensafeonline.com 1. What Is Cyberbullying? The definition of Cyberbullying is ‘the use of electronic communication to bully a person, typically by sending 1 messages of an intimidating or threatening nature’. As the definition suggests, Cyberbullying can take many forms. Just about any type of electronic communication can be used to bully or intimidate somebody, whether it’s via texting, email, instant messengers, chat rooms, multiplayer games and so forth. Here is a list of some (but by no means all) of the possible sources of Cyberbullying: • Texting • Phone Calls • Social Media • Chatrooms • Forums • Messaging & Photo Apps like WhatsApp and Snapchat • Online Multiplayer 1 Oxford English Dictionary Page 3 www.keepchildrensafeonline.com Of course, it can be tricky to know what is and isn’t Cyberbullying, as sometimes children say mean things to each other online, but one wouldn’t consider it any more than childish name-calling. The key distinction to make is that Cyberbullying is generally characterised by repeatedly causing harm, whether that is through repeated incidents or a single malicious incident that has lasting repercussions. Some examples of Cyberbullying include: Cyberstalking Cyberstalking is where somebody ‘stalks’ the victim online, usually sending multiple messages or just making it clear that they are watching the victim’s online life.
    [Show full text]
  • Field Hockey Glossary All Terms General Terms Slang Terms
    Field Hockey Field Hockey Glossary All Terms General Terms Slang Terms A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z # 16 - Another name for a "16-yard hit," a free hit for the defense at 16 yards from the end line. 16-yard hit - A free hit for the defense that comes 16 yards from its goal after an opposing player hits the ball over the end line or commits a foul within the shooting circle. 25-yard area - The area enclosed by and including: The line that runs across the field 25 yards (23 meters) from each backline, the relevant part of the sideline, and the backline. A Add-ten - A delay-of-game foul called by the referee. The result of the call is the referee giving the fouled team a free hit with the ball placed ten yards closer to the goal it is attacking. Advantage - A call made by the referee to continue a game after a foul has been committed if the fouled team gains an advantage. Aerial - A pass across the field where the ball is lifted into the air over the players’ heads with a scooping or flicking motion. Artificial turf - A synthetic material used for the field of play in place of grass. Assist - The pass or last two passes made that lead to the scoring of a goal. Attack - The team that is trying to score a goal. Attacker - A player who is trying to score a goal.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ripple Effect Covid-19 and the Epidemic of Online Abuse
    THE RIPPLE EFFECT COVID-19 AND THE EPIDEMIC OF ONLINE ABUSE September 2020 Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Executive summary 5 Glossary 13 INTRODUCTION Introduction 14 FINDINGS About the respondents 19 Respondents’ experiences of online abuse during COVID-19 20 Intersectionality 22 Platforms, perpetrators and patterns of online abuse 23 Impacts of online abuse on respondents 27 Behavioural change and self-censorship online 28 Reporting 31 Abuse in the virtual workplace 34 TESTIMONIALS Testimonials 36 CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS Conclusions 36 Recommendations for employers 40 Recommendations for the government 40 Recommendations for tech companies 42 Recommendations for civil society 43 Appendix 44 2 Suggested Citation: The Ripple Effect: COVID-19 and the Epidemic of Online Abuse by Glitch UK and End Violence Against Women Coalition under a creative commons lisence. You are free to: Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium icensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms. Under the following terms: Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use. ShareAlike — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original. No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits. This report was design in Adobe InDesign and Illustrator by Visualst. 2 Please note that this report includes statistics, and personal accounts, of online abuse and discrimination which some readers may find triggering.
    [Show full text]
  • Cyberbullying and the Middle School Adolescent: Educator Perceptions
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Digital Commons @ Gardner-Webb University Gardner-Webb University Digital Commons @ Gardner-Webb University Education Dissertations and Projects School of Education 2019 Cyberbullying and the Middle School Adolescent: Educator Perceptions Kalani Crognal LaFrancis Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.gardner-webb.edu/education_etd Part of the Education Commons CYBERBULLYING AND THE MIDDLE SCHOOL ADOLESCENT: EDUCATOR PERCEPTIONS By Kalani Crognal LaFrancis A Dissertation Submitted to the Gardner-Webb University School of Education in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Education Gardner-Webb University 2019 Approval Page This dissertation was submitted by Kalani Crognal LaFrancis under the direction of the persons listed below. It was submitted to the Gardner-Webb University School of Education and approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education at Gardner-Webb University. __________________________________ ________________________ Jennifer Putnam, Ed.D. Date Committee Chair _________________________________ ________________________ Stephen Laws, Ed.D. Date Committee Member _________________________________ ________________________ Amanda Ruppe, Ed.D. Date Committee Member _________________________________ ________________________ Prince Bull, Ph.D. Date Dean of the School of Education ii Dedication In memory of my Momma; she believed I could do anything. I did it, Momma! In honor of Thomas Simon, John Stephen, and Anna Elaine; may my work serve as a remembrance of the significance of lifelong learning while ensuring you that with perseverance you can accomplish anything your heart desires. Thank you for allowing me to take this journey, and for always understanding the seemingly endless days of “homework.” All that I do has been, and will always be, for you.
    [Show full text]
  • New Technologies, New Problems, New Laws
    COMMENTARY New Technologies, New Problems, New Laws Patricia R. Recupero, JD, MD Forensic psychiatrists in the 21st century can expect to encounter technology-related social problems for which existing legal remedies are limited. In addition to the inadequate protection of adolescents using social media as outlined by Costello et al., current laws are often poorly suited to remedy problems such as cyberharassment, sexting among minors, and the publication of threatening or harmful communications online. Throughout history, technological developments have often preceded the introduction of new laws or the careful revision of existing laws. This pattern is evident in many of the newer social problems that involve technology, including cyberbullying, online impersonation, and revenge porn. As specialists working at the intersection of human behavior and the law, forensic psychiatrists are uniquely situated to help legal professionals and others understand the impact of internet-related problematic behaviors on victims and, perhaps, to assist in the development of new legal remedies that are better tailored to our increasingly digital society. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 44:322–27, 2016 Drs. Costello, McNiel, and Binder1 call attention to technology-related concerns with particular rele- a very important problem that has received surpris- vance to psychiatrists have severely limited legal rem- ingly little attention in peer-reviewed academic jour- edies, including sexting among minors,2,3 cyberbul- nals: the long-term risks posed to adolescents when lying,4 and cyberstalking.5 As Costello et al. suggest, social media and technology companies treat them as we as forensic psychiatrists may be able to play an if they were adults for the purposes of entering into important role in proposing solutions to these diffi- contracts.
    [Show full text]
  • The Influences of Misogynist Online Harassment on German Female Journalists and Their
    The Influences of Misogynist Online Harassment on German Female Journalists and their Personal and Professional Lives A thesis presented to the faculty of the Scripps College of Communication of Ohio University and the Institute for Communication and Media Studies of Leipzig University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degrees Master of Science in Journalism (Ohio University), Master of Arts in Global Mass Communication (Leipzig University) Nhi Le Vu Phung August 2020 © 2020 Nhi Le Vu Phung. All Rights Reserved. This thesis titled The Influences of Misogynist Online Harassment on German Female Journalists and their Personal and Professional Lives by NHI LE VU PHUNG has been approved for the E.W. Scripps School of Journalism, the Scripps College of Communication, and the Institute for Communication and Media Studies by Victoria Leigh LaPoe Associate Professor of Journalism Scott Titsworth Dean, Scripps College of Communication, Ohio University Christian Pieter Hoffman Director, Institute for Communication and Media Studies, Leipzig University ii Abstract LE VU PHUNG NHI, M.S., Journalism; M.A., Global Mass Communication, August 2020 3454453 The Influences of Misogynist Online Harassment on German Female Journalists and their Personal and Professional Lives Director of Thesis: Victoria Leigh LaPoe Committee Members: Mario Haim, Kefajatullah Hamidi Although female journalists persistently experience misogynist online harassment while doing their jobs, this topic has yet to receive significant attention in the German journalism landscape. As revealed through seven in-depth interviews with female, German journalists, these experiences include accusations of attention-seeking, attacks against their appearance, discrediting their skills, infantilization, unsolicited images, misogynist slurs and even fantasies about sexual violence and rape.
    [Show full text]
  • Candidate Privacy
    William & Mary Law School William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository Faculty Publications Faculty and Deans 3-2020 Candidate Privacy Rebecca Green William & Mary Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/facpubs Part of the Election Law Commons, and the Privacy Law Commons Repository Citation Green, Rebecca, "Candidate Privacy" (2020). Faculty Publications. 2006. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/facpubs/2006 Copyright c 2020 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/facpubs CANDIDATE PRIVACY Rebecca Green* Abstract: In the United States, we have long accepted that candidates for public office who have voluntarily stepped into the public eye sacrifice claims to privacy. This refrain is rooted deep within the American enterprise, emanating from the Framers' concept of the informed citizen as a bedrock of democracy. Voters must have full information about candidates to make their choices at the ballot box. Even as privacy rights for ordinary citizens have expanded, privacy theorists and courts continue to exempt candidates from privacy protections. This Article suggests that two disruptions warrant revisiting the privacy interests of candidates. The first is a changing information architecture brought on by the rise of the internet and digital media that drastically alters how information about candidates is collected and circulated. The second is a shift in who runs for office. As women and minorities-targets of the worst forms of harassment-increasingly throw their hats in the ring, this Article argues that competing democratic values should challenge previous assumptions about candidate privacy.
    [Show full text]
  • Prevalence of Cyberbullying Among Traditional Undergraduate Students Attending Faith-Based Universities: a Causal-Comparative Study
    PREVALENCE OF CYBERBULLYING AMONG TRADITIONAL UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS ATTENDING FAITH-BASED UNIVERSITIES: A CAUSAL-COMPARATIVE STUDY by Susan A. Hayes-McElroy Liberty University A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Education Liberty University 2021 2 PREVALENCE OF CYBERBULLYING AMONG TRADITIONAL UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS ATTENDING FAITH-BASED UNIVERSITIES: A CAUSAL-COMPARATIVE STUDY by Susan A. Hayes-McElroy A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Education Liberty University, Lynchburg, VA 2021 APPROVED BY: Dr. Meredith Park, Ed.D., Committee Chair Dr. Benjamin Tickle, Ph.D., Committee Member 3 ABSTRACT Cyberbullying among traditional undergraduate students is a relatively new issue that involves the safety of postsecondary students. The purpose of this study was to provide statistical data to faith-based universities that relate the prevalence of cyberbullying victimization experiences and the prevalence of cyberbullying offending experiences of traditional undergraduate students to biological gender (female/male) and level of religiosity (higher/lower), and to add to the small body of research conducted among this demographic. In this quantitative, causal-comparative study, traditional undergraduate students were recruited from two faith-based universities in the southern United States. Level of religiosity and cyberbullying prevalence were determined through responses to an anonymous, online survey using the Duke University Religion Index (DUREL) and the Cyberbullying and Online Aggression Survey (COAS), respectively. The researcher utilized two separate two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) to analyze the data. The study had 284 participants that included 180 female students and 104 male students. Findings indicated that gender and level of religiosity did not have a significant effect on the prevalence of cyberbullying experiences scores among traditional undergraduate students attending faith-based universities.
    [Show full text]