Morally Motivated Networked Harassment as Normative Reinforcement

While online harassment is recognized as a significant problem, most scholarship focuses on descriptions of harassment and its effects. We lack explanations of why people engage in online harassment beyond simple bias or dislike. This article puts forth an explanatory model where networked harassment on social media functions as a mechanism to enforce social order. Drawing from examples of networked harassment taken from qualitative interviews with people who have experienced harassment (n = 28) and Trust & Safety workers at social platforms (n = 9), the article builds on Brady, Crockett, and Bavel’s model of moral contagion to explore how moral outrage is used to justify networked harassment on social media. In morally motivated networked harassment, a member of a social network or online community accuses a target of violating their network’s norms, triggering moral outrage. Network members send harassing messages to the target, reinforcing their adherence to the norm and signaling network membership. Frequently, harassment results in the accused self-censoring and thus regulates speech on social media. Neither platforms nor legal regulations protect against this form of harassment. This model explains why people participate in networked harassment and suggests possible interventions to decrease its prevalence

Media Studies and the Pitfalls of Publicity

For many academics, using social media has both drawbacks and advantages. Social media may allow connection with colleagues, scholarly promotion, and public engagement, and may also open researchers up to criticism and even possible harassment. This essay argues that we must think critically about logics of self-branding and attention-seeking given these two sides of the coin of social media publicity. First, publicity can easily be weaponized against scholars engaging in projects that may be socially or politically controversial by individuals or organizations who disagree with their premises. Universities are often unprepared to deal with this negative publicity and fail to protect researchers from the consequence. Second, self-branding may undermine one’s ability to be viewed as a serious scholar and requires rigorous self-censorship, particularly for those far from the white, male ideal of the professoriate. I conclude with some recommendations for academic social media use at different career stages

Evaluating 'Prefer not to say' Around Sensitive Disclosures

As people's offline and online lives become increasingly entwined, the sensitivity of personal information disclosed online is increasing. Disclosures often occur through structured disclosure fields (e.g., drop-down lists). Prior research suggests these fields may limit privacy, with non-disclosing users being presumed to be hiding undesirable information. We investigated this around HIV status disclosure in online dating apps used by men who have sex with men. Our online study asked participants (N=183) to rate profiles where HIV status was either disclosed or undisclosed. We tested three designs for displaying undisclosed fields. Visibility of undisclosed fields had a significant effect on the way profiles were rated, and other profile information (e.g., ethnicity) could affect inferences that develop around undisclosed information. Our research highlights complexities around designing for non-disclosure and questions the voluntary nature of these fields. Further work is outlined to ensure disclosure control is appropriately implemented around online sensitive information disclosures

Okay, Facebook me: Exploring behavior, motivations and uses in Social Network Sites

In the information sciences, there is significant interest in the study of social network websites. Sites such as Myspace and Facebook have drawn hundreds of millions of users, shaping and contextualizing new forms of social information transfer. Furthermore, the impact of social networking sites on the college campuses we inhabit is substantial; students use social network sites to connect, engage with fellow students, and to form new learning opportunities. In this wildcard session, four (with a potential fifth) researchers exploring social network sites will come together to debate and examine the future of social network scholarship. The panelists bring a significant breadth of experience, varying research questions, and a broad scope of methodological approaches. Rather than simply presenting research and fielding questions, the panelists will engage in a debate exploring some critical and exploratory aspects of social network sites. What do social network site behaviors represent? How are we constructing new publics in social network sites? What is the future of social networking? With this high interactivity format, this session will provide significant insight into social network sites. Scheduled to participate in the session are danah boyd, Ph.D. student at UC-Berkeley???s Chool of Information, Cliff Lampe, Assistant Professor in the department of Telecommunications, Information Studies and Media at Michigan State University, Alice Marwick, PhD student at New York University in the Department of Media, Culture, and Communication, and Fred Stutzman, Ph.D. student at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill's School of Information and Library Science

To catch a predator? The MySpace moral panic

This paper discusses moral panics over contemporary technology, or “technopanics.” I use the cyberporn panic of 1996 and the contemporary panic over online predators and MySpace to demonstrate links between media coverage and content legislation. In both cases, Internet content legislation is directly linked to media-fueled moral panics that concern uses of technology deemed harmful to children. This is of particular interest right now as a new internet content bill, the Deleting Online Predators Act (DOPA), is being debated in Congress. The technopanic over “online predators” is remarkably similar to the cyberporn panic; both are fueled by media coverage, both rely on the idea of harm to children as the justification for internet content restriction, and both have resulted in carefully crafted legislation to circumvent First Amendment concerns. Research demonstrates that legislation proposed (or passed) to curb these problems is an extraordinary response; it is misguided and in many cases masks the underlying problem

Scandal or Sex Crime? Ethical Implications of the Celebrity Nude Photo Leaks

This paper explores the ethical frames and implications of the 2014 leak of a large archive of digital photos of primarily female celebrities known as "Celebgate" or "the Fappening." These photos, mostly scantily clad or nude selfies taken with iPhones, were stolen from Apple's iCloud servers and posted on image sharing board 4Chan and then to Reddit. The leak garnered an immense amount of publicity, significant revenue for Reddit, and an intense public discussion around the ethics of viewing and sharing the images. This paper is grounded in the emerging feminist literature on geek masculinity, gendered harassment, and misogynist subcultures online, and uses critical discourse analysis to examine how Redditors framed and made meaning of the nude photo leaks. I present selections from a mass capture of 94,602 text comments from reddit.com/r/thefappening. These comments are augmented by a discourse analysis of popular press discussion, primarily from afflicted celebrities, feminist columnists, and journalists. I analyze US legal policy around celebrity privacy to discuss the “need to know, right to know, want to know” ethical framework that has been used to justify publicizing private information. I conclude that the potential for attention and publicity brought about by the material affordances of the modern internet creates a continuum between “celebrities” and “average people.” Thus, attitudes towards nude photos of celebrities may mirror public attitudes towards stolen photos of the non-famous, such as revenge porn

Marwick | Online Identity |1 Online Identity in Companion to New Media Dynamics

This is a pre-print version; refer to final publication for page numbers

Status Update: Celebrity, Publicity and Self-Branding

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial

Online Harassment, Defamation, and Hateful Speech: A Primer of the Legal Landscape

This interdisciplinary project focused on online speech directed at women and seeks to provide a primer on (i) what legal remedies, if any, are available for victims of sexist, misogynist, or harassing online speech, and (ii) if such legal remedies and procedures exist, whether practical hurdles stand in the way of victims’ abilities to stop harassing or defamatory behavior and to obtain legal relief. The study concluded that while online harassment and hateful speech is a significant problem, there are few legal remedies for victims. This is partly due to issues of jurisdiction and anonymity, partly due to the protection of internet speech under the First Amendment, and partly due to the lack of expertise and resources on online speech at various levels of law enforcement. Given this landscape, the problem of online harassment and hateful speech is unlikely to be solved solely by victims using existing laws; law should be utilized in combination with other practical solutions.https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/clip/1002/thumbnail.jp