That poor kid who killed himself, Tyler Clementi? It was the Internet's fault.

[stevedeshazer]

Yup. That's what this sickening AP article says.

NJ student's suicide illustrates Internet dangers

<snip>

PISCATAWAY, N.J. — The shocking suicide of a college student whose sex life was broadcast over the Web illustrates yet again the Internet's alarming potential as a means of tormenting others and raises questions whether young people in the age of Twitter and Facebook can even distinguish public from private.

Cruel gossip and vengeful acts once confined to the schoolyard or the dorm can now make their way around the world instantly via the Internet, along with photos and live video.

"It's just a matter of when the next suicide's going to hit, when the next attack's going to hit," said Parry Aftab, a New Jersey lawyer who runs the website WiredSafety.

Last week, Rutgers University freshman Tyler Clementi jumped to his death from the George Washington Bridge after his roommate and another classmate allegedly used a webcam to secretly broadcast his dorm room sexual encounters with another man. The two classmates have been charged with invasion of privacy, with the most serious charges carrying up to five years in prison.

</snip>

So, let's see if I have this right. It's not the outright bigotry and hatred that drives someone, even his roommate, to secretly record his sexual activities and broadcast them over the Internet.

It's the Internet itself.

Give me a freaking break.

:grr:

No mention of the outright cruelty of his roommate and his girlfriend getting their jollies on by destroying this guy.

I wonder how they would feel if someone recorded their bedroom activities and posted movies on the 'Net.

This is just sick. But, that is exactly what this article suggests.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5i1iMYHMsNbOUJOaBvP10z2VkrP_AD9IIKPUO0?docId=D9IIKPUO0

This is wrong.

[gateley]

1. I can't help but wonder how those two students feel. I'm guessing they'll leave

Rutgers because everyone will be so disgusted with them and horrified by what they did. I hope they are wracked with guilt and get the max 5 years.

[MadMaddie]

4. So I don't know if they did not question themselves

of the right or wrong of their actions I don't see them being remorseful. I only seem them being remorseful because they got caught.

[Jamastiene]

17. True.

Malicious people never do feel guilt...unless they get caught.

[JI7]

19. yeah, the fact that they did what they did indicates they are the type who doesn't give a shit

about how others felt.

[gateley]

21. Have they been interviewed - or do you mean that's your opinion of how they

probably feel (as opposed to making that observation after seeing/hearing them)?

Either way, I bet you're right. It makes me feel sick just thinking about how vile and hateful people can be.

[MadMaddie]

40. It's just my opininon

however; in a past career where I interacted with all levels of folks I met many like them. There is a set of individuals in a population that are cold hearted and malicious.

[gateley]

42. I was just curious because I think they've been glaringly absent from the

eye of the press with the exception of their two photos, so wondered if I'd missed something. And I agree about the cold hearted and malicious people - it's just something that so many of us can't identify with (which is good!) :hi:

[JI7]

8. the Whole country, World should know who they are and what they did

and deserve to be treated like crap . the same way they treated Tyler.

even if Tyler had not killed himself over this, it would have been just as horrible.

really, recording other people having sex without their knowledge and inviting others to watch ????????????? that is some fucked up shit.

[RandomThoughts]

2. It is theft of privace.

Same thing that is done with the patriot act.

[Bobbieo]

3. I wish the poor kid would have gotten a motel room for his tryst.. Isn't that

what politicians do?

[JI7]

6. why should he ?

[Bobbieo]

10. Because he probaby would still be alive!!!

[JI7]

11. he would be alive if his privacy wasn't invaded by scum

they might have found a way to do what they did even if he did go to a motel

[Bobbieo]

13. Chances are if he would have gotten a motel room - he'd still be alive!!!

C'mon - get real!!!

[JI7]

14. i guess you can say he would be alive if he didn't have sex, if he didn't go to rutgers

etc. also

[mkultra]

44. or if he didnt kill himself.

[Heidi]

25. Alive and dealing with the trauma of having had your sex life broadcast to the world.

I don't think blaming the victim is the answer here.

[Posteritatis]

16. "She shouldn't have dressed that way."

Ugh.

[Jamastiene]

18. Was he a politician?

No. He was just a kid. Probably could not afford to. Besides, he paid good money to live where he was living. He deserved the same rights in his own room as anyone else would have.

It wasn't his fault. The fault for the invasion of privacy and destruction of his life lies with the sociopaths who did that to him.

[pnwmom]

23. It's not what college students do. What he did was absolutely routine.

What his roommate did was evil.

[Heidi]

24. He was paying to live there. "Back of the bus" attitudes indulge the cruelty

to which he was subjected.

[Dappleganger]

30. Nice way to blame the victim here. nt

[MadMaddie]

43. It's college and everyone here knows that a lot of

good times are going on. Would we apply the same rigor to a straight couple of college kids? Probably not.

The guy who filmed it knew he was gay and could have simply asked for a new roommate. He chose not to and someone is dead because of it.

[JI7]

5. i hope they get 5 years in prison and after that is over i hope their lives are miserable

and they are treated like crap. they way they treated Tyler.

you have to be a fucked up human being to do what they did. fuck them both.

[Withywindle]

7. OH, such bullshit.

I've been online since '95, and I was well behind many of my peers.

Never felt the slightest flicker of desire to do this to anyone. The internet is not the problem. Bigotry and cruelty are the problem, and those things are as old as humanity.

[qnr]

9. It's obviously the fault of electricity, in numerous definitions of such. n/t

[Dr Morbius]

12. I couldn't disagree with you more.

First, the article does indeed mention the cruelty involved here, and cites similar examples of such cruelty. Consider this passage:

Gregory Jantz, founder of A Place of Hope, a Seattle mental health care center, said young people who use the Internet to spread something damaging about others often don't realize how hurtful it can be because many of them have grown up in a world that has blurred the line between public and private.

"Our kids are in a different zone now," Jantz said.

Aftab said young people who would never bully someone face to face do it online in part because of the often-false sense of anonymity that the Internet provides.

"They'll also jump on because they don't want to be the next target," Aftab said.

Now, it seems to me that a discussion of how new technology is promoting cruelty is long overdue, and that it what I think the article is about. It does not "blame" the internet itself. It cites the most recent case as an illustration of how the internet can be used for cruelty, and this is an important thing to discuss. We should be talking about the negative aspects of all this fancy technology at the same time as we sing hosannas for being able to watch sporting events wherever we are.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

15. Well put.

[stevedeshazer]

20. So, that's why the kid killed himself?

I respect what you are trying to say here (I think) but it is naive, in my opinion, to deny the effects of even the most recent case (as you put it) and I don't think most people give 'hosannas' for watching sporting events online. I don't give a crap about that.

Give me a break, Dr Morbius.

<snip>

young people who use the Internet to spread something damaging about others often don't realize how hurtful it can be because many of them have grown up in a world that has blurred the line between public and private.

</snip>

Really?

[pnwmom]

He killed himself because he was traumatized by what had happened to him.

And what happened to him -- having private, sexual images of him broadcast in real time, world wide -- wouldn't have been possible in the days before the Internet.

Our privacy laws need to catch up to today's technology. A five year maximum sentence might have made sense when all someone could do was take some pictures on a camera or hidden video. But it doesn't reflect the permanent damage that can be done today, when private material is dumped into the Internet.

[ThomasQED]

35. I hadn't even thought of that :-(

Once something is on the Net it never goes away. That poor kid was probably horrified thinking his parents would eventually see it, etc.

[AngryAmish]

39. I'm not stalking you, but I think five years is plenty of time.

Prison is a terrible place. I don't think these people thought he would jump off that bridge. I think the roommate was pissed that he could not study in his room or go to bed. And the roommate was grossed out by his roommate being gsy.

These people are scum and will get what is coming to them. Five years is enough.

[pnwmom]

46. Being grossed out that your roommate is gay isn't an excuse

for traumatizing him to the point of suicide.

If they find out that hate charges in NJ apply, I think the sentence should be higher. Yes, prison is a terrible place. But what they did to him was terrible.

[pnwmom]

26. delete (dupe)

[pnwmom]

27. delete (dupe)

[Dr Morbius]

33. Hmm. I concede that I was being hyperbolic about the hosannas.

We do hear a lot of praise for the latest technology; I think that's a point beyond dispute. And my larger point, that the negative effects of technology are a thing that doesn't get discussed, stands.

As to the quoted line, it's a conclusion with which I don't quite agree. I think young people who use the internet or their telephones to spread "something damaging" don't appreciate the pain they're causing because they don't feel anything. Every time they see something happen on their televisions or telephone screens, they see the consequence happen before them also. The glut of popular entertainment has blurred the lines between reality and entertainment these days. and the idea that some things should be left private don't occur to them. Life without cameras seems to them quaint and old-fashioned.

But just because the article contains a conclusion with which I disagree doesn't mean it's entirely worthless, and I still don't believe the article is blaming the internet.

And the kid killed himself because tragically, the consequences of this underhanded misdeed were more than he could emotionally bear. The actions of these two kids are incredibly hurtful; one hopes they suffer the maximum penalty under law, for justice cannot be returned to balance in this case. If we as a society will condemn this kind of behavior, then we as a society ought to talk about what we can do to prevent this kind of behavior... without compromising our freedoms. Which is what I was getting at.

Thanks for disagreeing respectfully, though. :)

[stevedeshazer]

48. And I apologize for disagreeing disrespectfully.

I got caught up in it and expressed myself in a way I regret.

You're right about the 'infotainment' (my term, but I think you know what I mean) and I appreciate that point of view. Things have changed radically in the past few years because of rapid technological advances.

This is a very emotional issue for many people; when I originally posted, I was angry. Today, it just makes me sad.

What a shitty deal. No one benefits from this.

Peace.

[ThomasQED]

34. a world that has blurred the line between public and private

I think that part may well be true. My younger friends all post private stuff on their (and others') Facebook walls and Twitter, and rather than text or call someone to ask if they want to meet, they will post "Hey X, want to get coffee this afternoon?" to the whole world.

These same people are "very concerned" about the government tracking people's movements, invasion of privacy, etc., but you can read their Facebook or Twitter accounts and know where they are all day long. I had to explain to them why putting their birthdates on the Internet might not be a good idea.
.

[seabeyond]

32. +1. or we can pretend there is no issue. agree with your post nt

[sinkingfeeling]

36. +10 I believe technology is creating a world where people think they're always

anonymous. Kids will put anything and everything about themselves and others 'online'. And we must all admit it's a lot easier to be nasty at a keyboard than to tell it to somebody in person.

[pnwmom]

22. It is TRUE that the Internet has made possible a whole new form of bullying.

And the privacy laws need to be changed to reflect that. In the past, someone could threaten to show photographs. Now they can publish them instantly worldwide -- and the images will NEVER completely disappear. I think there should be a maximum penalty in NJ significantly higher than the current 5 years, to reflect the degree of trauma that can be experienced by the victim.

[TexasObserver]

28. An absurd conclusion by someone who wanted to slam the internet.

The cause is more likely to be the parents of these two selfish people, who lack even a modicum of empathy.

[no_hypocrisy]

29. Same syndicated story appeared in local paper where his parents live.

http://www.northjersey.com/community/093010_NJ_students_suicide_illustrates_Internet_dangers.html

How do you think they feel as they grieve and try to make sense of this madness?

[seabeyond]

31. use someones name, and it will always come up in a google search. that is a pretty powerful weapon

you can sneer at what is being said, but you can damn well bet i am discussing this with my boys... the world they live in with the net and lack of privacy.

is it ultimately the blame of those that commit the action? damn straight. once on the net, how much does that matter?

[pipi_k]

37. If the Internet didn't exist and his activities had been caught on

camera, printed, and distributed by hand, I suppose it would be the fault of the paper those images were printed on.


sigh...

Where do they keep all the rocks these morons crawl out from under?

[WinkyDink]

38. We are being conditioned to accept govt control of the Internet, slowly but surely.

Maybe not so slowly, with this Administration.

[ecstatic]

41. Dangers of "social networking/media," not the Internet in general BUT

the problem still begins with BULLIES. Bullies are bullies whether using facebook or just their fists or words.

[Subdivisions]

45. The Internet doesn't kill people. People kill people. n/t

[gratuitous]

47. I didn't get that from the article

What I got from the article is that a mean, cruel act as happened here can now, thanks to the internet, become a nationwide, even worldwide sensation (and I don't mean that in the "sensational" sense). Students have been doing mean, cruel things for decades (I remember my own high school and college days), but the internet makes what were formerly strictly local meannesses into "the whole world is watching" spectacles.

I think it's more of a lament than a blame thing. At least, that's my reading of the article. It certainly doesn't appear to spare or absolve the perpetrators or shift the blame for their act to the internet.