Assessment 1 - Blog

I come from a bit of a gaming world – I wouldn’t call myself a gamer, but my brother is a gamer, and my partner is a gamer, as well as most of his friends. Now, because of this world that the people I love are so heavily involved in, it is practically impossible for me to not be able to pick up terminology or story lines and even get a little bit involved in these online worlds.

Over 50 million people play an MMORPG (Second Skin, 2008), and I can see why. World of Warcraft has over 10 million players worldwide (Atlay, 2015), all part of this virtual reality world. I remember once my partner was playing World of Warcraft, and he asked me to play a bit so that I could understand what he was talking about when he explained what was going on in his games. All I did was run around and kill things with lasers coming out of my eyes… and I only played for about 40 minutes before I said that it wasn’t for me. That being said, I did get really into it! I yelled when someone ran in front of me to kill the tree-monster (sorry if you play WOW, I don’t remember the exact character name) I was trying to kill. It was a lot of fun, but I don’t think I really was able to get into the virtual world side of the game with less than an hour of play time.

The documentary Second Skin (2008) focuses on the relationships that gamers have with their virtual worlds and their fellow gamers. So many people have used these games as a form of socialising. People play these games for more than 10 hours a day… couple that with approximately 8 hours a day for work, attempting to factor in 4 hours for sleep, that leaves 1 hour left in a day for EVERYTHING else, including eating, bathing, cleaning, exercising, socialising (Second Skin, 2008). Half of MMORPG players say that they are addicted to this virtual worlds and 1 in 5 say that they are residents of a virtual world (Second Skin, 2008). It can be an online dating tool, with 1 in 3 gamers date someone from a virtual world (Second Skin, 2008).

There is a dark side though, especially for females. Many can experience cyber bullying. John Oliver, host of Last Week Tonight, dedicated a segment to the online harassment (2015). He focused on the “veritable cornucopia of horrifying messages” that women can receive online, including rape threats and death threats. It also focuses on how the law in America hasn’t progressed to be able to help these women the way the really should be able to.

I personally think that the gaming world gets a bad rap for being an ‘unhealthy’ virtual world. To me, I don’t really see the difference between my partner wanting to log into his game as soon as he gets home and me checking my Facebook newsfeed. Virtual worlds can be addictive, and for all the reasons we have discussed – they provide you with the ability to escape, and communicate and even to become the person you WISH you could be. There probably is something inherently wrong with all of this, but I also don’t believe in digital duality (Herrman, 2014) and the real and virtual are going to become synonymous, and I really do think that this is something that we need to embrace, rather than reject.

References:

Atlay, O 2015, ‘Most Popular MMORPGs in the World’, MMOs.com, viewed 17 January 2016, < http://mmos.com/editorials/most-popular-mmorpgs-world>

Herrman, J 2014, ‘Meet the Man Who Got Inside Snapchat’s Head’, BuzzFeed, 28 January, viewed 16 January 2016, <http://www.buzzfeed.com/jwherrman/meet-the-unlikely-academic-behind-snapchats-new-pitch#3dlvjg2>

Last Week Tonight with John Oliver 2015 [television program], HBO, 21 June.

Great piece on gaming online.

The social aspect of it is certainly a big draw card, when younger my friends and I played dungeons and dragons (I know, how nerdy lol) while having a bbq and drinking (well, most of us were only drinking). This was the face to face version of online gaming, so true to form with the advent of online gaming we shifted online to play.

While only rarely these days, it is still the equivalent of going to a mates bbq to organise everyone to play online and have a drink at the same time, and the time set aside for the event is no different, it takes the majority of your attention for the day and the interaction is as real to the players as though they were in the same room.

Cheers,

I play online games, mostly ddo (Dungeons & Dragons Online) although my connection speed makes it a painful experience on occasion.

I have also introduced the kids to a collaborative online came called Arcane Legends to try and get them used to the concept of working together instead of alone, so far so good, although they still prefer Minecraft (which is fine, it is a good platform for demonstrating expression through construction). They also think it is funny to say that their dad kicks ass on Lego Play Station games that I play with them.

One of the things that they are developing through their guided journey in a MMORPG with my assistance, is when to spot trolling and time wasters, and who to respond to and who to ignore. If anyone contacts the littlest one (who is 7) she gives me the ipad to read the comment and I decide if it needs blocking etc, and I explain what and why I have decided to either allow communication or block it. I hope that this is helping them to develop their own sense of how to navigate an online environment.

Humphries and de Zwart cite an argument of Pargman and Jakobsson (2014 p. 5) where gamers move between frames while communicating, from an individual player, to an embodied person (that has physical needs) to being ‘in character’ as a role playing toon or avatar. This is the case, however, the individuals doing so are not born knowing how to socialise through these scenarios, they are socialised into an online gaming paradigm, through learning and experience, different and separate from face to face physical reality.

This is an argument that I have made pretty much the entire unit duration (sorry if I am boring my public!), that socialisation, dealing with trolls and bullies online, crowdsourcing information and participation in providing data are learned social activities that require guidance and experience to navigate, not government regulation or protection. 

A reinforcing point that seems to be lacking in discourse surrounding other online behaviour is the identification of the fact that individuals bring their own ethnocentric ideals and behaviour to the games and online interaction as well as “their cultural background, their education levels, their gender, their age and their own individual moral compass.” (de Zwart & Humphries 2014, p. 17).

Here is an interesting twist on RPG that has, I believe, just been released.

Online games provide a brilliant resource for other online fields to study established communities that have already experienced the problems that mainstream networked communities are only just starting to experience. Funnily though, up until recently gamers were ignored or thought of as aberrant due to their commitment to the gaming worlds.

References de Zwart, M & Humphreys, S 2014,’ The Lawless Frontier of Deep Space: Code as Law in EVE Online’, Cultural Studies Review, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 77-99.

I really like that you are bringing up your children in a way that shows your children both the positive and negative sides of the internet, especially in online communities. This is something I had to discover myself, and the hard way. I also agree with you, nothing beats experience as a learning tool, but guidance is always going to benefit, especially in the case of children.

In visual communities and social imaging, there are different ways which we can view visual aspects of people own identifications whether it being on Instagram, Facebook and Tumblr. People use it to engage with others through a way that they can share images to those they choose to connect with (Urban Dictionary, 2016).

In my own experiences, I enjoy tagging photos on social platforms whether it being my trips to Europe or when I am with friends, I like to look back to it as a memory so I don’t forget the good times. It is important to be careful what you post online, because once its uploaded, it’s out there on the web, and there is nothing you can do. Some people aren’t always up to date with social media, and this is smart because they prefer to keep things hidden from people. I have friends on Facebook that have a restriction to what people can post on their walls in case it being inappropriate.

Snapchat is an app on smart phones where you can send images to friends, giving you the ability to write a short message as well as a photo of your surroundings. I myself used it as another means of communications with my friends where you would send random photos or just send a short message to each other. Snapchat is really interesting, although you have to be careful when using it, because photos can be screenshotted and saved on your phone. People that send nude photos can have photos saved through the screenshot function on your phones and it can give the receiver the ability to share this with other people. So be mindful what kind of photos you are sending, it can easily backfire (Elyse betters, 2015).

The first self-portrait to ever been  taken was by Robert Cornelius in 1839 where he took the images by removing the lens cap and then running it into frame where he sat for a minute before covering up the lens again. On the back of the image he wrote, “The first light picture ever taken, 1893” (Wikipedia the Free Encyclopedia, 2016).

References:

Urban Dictionary, 2016, social-imaging, Retrieved 5 January, 2016, from http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=social-imaging

Elyse betters, 26th December 2015, what’s the point of Snapchat and how does it work? Retrieved 5 January, 2016, from http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/131313-what-s-the-point-of-snapchat-and-how-does-it-work

Wikipedia the Free Encyclopedia, 2016, Selfie, Retrieved 5 January, 2016, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selfie

Robert Cornelius, http://petapixel.com/assets/uploads/2013/12/robertcornelius.jpg

Snapchat, http://musically.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Snapchat_logo-2.png

The first selfie is an interesting component, and it seems to have a great deal more importance than the current fad of posting selfies everywhere. While not a fan of selfies, on reflection I also take many pictures when overseas and post them, usually via FB, noting where I am and what the experience is, and I go back through them every now and then and wish i was traveling again!

Imaging platforms are on the rise. This week we have discussed the importance of visuality, and how social media platforms are becoming more and more powerful based on the use of image. I strongly believe the main innovation of visual media in the past decade would have to be the ‘selfie’.

With the increasing development of cameras and smart phones, everyone having access to a camera, it has changed the way people have been communicating. Let’s use Instagram for example: You no longer need to write a message to your friends to tell them what you are doing or invite them to catch up for a coffee. You can simply take a photo representing what you currently are doing, eg.: having a coffee at a café at the beach, post and tag your friends. This instantly will be understood by whoever sees that picture.

We no longer need to communicate with anyone, a picture says more than a thousand words. We often see celebrities and big brands also using visual networks to promote themselves or their products. Not even mentioning the self-made celebrities, very common now a days are fitness professionals, posting videos and images of exercises and the diets they consume.

Brands are using celebrities to promote their products services on Visual Networks. Attempting to reach the 13-to-25-year-old demographic, brands are now spending up to $30,000 for a campaign with a Snapchat celebrity, and many users who have found success on other platforms are looking to cash in (Hootsuite 2014).

With Snapchat you’re dealing in a space where people are coming in when they’re bored and looking to browse for content, therefore the interest in using celebrities to publish branded content.

Publishers like BuzzFeed and Refinery29 are exploring ways they can shoot videos that can play across different screens without viewers feeling like they’re missing something going on outside their viewports (Peterson 2015). 

With the increase of visual communities we are now facing a new issue, easy access to imaging is crafting the age of digital narcissism. It has never been so easy to show off to people what you do, which car you drive, where you have been travelling to etc. A world of boundless pretention prospects and unrestricted self-important possibilities (Chamorro-Premuzic 2014).

Social platforms are now a place of selfish worship where people just like me and you are able to publicise our private lives in exchange of likes and followers. This is a new age where the ordinary person becomes the star (Chamorro-Premuzic 2014).

Now, we are all connected with Social networks in some level. Does that makes us narcissists?

  References:

Peterson, T 2015, How Brands, Publishers Are Tailoring Their Ads for Snapchat Discover , Adverting Age, viewed 03 January 2016 <http://adage.com/article/digital/brands-tailoring-ads-snapchat-discover/300979/>

Loren, T 2014, How Brands Can Leverage Snapchat Stories: Lessons From Snapchat Celebrities, hootsuite.com, 9 September, viewed 03 January 2016, http://blog.hootsuite.com/brands-can-learn-snapchat-celebrities/

  Chamorro-Premuzic, T 2014, Sharing the (self) love: the rise of the selfie and digital narcissism, The Guardian, 14 March, viewed 03 January 2016, <http://www.theguardian.com/media-network/media-network-blog/2014/mar/13/selfie-social-media-love-digital-narcassism>

  Swinburne Online, 2015, Week : Visual communities and social imaging, MDA20009, Digital Communities, learning material on Blackboard Swinburne Online, January, viewed 03 January 2016

  Images:

I agree that the advent of the selfie has indeed engendered a new level of selfishness into those who spend their time taking them and posting them simply to gain attention.

Included in the long list of things i would rather do than look at someones selfies is being shot in the neck with an arrow, and being eaten by Fire ants.

The rapid evolution and development of technology in the past decade cannot be disputed. This growth has made it possible for platforms other than traditional media and emergency services to deliver information to people, in times of crisis and disaster (Swinburne Online 2015).

This week’s first reading explores the mechanisms and effectiveness of social media mapping platform Ushahidi. Essentially, through this mapping platform, residents in Kenya are able to start their own mapping website (Ford 2012, p. 33), allowing the public to send text messages reporting instances of human rights abuses in their country (Ford 2012, p. 36).

Here, the concept of ‘crowdsourcing’ comes into play. Crowdsourcing relies on obtaining information, content and ideas from a large number of people; particularly the online community rather than ‘traditional’ and professional employees and suppliers (Swinburne Online 2015).

As I mentioned earlier, we traditionally received updates in times of crisis from traditional media and emergency services; people paid and employed to deliver timely and useful information to residents. It is interesting that we are moving into an era in which the ‘amateur’ has a role to play alongside news networks and emergency websites.

Residents in the centre of the action of crisis situations now have ample opportunity to have their voices heard. While social media mapping platforms like Ushahidi have come into existence, their presence in Australia is relatively non-existent (Swinburne Online 2015).

Platforms such as Twitter have played a significant role in providing the tools for its users to communicate information, as this week’s second reading discusses. Bruns et al. analyse the role that the Queensland Police Service Media Unit Twitter account (@QPSMedia) played during the 2011 South East Queensland Floods (Bruns et al. 2012), as well as the way that 'regular’ Twitter users made use of the hashtag #qldfloods.

It is important to note that in the second reading, which was a report, a common theme emerged. @QPSMedia’s account largely disseminated situational information and advice for Queensland residents (Bruns et al. 2012, p. 8), while users posting with the #qldfloods hashtag largely focused on personal reactions and anecdotes, with a great deal of photos in the centre of the action posted (Bruns et al. 2012, p. 7).

It is also important to note that many tweets featuring the #qldfloods hashtag were in fact retweets from the Twitter accounts of emergency services and the @QPSMedia account. So while crowdsourcing served to enable digital citizens to further disperse timely, likely accurate information from emergency services, the information didn’t come straight from these 'amateurs.’

Their role in the crisis seemed to be to A. Provide a 'human’ voice to the crisis, with the sharing of their images and personal reactions, and B. To ensure that information delivered from professional organisations was seen by as many people as possible. Thus, the role of 'regular citizens’ seemed to be less direct than that of organisations such as Queensland Police.

This is not necessarily a bad thing or a good thing. Professional organisations are reputable and have people working for them who are employed for the sole purpose of keeping residents safe and supplying them with the information to do so. Digital citizens are spreading information of their own accord, and are not paid to do so. This may mean that their information will be false, whether intentional or not. They’re perhaps not as reputable as emergency services, and so the 'human role’ that they play in times of crisis, as well as their role of retweeters, may be more appropriate than directly providing information to other citizens.

Social media mapping platforms could be useful in Australia, but again, it is vital that information delivered to the websites are screened, checked, and verified to ensure that it is accurate information. The large presence of a platform like Ushahidi in Australia would mean that the role of the 'amateur’ in times of crisis would become even more important and reputable.

REFERENCES

Bruns, A et al. 2012, ’#qldfloods and @QPSMedia: Crisis Communication on Twitter in the 2011 South East Queensland Floods’, Media Ecologies Project, ARC Centre of Excellence for Creative Industries and Innovation, Brisbane.

Ford, H 2012, Crowd Wisdom, Sage Journals.

I like you separation of amateur and professional contributors and the need for more stringent verification in the case of the former.

A more recent application of crowdsourcing can be seen in the 2015 Adelaide bushfire mapping. Not only has the incoming data from individuals been screened for integrity but the contributors are from all over the world.

The incoming data permitted rescue and not for profit organisation to map the destruction without actually stepping foot in the still dangerous fire zone.

Cheers,

In combing through the lecture notes and the readings for this week one thing immediately came to mind: the Facebook response to the Paris terrorist attacks.

Almost a year to the date that I had visited Paris I lay in my bed having just woken up and with smartphone in hand hit the ubiquitous F symbol to quell my FOMO of what had taken place overnight. The first post to grab my attention was from my friend Monika stating that she and her partner were fine. Fine? Fine about what? I didn’t have to wonder too long as I scrolled down and saw a news outlet reporting on a terrorist attack in Paris - Holy Cow! I thought.

I instantly ‘liked’ Monika’s post - got out of bed and turned on the TV to see the reports from the national broadcaster - because I like decreasing amount of Australians still need verification from traditional media outlets (Deloitte, 2014). As the morning progressed I got ready for my day. I received a notification from Facebook advising me that my friend Monika was safe and well - it seemed that Facebook had set up an option for residents in Paris (based on those who had their location preferences on) to simply ‘check in’ if they were safe in Paris. WOW! I thought - what an amazing feature: Safety Check.

The Safety Check function is not to dissimilar to the social mapping capability of Ushahidi (Ford 2012), and was introduced in 2014 to be used in the wake of natural disasters ( Zuckerberg, 2014)  and just like Ushahidi it too poses some very interesting yet different challenges for both Facebook and its users.

While the Safety check function was heralded as an awesome addition to the social network, Facebook faced significant criticism of its choice to provide the option only to those in Paris when there had also been a significant although less publicised terrorist attack in Beirut (Alter, 2015). In many ways this echoed the criticism that the mainstream media also faced over its coverage choices at the time.

In a statement Facebook said:

“We chose to activate Safety Check in Paris because we observed a lot of activity on Facebook as the events were unfolding. In the middle of a complex, uncertain situation affecting many people, Facebook became a place where people were sharing information and looking to understand the condition of their loved ones. We talked with our employees on the ground, who felt that there was still a need that we could fill. So we made the decision to try something we’ve never done before: activating Safety Check for something other than a natural disaster. There has to be a first time for trying something new, even in complex and sensitive times, and for us that was Paris.

This activation will change our policy around Safety Check and when we activate it for other serious and tragic incidents in the future. We want this tool to be available whenever and wherever it can help. We will learn a lot from feedback on this launch, and we’ll also continue to explore how we can help people show support for the things they care about through their Facebook profiles, which we did in the case for Paris, too.”

So there in lies the challenge

With so much unrest around the world when should Facebook activate this function? If the incident is not covered by the mainstream media how will Facebook know when to activate the function? Will other social platforms like Twitter, which has a far more rapid response to crisis implement a similar function? If so how?

Perhaps the answer to at least the last two questions lies in the ability of Ushahidi as it is open to everyone.

What’s more crowdsourcing has recently received some negative attention as the primary function in which terrorist groups like ISIS are recruiting and radicalising members from around the world in organised attacks. It is said that the most recent mass shooting in San Bernardino was orchestrated through the use of crowdsourcing Jakes and De Luce, 2015.

References

Alter, C 2015, ‘Facebook Explains Why it Activated Safety Check for Paris Attack’, time.com, 14 November 2015, viewed 9 January 2015,<http://time.com/4113410/paris-attacks-facebook-safety-check-beirut/>.

Deloitte Australia 2014, Media Consumer Survey 2014, <http://magazines.org.au/wp-content/uploads/Deloitte_Media_Consumer_Survey_2014.pdf>

Ford, H 2012, 'Crowd Wisdom’, Index on Censorship, vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 33-39.

Jakes, L & De Luce, D 2015, ‘Is the San Bernardino Attack the Latest in ‘Crowdsourcing’ Terrorism?’, foreignpolicy.com, 3 December 2015, viewed 9 January 2015,<http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/12/03/is-the-san-bernardino-attack-the-latest-in-crowdsourcing-terrorism/>.

Schultz, A 2015, Facebook Safety, 15 November 2015, viewed 9 January 2015,<https://www.facebook.com/fbsafety/posts/930229667014872>.

Great blog on this weeks topic.

I also still go turn the TV on when a feed through Twitter or FB alerts me to something important going on, generally to the ABC News which dedicates both visual and audio to the matter at hand, presumably addressing multiple sensors increases my perception of being informed.

I think Facebook will continue to make the Safety function more relevant and available quickly as they become aware of a situation, they are a commercial interest and they will quickly become superfluous if they do not meet the changing environment.

Cheers

The digital age has given everyone a voice and visibility thought the use of social media platforms, providing easy access to public communication and ability to participate. Thought that is creates new norms and accountabilities, possible misuses, new practices of engagement and potential damages.

Web trolling is an unmanageable conflict. It is unlikely we can change someone’s ability to express themselves on the internet and also in real life. Although, internet trolling, to a certain level, is protected by distance and anonymity. Trolls are an online subculture who seek to deliberately incite emotional distress by intentionally violating social norms and provoking outrage, touting and harassing individuals through their behaviour and commentary (Doyle et al. 2014).

The fact you can build a profile on different social media platforms without been detected, allows people to frame profiles to be what they want to be or pretend to be someone else. This misuse of social platforms is a form of deception and manipulation, often in prank and for the implicit fun of community members (Donath 1999).

The rise of social media tools and accessories has allowed us to be “always on” and “always connected” it has also helped to feed the public’s obsession with obtaining information about celebrities. With that in mind, there are growing concerns about cyberbullying and trolling.

A well-known case of cyberbullying in Australia, is the heart breaking death of Charlotte Dawson in early 2014. Charlotte was a very public celebrity who publicly was fighting with trolling and cyberbullying for quite a while. At the end she ended her own life giving up her battle against bullies and trolls. She hasn’t been the first tragedy and certainly not the last. There are many people out there right now going through a personal battle against cyber abusers.

Cyberbullying is more common than we think. Posting an embarrassing photo of a friend, or making a mean comment about someone you don’t like very much or a celebrity. If you stop and think about it, we have all done it right? Does that makes us cyberbullies as well? Maybe we should all reconsider before posting anything online that could embarrass a good friend and family member.

It has been stressed by Boyd (2014, p.305) that bullies are not horrible people who simply choose to pick on others for fun; those are sociopaths. Generally bullies respond in hostile way because they are having issues themselves, at times struggling with significant issues of their own. Boyd points it out that several online bullies are distressed teenagers who have lots of free time on their hands, however every so often they are adults, who seem to take their frustration at others without valid reasons.

In an ideal online world, there would be regulations in place to stop this kind of attacks happening.  While this is only an ‘ideal’ online world, I guess we could all do our part and think twice before posting anything that could hurt someone feeling or damage their reputation.

  References:

Boyd, D 2014, ‘Bullying: Is the Media Amplifying Meanness and Cruelty?’, in It’s Complicated: The Social Lives of Networked Teens, Yale University Press, New Haven, USA, pp 128-52.

Donath, S 1999, ‘Identity and deception in the virtual community’, in MA, Smith & P, Kollock (eds), Communities in Cyberspace, Routledge, London,  pp. 27-58.

Doyle, L, O’Gorman, M & Flanagan, P 2014, Role of the author/audience within digital “new media”, authorandaudience, viewed 22 December 2015, <http://authorandaudience.com/>

Images:

 Conflict resolution skills for Social Media, [twitter conflict], erelations.info, viewed 22 December 2015, <http://erelations.info/conflict-resolution-skills-for-social-media/>

I agree that in an ideal world, it would not be possible to cause undue distress to other internet citizens and, as you have noted, that is not possible and we should all do our part by simply not contributing to the vitriol posted about anyone. I think this is actually the key to online social interaction, if morals are developed, entrenched, and then taught to children like any other subject matter, trolling and flaming for reaction would get far less a rise from victims than it does at present.

As always, your blog set out is coloufull and engaging, cheers,

Blog post 5

What is bullying?  The collapsing of contexts.

“There’s no bullying at my school, everyone’s much too chill.” – Luke, age 16, Sydney.

With a third of all teenagers having experienced annoying or menacing behaviour online, communities are rightly concerned about the issue of bullying and the safety of children (Lenhart 2007).  However, the term has become a one size fits all description of harassing behaviour in online spaces that has confused the issue (boyd 2014, p. 131).  Olweus (cited in boyd 2014, p. 131) says bullying is defined by power distance, repetition and aggression, very different from the forwarding of an unflattering pic on Instagram for a laugh, or malicious gossip that often goes by the same name.  This blurring from a generational misunderstanding between those experiencing the behaviour and those in a position to report them, is damaging because the behaviours and the technologies that conduct them are all different, and so require different interventions to address them (Fuller 2014).

How does cyberbullying affect you? (MySecureCyberspace 2010).

Why do kids do all this stuff?

“Adults just don’t get social media.  Like if I put a status up and it doesn’t get 50 likes I delete it, you guys don’t know what that’s about.” – Owen, age 16, Sydney.

More often, aggressive online behaviours between teens fit Boyd’s (2014, p. 138) definition of drama: performative, interpersonal conflict in front of an engaged audience.  While teens have more autonomy than children, they still lack agency in much of their lives, and they know it.  Identity creation and evaluation of others falls within their zone of influence and social media gives them the opportunity to exercise it (Boyd 2014, p. 142).  Screens put distance between actions and consequences in ways that developing minds don’t always appreciate, resulting in issues that get out of hand before the participants realise (Kids Health 2015).

Cyberbullying: what it is (O’Brien 2014).

Do kids need protecting?

“It happens all the time, a girl will dis someone on their social media and like 15 girls get involved and the person comes back and says why didn’t you tag my so I could hear your lies straight away, and it’s on.” – Terry, age 16, Sydney.

In his discussion of agonism, McCosker (2014, p. 215) suggests the value of adversarial interaction online for productive impact.  In other words, that aggressive exchanges online can be a good thing.  For me though, the safety of teens in online spaces it too big a price to pay for the tempering of adolescent character.  Bullying may be more common offline than on, but we do not ignore it in the real world and have a moral duty to apply the same standards to our online spaces (Queensland Government 2015).  They may have different norms but at their heart remain just places for the interaction of people.  Lacking the structural defences and resources of adults, our adolescents need our protection (Boyd 2014, p. 150).  The efforts to combat bullying and other harassing behaviour that teens can be subject to are worthwhile.

To This Day (To This Day 2013).

References.

Boyd, D 2014, ‘Bullying: Is the Media Amplifying Meanness and Cruelty?’, in It’s Complicated: The Social Lives of Networked Teens, Yale University Press, New Haven, USA, pp 128-52.

Fuller, G 2014, 'Cyber-safety’: What are we actually talking about?, The Conversation, 27 February, viewed 22 September 2015, <http://theconversation.com/cyber-safety-what-are-we-actually-talking-about-23505>.

Kids Health 2015, Cyberbullying – bullying from a distance, Kids Health, viewed 19 December 2015, < http://www.cyh.com/HealthTopics/HealthTopicDetailsKids.aspx?p=335&np=288&id=2704>.

Lenhart, A 2007, Cyberbullying, Pew Research Centre, viewed 19 December 2015, < http://www.pewinternet.org/2007/06/27/cyberbullying/>.

McCosker, A 2014, YouTrolling as provocation: Tube’s agonistic publics, Convergence, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 201-217.

MySecureCyberspace 2010, Think Time: How Does Cyberbullying Affect You?, 30 November, viewed 20 December 2015, <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0oGFh0mwrjM>.

O’Brien, J 2014, ‘Cyberbullying: what it is’ [image], Jean O’Brien, viewed 20 December 2015, < http://www.jeanobrien.com/2014/01/29/cyberbullying-advice-infographic-for-barnardos/>.

Queensland Government 2015, Bullying and Cyberbullying facts, QLD Gov, viewed 1 January 2016, <https://www.qld.gov.au/disability/children-young-people/bullying/facts.html>.

It seems that the term bullying has about as much meaning left as does terrorism, which is not much. The concept of online bullying, even less so. To me individual empowerment and education will determine if trolls win or become irrelevant. I note one of the comments you cite;

“Adults just don’t get social media.  Like if I put a status up and it doesn’t get 50 likes I delete it, you guys don’t know what that’s about.” – Owen, age 16, Sydney.

To me this demonstrates a societal issue where popularity is transferred from physical domain to the online arena, and it matters about the same. The perceived importance by the child engenders the power of the words and comments to hurt.

Cheers