The Suicide of Megan Meier Is an Illustration of the Unlegislated Diminuendos of the Internet - Research Paper Example

“Friend Game” by Lauren Collins Introduction The social order has transformed dramatically due to the innovative technological revolutions with regards to writing. Certain persons perceive the transformations in writing to be unconstructive since it influences individual privacy and connections. Others perceive the transformations to be an advantageous development within the social order through connecting individuals on an innovative level. The transformations in individual connections by writing due to technology have brought individuals within the social order closer together alongside resulting in lack of privacy. The automated collection of literature characterizes a sphere, which comprises various forms of digital formats of writing. There are certain authors who come up together owing to sharing a common interest. Nevertheless, whatever is obtainable to everybody else on the internet, as well as the interned, no longer confided their interests to bedroom in the disguise of reading. Friend Game by Lauren Collins remains an appalling article, which explained the sudden suicide of an adolescent girl owing to online bullying. Megan Meier undertook suicide owing to numerous messages sent by Josh Evans, her MySpace friend. He was a fictional character invented by the Meier’s neighbors. Sites of social networking allow persons to write their interests and opinions for the viewership of other persons.Collins states that an individual can project a broader, further confident self, a daring collection of preferred quotations, complaints, music, pleasures, and books. The statement appears to improve the impression that technology has transformed associations through writing by permitting them to becoming more open. Further, Collins states that different from Facebook, MySpace does not need the users to classify themselves with the last and first name, thus there is less illusion that a profile has any direct communication to other individuals. As such, MySpace alongside other sites of social networking still permit privacy to their operators, even though the idea of personal connections being dead owing to online social writing could be a means to hiding the exact individuality of a person (Palfrey and Urs 109). The modifications in individual connections through writing resulting from technology have led to persons coming together, despite the absence of privacy. It is essential for persons to gain from technologies in order to improve their ties and communication with other persons. Nevertheless, there remains a great necessity for personalization and privacy. A great hope of people continuing to personalize their exceptionality minus causing drifts in the social order persists. In a progressively digital world, as the reputation and privacy of an individual becomes further vulnerable to anonymity and corruption through the internet becomes further feasible, cyber harassment probably will intensify and federal regulations to punish or curb it will be essential. The First Amendment right to free speech alongside the relative nonexistence of government guidelines on internet activities stands as considerable obstacles to overcoming the threat to reputation and privacy of individuals online. This observation deliberates how cyber harassment, demonstrated through Megan Meier’s suicide remains a serious danger to the safety of the public. In order to mitigate the danger, this observation suggests legislation outlawing cyber harassment (Kowalski et al 112). One characteristic of the internet is permitting a free flow of information along with being a marketplace of expanding ideas. Contributing to the unrestricted flow is the ability of a person to being and remaining virtually anonymous. Operators can experiment with various personas, post observations on bulleting boards and writing a blog under a false name devoid of ever revealing their identities. Consequently, the anonymity in the internet heightens conventional free speech that in turn encourages the concept of the open market of ideas. It consents to persons practicing eccentricity devoid of risking impairment to their reputation. In addition, anonymity on the internet permits individuals to speak freely and express their ideas whenever they would otherwise be fearful to do so. Through increasing the opportunities for numerous ideas to exist concurrently, the open market of ideas widens. In principle, a significant number of ideas results to further rapid societal truths. According to Daniel Solove, a scholar, the anonymity of the internet consents to information flowing more spontaneously than ever in the past. Individuals can share and communicate ideas in unparalleled manners (Palfrey and Urs 167). These advancements are revolutionizing people’s self-expression and improving their freedom. The revolutionizing of people’s self-expression could result in undesirable and extreme manners of expression. The internet guarantees the privacy of one individual to speaking freely, whilst further allowing the individual to invading the privacy of another person. Fundamentally, the unrecognizability fostered by the internet all together undermines and preserves individual privacy. Unrecognizability on the internet consents to individuals providing information and opinions, which they could never otherwise disclose, including information, which is harmful and false to third parties. Both feasibility and unrecognizability enabled through the internet mounts a challenge to the conventional understanding of the privacy law. Conventionally, the concept of privacy remains twofold, as individuals cannot anticipate privacy supposing they are in public locations, even when these individuals believe their actions are private. Courts establish whether an occurrence is private through applying the law of tort on public disclosure (Kowalski et al 112). Liability is not present when a defendant simply presents more publicity to information regarding the plaintiff, which is already public. As such, liability is nonexistent on the presentation of publicity to facts regarding the life of the plaintiff, which are subjects of public records. Presently, information never purposed to the public experiences exposure through the internet. The temperament of the exposure invades the expectations of an individual’s privacy and calls into doubt the conventional description of privacy. Whatever would instead be a transitory memory in the observances of less bystanders can be on the internet posting and extensive and continuous scrutiny by the public. Consequently, the scrutiny can mount to the heights of cyber harassment. The right to free speech is essential to the intellectual and moral development of a person, even though with it is the obligation to ensuring that contemporary rights such as the right to privacy remain not invaded. Individuals’ right to expression without a doubt is essential. However, increasing evidence proposes that assurances of the right on freedom of expression via the internet are frequently at the cost of personal privacy (Halder andJaishankar 110). Owing to the nonexistence of government regulations on internet activities along with the historical advancement of the internet along laissez-faire principles, a precise reading of free speech had occasioned. In turn, the lenient understanding of freedom of expression has instigated a danger to public safety, as demonstrated by cyber harassment. In addition, issues come up with legislation owing to freedom of speech alongside the annexation of privacy challenges. As the internet carries on asserting its manifestation in American people lives, the revelation of individual information on the internet upsurges, whilst online safe ports decrease. The revelation can be either unintentional or intentional. In either instance, engagements that victimize an individual or reveal their individual information can merit as cyber harassment. Conventional, federal statutes center on physical interaction between the victim and harassment and thus unsuitably address the virtual temperament of cyber harassment. Even though, Congress has passed legislations on the protection of kids on the internet, majorly from damaging content, passing legislations to protecting targets from the harassers on the internet has, nonetheless not been a congressional precedence (Kowalski et al 173). The targets of cyber harassment have their limitations to civil litigation as remedy. The victims have the capacity to suing for invasion of privacy, defamation, or premeditated infliction of emotional suffering. Victims could further find recourse through reporting cyber harassment instances to an ISP and subsequently endeavoring to sue the ISP itself. However, suing the ISP under segment 509 of the CDA.133 for unlawful conducts over the internet, leave cyber harassment victims ineffectively safeguarded because the options have increasing restriction. Opportunely, Congress has begun recognizing the mounting predicaments resulting from cyber harassment. Persons opposed to internet regulations argue that fashioning immunity for the service providers is essential since it thwarts the chilling of speech, which could result otherwise.The antagonists argue that anticipating service providers to filter and monitor out every defamatory complaint or comment is not realistic. The solution to fighting cyber harassment is in designing a narrow federal law, which forbids cyber harassment. Any such regulation should purpose to meet the following criteria: there should be recognition of the cyber harassment as an aggravation towards an individual that encourages emotional fear or distress of bodily grievance over an automated medium. Secondly, there should be maintenance of privacy safeguards, implying that the information regarded private by sensible persons should remain sequestered. The right to free speech, the right of an individual to expressing his/her thoughts, so long as the persons do not purpose to mete out fear, requires upholding (Halder andJaishankar 188). Conclusion As the internet carries on advancing, both concerns of public safety and necessity for regulations, which dampen cyber harassment will emerge further noticeable. The internet remains dynamic. The evolution and progressing of the internet implies that the failure to adopting legislation on cybercrime now will result to future constitutional rights violations. What will follow will be an unstable open market, where communication and internet companies will constantly be hastening to meet the demands of their customers through fashioning innovative and new technologies. Nevertheless, the effect of endeavoring to meet the demands minus legislations in place, will further contribute to the risk of public wellbeing and vulnerability of customers to concerns like cyber harassment. The suicide of Megan Meier is an illustration of the heartbreaking consequence, which can happen owing to the unlegislated diminuendos of the internet. This observation, nonetheless, does not propose the regulation of the internet. Rather, it appeals to the acknowledgment by Federal Government that cyber harassment postures a danger to the safety of the public and the regulations forbidding it are essential to protecting internet consumers. The courts will eventually determine whether and whatever balance struck between the right to privacy and freedom of speech. Nevertheless, the Federal Government will best serve the interests of the public through providing a legislation, which tackles both values correspondingly. The time is right to enact a federal legislation, which fights cyber harassment in order to encourage a safe interactive atmosphere for users. Works Cited Halder, Debarati, and K Jaishankar.Cyber Crime and the Victimization of Women: Laws, Rights and Regulations. Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference, 2012. Print. Kowalski, Robin M, Sue Limber, and Patricia W. Agatston.Cyberbullying: Bullying in the Digital Age. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2012. Print. Palfrey, John, and Urs Gasser.Born Digital: Understanding the First Generation of Digital Natives. Sydney: Read How You Want, 2011. Print. Read More