Social Media
Cyber Violence: ‘Old Wine in New Bottles’?
Nothing really new - virtual criminality is a "technological variation of ordinary
crime” (McQuade, 2006:6)
Do current theories of in-person violence apply to the rapidly changing terrain of
cyber-aggression/cyber violence – can the phenomena be explained by existing
social science theory?
- Has the internet created completely new opportunities and environments for
traditional crimes to take new forms?
Questions + Emerging Challenges
What are the ways in which social media and the internet facilitate acts of violence
against adolescents/young people?
How is social media use linked to violence?
Also: whether youth’s problematic SMU:
1) Grows the overall number of perpetrators?
2) Increases the number of incidents?
3) Introduces new offending topics and techniques not possible or feasible outside
of a cyber environment?
Problem Space
Still much we do not know about social media's role in youth violence and other
types of offending.
The emerging evidence base is skewed to London based samples, and may over-
represent 'gang involved' cohorts.
As culture is probably the most important factor regulating people’s aggressive
impulses (theoretically) important to investigate role of SMU and particulars of how
it operates in these types of youth violence cases on regional basis
Technological Developments (Catch 22)
Free for all’ online space
- Activity hidden from adults/caregivers (+ anonymity and disinhibition)
unmonitored and uncensored.
- Small minority YPs share various forms of material display and incite serious
incidents of violence in real life
- Idealised identities (not representative portrait lived life)
Impact of the smart phone
- Instagram, Snapchat, Twitter, Periscope (live video app)
- 1525% (increase last 5 years)
Growing audience (external validation)
- Audience reach; importance of audience approval (celebrity culture)
- Future orientated focus
HMI: Key Findings
, HM Inspectorate found that 1 in 4 cases which they examined, the young person's
use of social media was directly related to the offence they committed.
Indeed, it was found to be the catalyst for some of the most serious and violent
offences - offence scenarios that would have been 'unthinkable' only 10 years ago
“Our young people used to hang around on street corners and parks before
committing offences. Now they sit alone in their bedrooms and get into arguments
or plan offences on their phones, tablets or computers.” (YOT worker)
SM component varied widely:
- Arguments and personal abuse that start on SM led physical assaults when
protagonists met in street or public transport
- Use of SM to intimidate others (multiple ways)
- Other offences:
+ Blackmail
+ Exposure to Internet pornography
Social Media + Gang Involvement
Socialising Processes + Gangs: Theories of Micro-Level Processes
Definitions and values
- Transmission of deviant norms and values
- Group pressure
Behavioural models for imitation
- Spreading/diffusion of gang culture
Moral justifications
- Moral disengagement; anti-authority attitudes
Facilitation of criminal behaviour
Cyber Violence: ‘Old Wine in New Bottles’?
Nothing really new - virtual criminality is a "technological variation of ordinary
crime” (McQuade, 2006:6)
Do current theories of in-person violence apply to the rapidly changing terrain of
cyber-aggression/cyber violence – can the phenomena be explained by existing
social science theory?
- Has the internet created completely new opportunities and environments for
traditional crimes to take new forms?
Questions + Emerging Challenges
What are the ways in which social media and the internet facilitate acts of violence
against adolescents/young people?
How is social media use linked to violence?
Also: whether youth’s problematic SMU:
1) Grows the overall number of perpetrators?
2) Increases the number of incidents?
3) Introduces new offending topics and techniques not possible or feasible outside
of a cyber environment?
Problem Space
Still much we do not know about social media's role in youth violence and other
types of offending.
The emerging evidence base is skewed to London based samples, and may over-
represent 'gang involved' cohorts.
As culture is probably the most important factor regulating people’s aggressive
impulses (theoretically) important to investigate role of SMU and particulars of how
it operates in these types of youth violence cases on regional basis
Technological Developments (Catch 22)
Free for all’ online space
- Activity hidden from adults/caregivers (+ anonymity and disinhibition)
unmonitored and uncensored.
- Small minority YPs share various forms of material display and incite serious
incidents of violence in real life
- Idealised identities (not representative portrait lived life)
Impact of the smart phone
- Instagram, Snapchat, Twitter, Periscope (live video app)
- 1525% (increase last 5 years)
Growing audience (external validation)
- Audience reach; importance of audience approval (celebrity culture)
- Future orientated focus
HMI: Key Findings
, HM Inspectorate found that 1 in 4 cases which they examined, the young person's
use of social media was directly related to the offence they committed.
Indeed, it was found to be the catalyst for some of the most serious and violent
offences - offence scenarios that would have been 'unthinkable' only 10 years ago
“Our young people used to hang around on street corners and parks before
committing offences. Now they sit alone in their bedrooms and get into arguments
or plan offences on their phones, tablets or computers.” (YOT worker)
SM component varied widely:
- Arguments and personal abuse that start on SM led physical assaults when
protagonists met in street or public transport
- Use of SM to intimidate others (multiple ways)
- Other offences:
+ Blackmail
+ Exposure to Internet pornography
Social Media + Gang Involvement
Socialising Processes + Gangs: Theories of Micro-Level Processes
Definitions and values
- Transmission of deviant norms and values
- Group pressure
Behavioural models for imitation
- Spreading/diffusion of gang culture
Moral justifications
- Moral disengagement; anti-authority attitudes
Facilitation of criminal behaviour
