CHAPTER 11

Have Kids Gotten Meaner? An Up-Close Look at Cyberbullying and Suicide

“I saw him making out with a dude,” Dharun Ravi tweeted the evening of September 19, 2010. A first-year student at Rutgers University, Dharun had set up a webcam in his dorm roomearlier that day. It was a prank so that he and his friends could spy on his gay roommate, Tyler Clementi. From down the hall, they watched Tyler intimately embracing a man he’d recently met. They peered in a second time the following day.Little could Dharun and his friends have imagined what would take place two days later: Tyler jumped off the George Washington Bridge, plunging to his death. After combing through Dharun’s social media records, prosecutorsclaimedthe spying was an egregious form of bullying that outed Tyler as gay. Watching Tyler through the webcam, they concluded, was a way of bashing him forhis sexual orientation.[1]

Almost exactly three years later in Florida, 12-year old Rebecca Sedwickexperienced the same fateafter having been bullied online. Upon hearing about Rebecca’s new boyfriend, two girls sent her Facebook messages calling her ugly and telling her to drink bleach and die. The morning of September 9, 2013 Rebecca changed her name on Kik Messenger to “That Dead Girl,” and then leapt off a platform at an abandoned cement plant in Lakeland, her hometown. Afterwards, one of the girls wrote on Facebook, “Yes, I bullied REBECCA and she killed herself but I don't give a f***."[2]

Cyberbullying among teens increased 40 percent during the period from 2006-12 when many became frequent social media users for the first time. Suicide is the second leading cause of death among people ages 10-24. Considering the tragic stories of Tyler and Rebecca in light of these statistics underscores that cyberbullying and teen suicide are serious social problems deserving attention. [3]

Figure 1 – The deaths of Tyler Clementi and Rebecca Sedwick are two of the publicized suicides that have followed cyberbullying.

It’s reasonable to believe cyberbullying causes teen suicide because both problems receive little publicity unless they occur in tandem. Tyler’s and Rebecca’s stories would be unfamiliar to us if they hadn’t taken their own lives or if their suicides didn’t occur in the wake of cyberbullying.Moreover, adults are often concerned aboutthe spread of bullying from physical places like school hallways and playground to the limitless terrain of cyberspace. Teens nowadays may exhibit cruelty anywhere at any time. Their potential to act meanly in ways they never would in person can make it seem that cyberbullying causes suicide. We can see this presumed causality in media reports following Tyler’s death. They characterized Dharun Ravi – his roommate and the ringleader of the webcam spying – as exploiting Tyler’s vulnerabilities as a closeted gay male.[4]

Figure 2: Initial news reports portrayed Dharun as a privileged, self-absorbed homophobe whose maliciousness led Tyler to jump to his death.

The truth is that most bullying victims do not experience suicidal thoughts, let alone act on them, and most teens who commit suicide had not been bullied. This chapter exposes how our tendency to pair cyberbullying and teen suicide distorts – more than illuminates – ourunderstanding of both. We can deepen what we know about these social problems by looking at each separately.[5]

EXPLORING TEEN CULTURE

Using the sociological perspective to understand the events preceding Tyler Clementi’s suicide offers a richer picture of cyberbullying than did the media reports that circulated after he took his own life. This perspective uncovers the hidden story behind the prevalent image that his roommate, Dharun Ravi, exploited Tyler’s vulnerabilities as a closeted gay male. There’s ample evidence for us to consider, since prosecutors built theircase against Dharun by combing through the massive digital trail thetwo roommates and their friends left behind. This trail reveals that characterizing his response to Tyler’s sexual orientation as homophobia masks the context in which his mean behavior took place.

When I teach about this case, I ask students to rate Dharun’s behavior in relation to what they’ve seen on online. At one extreme, they might regard his behavior as more malicious than any they’ve ever noticed; at the other extreme,it wastypical of how teens use social media. Students consistently rate Dharun as somewhere in the middle, tilting slightly toward the malicious end of the spectrum.What they’re indicating is that although the webcam prank was stupidand immature, Dharun didn’tactout of the ordinary. Seeing his behavior in this way certainly doesn’t excuse what he did. But, it does give us reason to challenge the belief among many adults that with digital weapons at their disposal, kids have gotten meaner.

Seeing Dharun’s actions asdiffering merely by degree from what often takes place among teenson social media builds upon the individualperspective toward cyberbullying. The fact that any teen may at times behave in similar ways reveals how online meanness reflects adolescent culture. Highlight the social forces underlying cyberbullying gives you a more thorough understanding of a social problem that you surely heard a lot about during middle and high school, and which you may have experienced directly.

Figure 3 –Embracing the sociological perspective enables you to discover that cyberbullying doesn’t simply involve villains and victims. This problem is rooted inteen culture

Seeking Social Status

When he found out Tyler was his roommate, writes journalist Ian Parker, Dharun came to see him as “material for a ‘gay roommate’ news scoop.”Sixteen months after the suicide, Parkerdid a detailed investigation of the events preceding it. His report highlights an underlying reason for Dharun’s malicious behavior. As a teenage guy who cared a lot about the image he projected, he wanted to do anything he could to show his bros that he belonged among them.Ridiculing Tyler didn’t stem from homophobia but a desire to fit in among his friends. Consider a text Dharun sent just hours before Tyler made his way to the George Washington Bridge:

I’ve known you were gay and I have no problem with it. In fact one of my closest friends is gay and he and I have a very open relationship. I just suspected you were shy about it which is why I never broached the topic. I don’t want your freshman year to be ruined because of a petty misunderstanding, it’s adding to my guilt.[6]

This case reveals that instances where boys bully other boysreflectthe pressures on heterosexual young males to show their friends that they belong.This sociological perspective is eye-opening because it exposes that boys’ malicious online behavior characterizes what’s typical within male teen culture rather than what’s deviant. For a guy to present himself in opposition to his gay peers is common among heterosexual adolescentboys. We can see this in utterances such as “no homo” that are common for boys to say to one another.Such language is often not an indicator of homophobia, but a way tofit in. C.J. Pascoe, a sociologist who has extensively studied high school students has shown that someteenage boys who sound homophobic support civil rights for gays and lesbians.[7]

In the same way that masculinity norms can lead to meanness of the sort Dharun Ravi inflicted, the cyberbullying of Rebecca Sedwick was also rooted in teen culture. Recall that two girls sent herbitingFacebook messages after learning about her new boyfriend. While they were clearly jealous of Rebecca, their meannessalso reflected the wider pressureheterosexual adolescent girls feel to gain status among their peers. Often, theirmost valuableasset for popularity is their attractiveness to boys.Thegirls who cyberbullied Rebecca did soto defend their turf, given the threat her boyfriend posed to their status. Their nasty Facebook postsreflected the precarious position they occupied within the hierarchy of middle school. Bullying Rebecca, therefore, reflected the notion within teen culture that if status-conscious girls do not continually engage in efforts to maintain their popularity, they risk losing it. For such girls, unpopularity is something to be avoided at all costs. [8]

Figure 4– Bullying other boys or other girls is a way for a teen to try to fit in aseither “masculine” or “feminine.”

Looking at cyberbullying sociologicallycasts this social problem in an entirely different light than how we typically see it. The conventional wisdom is that cyberbullying is deviant behavior that stems from popularity-obsessed teens using social media to preyon innocent victims. We’re discovering that teens who at first glance seem like outliers for acting meanly toward their peers are actually exhibiting behavior that reflects prevalent norms within their culture.

To understand how this can be, we need to highlighta key way teens differ from both children and adults. Compared to children, theyspendmore time with friends and often try to differentiate themselves from their parents – by adopting new tastes in music or clothing styles. Yet, relative to adults, teens’ autonomy remains limited. They still experience legal restrictions, such as not being permitted to vote or drink. Moreover, adults often prohibit where they can go because of fears for their safety. There is, however,one dimension of their lives over which teens have nearly total control – how they evaluate one another. They have the power to define their own markers of social status at school, the mall, and online. This is why gossiping, spreading rumors, teasing, and pranking are tactics teens use to size up where people fit within the pecking order.[9]

These mean ways of interacting with one’s peers reveal how teen behavior reflects broader forces in American culture. Consider the following:

  • Advertising gives teens the message that however one goes about capturing others’ attention, the key is being able to stand out and get noticed.
  • Success in the business world often hinges on bullying other people to close the deal.
  • Bullying had come to dominate Americanpolitics long before Donald Trump brought this behavior to an entirely unprecedented level.

Seeing howteens’behavior reflects our “Bully Nation” invites us to consider how the importance they place on peer validation is rooted in the broaderculture.[10]

Given the impressionability that accompanies adolescence, teens often identify with celebrities – whose fame hinges on capturing others’ approval.Social media has transformed celebrity; one no longer must win the approval of talent agents and other expert gatekeepers. The opportunity tobecome a celebrity via Instagram, Snapchat, or Twitter isavailable to any user. Even though most teens are unlikely to become mega-stars on social media, these platforms offera 24/7 arena for gaining status. Cyberbullying is, therefore, a byproduct of the significant value teens place on achieving influence within their social network. Meanness, after all, gets clicks and likes.

Figure 5 – Shawn Mendes was a talented but undiscovered musician until he posted video clips on Vine.

The Drama of Adolescence

Highlighting howteen culture contributes to cyberbullying uncovers another significant story. Whereas outsiders to this culture – including parents, teachers,journalists, and lawmakers – view most instances of online meanness as cyberbullying, teensdefine much of this behavior as mere drama. Teens do not tend to see people’s roles on social media as fixed in the ways adults often do. These roles are malleable depending on the situation. A person can be the target of meanness in one instance and the perpetrator in another. Therefore, even a teen who has been exploited may retaliate and assert power. [11]

Let’s return to the story of Tyler Clementi and Dharun Ravi to see how this can be. Right after Tyler’s death, much of the media attention focused on Dharun’s homophobic behavior.Yet, the digital trail Tyler left behind reveals that he also exhibited bias.On the very first day of college – with Dharun unpacking on the other side of their shared dorm room – Tyler messaged his high school friend: “I’m reading his twitter page and umm he’s sitting right next to me. I still don’t kno how to say his name.” The friend replied: “Fail!!!!! that’s hilarious.” Tyler then commented that Dharun’s parents appeared to be “sooo Indian first gen americanish” and “defs owna dunkin.” [12]

Whereas news about Dharun’shomophobiainfluenced how audiences understood this case, Tyler’s racial bias was not part of the official story of what transpired between the two roommates. Tyler, after all, was the one who took his own life. Including mention of his own biases would have blamed the victim and compromised the image of Dharun as a poster child for the evils of cyberbullying.

My aim here isn’t to suggest that Tyler contributed to his own fate. It’sto highlight that what may appear to adults as cyberbullying is part of a wider social drama that unfolds among adolescents. Victims also participate in this drama, using social media in similar ways as perpetrators – to assert, maintain, and defend their social status. Focusing on this drama likewise exposes that bullies are also often victims. This doesn’t condonetheiregregious behavior. But, it does highlight that their meanness is a response to the anxiety teen culture exerts on them to be self-conscious about their social status.

Exposing the sociological roots of this meanness enables us to feel a measure ofcompassion toward bullies in a similar way that we do toward the people they shame. “It’s easy to empathize with those who are on the receiving end of meanness and cruelty,” sociologist Danah Boyd writes based on her comprehensive study ofteen life online. “It’s much harder – and yet perhaps more important – to offer empathy to those who are doing the attacking.” [13]

Heeding these words reflects a deepened understanding of cyberbullying. The sociological perspective challenges us to rethink our conventional wisdom thatthis social probleminvolves mean kids preying on nice kids. Focusing on teen culture exposes the story beneath the story: bullies and victims are often not so distinct from one another both in their capacity for meanness and in the emotional pain they experience.

WHEN TEENS TAKE THEIR OWN LIVES

High-visibility newsstories like Tyler Clementi’s and Rebecca Sedwick’s foster the impression that cyberbullying is a major cause of teen suicide. You’d have reason to believe this, given how much media attention surrounds the deaths of young people who had been cyberbullied. Viewingonline meanness as the smoking gun when teens take their own lives hinges on the absence of two kinds of information from media coverage. First,there is little reporting about most teen suicides, which occur for reasons other than cyberbullying. And second, attention is seldom givento the majority of cyberbullying incidentswhere victims do not attempt to take their own lives.

What Tyler’s and Rebecca’s stories more accurately demonstrate is the correlation, or mutual relationship, between cyberbullying and suicide. Despite the impression high-profile media cases give off, illustratingcorrelation isn’t the same as proving causation.Here’s an analogy: attending class on sunny days indicates your academic behavior is related to the weather – the two are correlated; but sunshine doesn’t cause you to go to class.If it’s a warm day, sunshine may lead some people not to go to class!

Figure 6: A comprehensive review of research about the relationship between cyberbullying and suicide dispels the media image that the former causes the latter.[14]

The Emotional Pain of Suicidal Teens

In the Rutgers case, what we know for sure is that Tyler committed suicide two days after the webcam prank exposing him kissing an older male.Yet, it’s questionable whether the prank played arole in Tyler taking his own life. Whereas initial news reports indicated the webcam video exposed Tyler as gay, he’d come out to his parents three days before leaving for college. It’s notcertain the video evenhumiliated him. After all, Tyler was the one who had kicked out his roommate in order to be alone another person. According to one of Dharun’s friends,Dharun had never had a girlfriend. Perhaps Tyler knew this and interpreted the prank as a sign of his roommate’s envy. Cyberbullying may have played some role in Tyler’s death, since cyberbullying victims are 1.9 times likelier to have made an attemptthan non-victims. Still, it would be presumptuous to infer categorically that cyberbullying caused him to commit suicide. [15]

Cyberbullying is most likely to be a factor when the victim already experiences any of a number of psychological risk factors. A team of researchers examined the life circumstances of 1,046 suicide victims ages 10 –17 to identify these other risk factors (see Table 1). The majority had diagnoses of mental illness. Depression wasmost prominent(64.7 percent); ADD/ADHD and bipolar disorder were also pronounced (17.8 and 13.6 percent respectively). Other key factors included: substance-abuse problems (21.5 percent), intimate-partner problems (26.8 percent), and other relationship problems (51.1 percent). Suicide victims often experienced several of these risk factors, whichprobably compounded one another.

Table 1 – Prominent Psychological Risk Factors for Suicide among 10-17 Year Olds