- 19/01/2018
- Category: Commentaries
Indonesia has been labeled as the fastest growing nation in terms of internet usage, being almost three times the global average at a growth rate of 51% every year.[i] The country also boasts the third highest growth in social media usage where it has increased 39% since January 2016, and it is now home to over 29 million active Twitter users – the 5th highest in the world.[ii] However, a major stumbling block that has been becoming ever more apparent is that Indonesia’s drastic raise of internet users is not followed by sufficient knowledge on how to use the internet sensibly and responsibly. A large number of Indonesian netizens are still prone to accepting fake news as truth, and cyberbullying certain individuals has become somewhat of a trend for the country’s digital society – especially towards those who have shown undesirable behaviour on the internet, or those have been accused of wrongdoing in public. This rising popularity of cyberbullying is one of the most prominent disadvantages that technological development has brought along in recent years, and it has caused unprecedented implications on how individuals utilize the internet.
In general, the term bullying itself refers to any unwanted aggressive behaviour that involves an abuse of power imbalance between the perpetrator and the victim, and is repeated or highly likely to be repeated multiple times.[iii] The “power imbalance” between the two parties becomes a crucial aspect when defining or identifying acts of bullying. Olweus refers to such power imbalance by describing victims of bullying as weak and vulnerable, whether that be in physical or psychological terms, and therefore unlikely to be able to defend themselves.[iv] Thus, the term bullying does not apply to acts of aggression between two equally matched parties – it is only applicable when there is an inequality of power between the perpetrator and the victim, and when such inequality is then abused and misused.
Defining cyberbullying, however, requires a slightly different approach. Identifying the power imbalance within cases of cyberbullying is not as straightforward, as people who possess higher degrees of power are still vulnerable to acts of cyberbullying. Thus, victims do not need to be physically or psychologically weak compared to their perpetrators. Instead, Vandebosch and Van Cleemput argues that there is another important aspect within cyberbullying that could contribute to a power imbalance, which is anonymity.[v] The anonymity of the perpetrators makes it difficult for victims to identify the source of cyberbullying and consequently act or defend themselves against it. However, even in cases where the victim does know the identity of the perpetrator, it is often difficult to reach out to the perpetrators and take real action towards them. This may happen due to the fact that a single case of cyberbullying may be carried out and repeated by hundreds or even thousands of internet users at once. Slonje notes this possibility by identifying that the idea of ‘repetition’ within acts of cyberbullying are much more complex than that found in traditional bullying.[vi] The usage of information communication technology allows a single act of cyberbullying by one individual to create a snowball effect, where such actions are then repeated and spread by other users of the internet. As a result, the victim is exposed to cyberbullying multiple times by different individuals, and thus the idea of repetition in cyberbullying involves a larger number and a more diverse account of people.
One clear example of this is the cyberbullying that happened towards an Indonesian celebrity under the initials ZG. In August 2015, ZG mistakenly made several inconsiderate remarks regarding the country’s national symbol, which resulted in her receiving constant hate-speech and degrading comments on her social media accounts for several weeks – despite her already publicly apologizing multiple times.[vii] Another example is that of which happened to a newly-graduated high school student under the initials SD during April 2016. While being ticketed by a female police officer, SD displayed ill-mannered behaviour by shouting and claiming to be a child of a national military general. The video of this occurrence quickly went viral and entailed thousands of offensive comments on her Instagram account. The intensity of the cyberbullying was so severe to the extent that it caused the father of SD to decease due to heart failure, but the hateful comments still continued to be posted even after his death became widely known. Thus these cases effectively underline how technological advancements have allowed bullying to be carried out not only by a handful of individuals, but also by thousands of internet users who may not even know each other in real life.
Other than the usual hate-speech targeted towards specific individuals, another particular form of cyberbullying that has been on the rise in recent years is digital/online sexual harassment. A recent study has shown that sexual harassment accounted for at least 44% of all forms of online harassment in 2014.[viii] Another study has shown that around 73% of adult internet users have seen someone being harassed online,[ix] with millennials aged 18-29 years old being the most likely demographic group to be victims of online harassment (65%).[x] Young women in particular, aged 18-24 years old, experience the highest levels of online harassment: 26% claim they have been stalked online, while 25% have been targets of actual sexual harassment on online platforms.[xi]
As with other forms of cyberbullying, the advancements in information communication technology have allowed perpetrators of sexual harassment to explore and exploit new possibilities. Social media websites and apps were cited as being the most frequent platforms where harassment was received (66%), while another 22% noted that harassment came from comment sections on websites.[xii] Furthermore, more than half of those harassed online do not know who is behind it: 38% victims were harassed by total strangers, and 26% claimed they did not know the real identity of the perpetrators.[xiii]
A recent example of online sexual harassment is the case of HA, an Indonesian victim of revenge porn whose name has been circulating widely on several social media platforms. The usage of social media was an effective tool to disseminate and distribute private footage of HA without her consent. This has caused her to be the target of widespread sexual objectification as well as public naming and shaming, while it became increasingly difficult to stop the footage from being spread even further within the society. In this case, the identification of perpetrators thus becomes a challenging task, due to the manner in which the footage has been spread on such a massive scale. Thus it can be inferred how technological advancements have not only made it easier for sexual harassment to happen (as it now only requires internet access to carry out), but it has also allowed perpetrators to stay safe in hiding without having to confront their victims and risk making their identity known. The victim’s incapability to identify these perpetrators, let alone take action against them, signifies the severity of online sexual harassment and highlights how difficult it can be for individuals to defend themselves in the digital era.
Seeing that most online harassment is carried out via social media, a large portion of Indonesia’s online-crazed society may very well be potential victims of harassment on online platforms. Therefore, it remains an utmost priority to be able to educate the Indonesian society on digital literacy, in order to ensure responsible and mature usage of technology. This will prove to become an indispensable aspect in the nation’s future efforts to fight against online sexual harassment and to keep the society safe from digital predators.
Editors: Atin Prabandari, MA(IR); Viyasa Rahyaputra, SIP; Nabeel Khawarizmy Muna, SIP
Picture: pexels
References
[i] Nguyen, H. (2017). Indonesia is fastest growing country for internet use – report. [online] Rappler. Available at: https://www.rappler.com/world/regions/asia-pacific/indonesia/bahasa/englishedition/159593-internet-social-media-statistics. [Accessed 22 August 2017].
[ii] Sadowksi, M. (2015). Social Media Statistics for Indonesia [online]. Social Memos. http://socialmemos.com/social-media-statistics-for-indonesia/
[iii] Understanding Bullying Factsheets 2016. Center for Disease Control and Prevention. 2016. Available at https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/bullying_factsheet.pdf [Accessed 18 August 2017].
[iv] Olweus, D. (1999). In P. K. Smith, Y. Morita, J. Junger-Tas, D. Olweus, R.
Catalano, & P. Slee (Eds.), The nature of school bullying: A cross-national
perspective. London & New York: Routledge.
[v] Vandebosch, H., & Van Cleemput, K. (2008). Defining cyberbullying: A qualitative
research into the perceptions of youngsters. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 11.
[vi] Slonje, R., et al. (2012). “The nature of cyberbullying, and strategies for prevention”. Computers in Human Behavior.
[vii] Rastati, R. (2016). “Bentuk Perundungan Siber di Media Sosial dan Pencegahannya bagi Korban dan Pelaku”. Jurnal Sosioteknologi Vol 15, No 2.
[viii] http://onlineharassmentdata.org/2016/
[ix] Duggan, M. (2014). Online Harassment {online]. Pew Research Center. Available at: http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/10/22/online-harassment/ [Accessed 22 August 2017].
[x] How big a problem is online harassment in 2016? [online]. Online Harassment Data. Available at: http://onlineharassmentdata.org/2016/]. [Accessed 22 August 2017].
[xi] Duggan, M. (2014). Online Harassment [online]. Pew Research Center. Available at: http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/10/22/online-harassment/ [Accessed 22 August 2017].
[xii] Duggan, M. (2014). Online Harassment [online]. Pew Research Center. Available at: http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/10/22/online-harassment/ [Accessed 22 August 2017].
[xiii] Duggan, M. (2014). Online Harassment [online]. Pew Research Center. Available at: http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/10/22/online-harassment/ [Accessed 22 August 2017].
