KNOW YOUR OPTIONS WHEN REPORTING ABUSE
Problem: Backlash or revictimization online for reporting online abuse Possible solution: Publication bans or anonymity The courts have recognized the potential consequences of online bullying and harassment. Most notable was the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision that allowed a teenage girl to pursue, anonymously, a court order to reveal the identity of someone who had posted a fake Facebook profile using her picture along with sexually explicit references.
“Courts may also conclude that there is objectively discernible harm,” the decision says. It recognizes the “psychological toxicity” of cyberbullying and the potential for revictimization when information on the complaint is published.
The SCC decision specifically refers to children, a vulnerable group in need of higher privacy safeguards, who it says should not be deterred from protecting themselves.
However, the ruling raises questions about the consequences for adults who come forward to report abusive behaviour online, but may fear backlash of the kind experienced by the two complainants in the Elliott case. The women made their Twitter accounts private after receiving death threats and other abusive comments. Problem: Insufficient and ineffective ways to report abuse Possible solution: Working with companies to improve reporting; government intervention; making it clear how to use the “report abuse” and blocking functions. “A lot of this is the responsibility of the digital technology providers,” says Internet safety expert Parry Aftab. “All these guys know there are a lot of people who use their system to hurt their users . . . They need to make sure they have a good reporting process and that they act on it. That if people continue to break the rules they are excluded from the network.”
She says the rules for using the platforms need to be set clearly so people know when they have crossed a line. Problem: Lack of understanding of technology by judges (and the public) Possible solution: Educational workshops McGill law professor Shaheen Shariff is keenly aware of the judicial education issue — it is something she is researching. She hopes to develop workshops that would educate judges about evolving issues in technology.
“(The problem) is huge. It is absolutely huge. The grant I have now is to look at a whole bunch of case law and the judicial assumption about how young people are using the Internet and whether the judges really understood some of the technology. And definitely we found patterns that judges are really out of touch,” she said.
“It is one of the challenges of how technology is shaping this balance between free expression and online harassment.”