RSS Feed

Category Archives: Uncategorized

More background research into Cyberbullying

The term “cyberbullying” was first coined and defined by Canadian educator and anti-bullying activist Bill Belsey, as “the use of information and communication technologies to support deliberate, repeated, and hostile behavior by an individual or group, that is intended to harm others.”

Cyberbullying has subsequently been defined as “when the Internet, cell phones or other devices are used to send or post text or images intended to hurt or embarrass another person”. Other researchers use similar language to describe the phenomenon.

Cyberbullying can be as simple as continuing to send e-mail to someone who has said they want no further contact with the sender, but it may also include threats, sexual remarks, pejorative labels (i.e., hate speech), ganging up on victims by making them the subject of ridicule in forums, and posting false statements as fact aimed at humiliation.

Cyberbullies may disclose victims’ personal data (e.g. real name, address, or workplace/schools) at websites or forums or may pose as the identity of a victim for the purpose of publishing material in their name that defames or ridicules them. Some cyber-bullies may also send threatening and harassing emails and instant messages to the victims, while other post rumors or gossip and instigate others to dislike and gang up on the target.

Kids report being mean to each other online beginning as young as 2nd grade. According to research, boys initiate mean online activity earlier than girls do. However, by middle school, girls are more likely to engage in cyberbullying than boys do. Whether the bully is male or female, their purpose is to intentionally embarrass others, harass, intimidate, or make threats online to one another. This bullying occurs via email, text messaging, posts to blogs, and Web sites.

Though the use of sexual remarks and threats are sometimes present in cyberbullying, it is not the same as sexual harassment and does not necessarily involve sexual predators.

-Wikipedia (Source)


Cyberbullying Statistics

Posted on
Half of all 14-year-olds are the victims of bullying, and cyberbullying is now one of the most common forms of abuse, a major survey of victimisation in schools shows.
The study of 15,000 children by the National Centre for Social Research found that although many teenagers try to stop parents getting involved or informing the school, when they do so, the child is significantly less likely to be suffering from bullying two years later.
The Longitudinal Study of Young People in England has been tracking the lives of 15,000 children who turned 14 in 2004.

Introduction to courseowrk: Cyberbullying

Posted on

Cyberbullying” is when a child, preteen or teen is tormented, threatened, harassed, humiliated, embarrassed or otherwise targeted by another child, preteen or teen using the Internet, interactive and digital technologies or mobile phones. It has to have a minor on both sides, or at least have been instigated by a minor against another minor. Once adults become involved, it is plain and simple cyber-harassment or cyberstalking. Adult cyber-harassment or cyberstalking is NEVER called cyberbullying.

There are two kinds of cyberbullying, direct attacks (messages sent to your kids directly) and cyberbullying by proxy (using others to help cyberbully the victim, either with or without the accomplice’s knowledge). Because cyberbullying by proxy often gets adults involved in the harassment, it is much more dangerous.

When it comes to cyberbullying, they are often motivated by anger, revenge or frustration. Sometimes they do it for entertainment or because they are bored and have too much time on their hands and too many tech toys available to them. Many do it for laughs or to get a reaction.Because their motives differ, the solutions and responses to each type of cyberbullying incident has to differ too.

SWOT Analysis for Twitter

Swot Analysis



  • Gives people freedom  speech
  • Allows people who wouldn’t normally have an input on important matters, to give their opinion on current affairs
  • Even though the word count is low, people can still get their points across
  • If you go over the word count; you can link from within another page to allow followers to read the longer post
  • No advertising


  • Word count is limited
  • There is very limited filtering and moderation
  • It is open to anyone – could cause controversy if younger children were to go on it, especially concerning their safety – paedophiles


  • Could develop the ‘following’ scheme – possibly group different people you follow, in order to see the tweets that you class as more important; from different people
  • Has the ability to be the most popular and used social network in the world
  • Doesn’t advertise, but has ‘promoted tweets’ and ‘promoted themes’ which are paid for my different companies, and therefore they have the ability to develop into an extremely efficient way of advertising businesses; new products and themes


  • There is no filtering, so users have the ability to post discriminatory things on the site, as well as posts that may cause a reduction in the safety of the other users

Exam Question Practice

January 2011

06 New and digital media offers media institutions different ways of reaching audiences. Consider how ans why media institutions are using these techniques.


YouTube; ‘Vlogging’ -> User controlled

Twitter; constant/instant posts/updates -> Businesses using for updating clients/promoting to potential clients -> millions can gain access to it.

Facebook; millions of users access it ->finding progress -> ‘liking’ pages -> keeping up to date with people/groups/organisations

Tumblr; personal -> images -> anon

Newspapers; DMonline -> constant updating and new article posted -> more efficient than traditional paper articles -> more than once daily


BlackBerry Sever Crash; kept their users updated on progress (or lack off) via Twitter and Youtube    -> daily updates and reasurance (attempted) of network issues -> informing on what had gone wrong and what they were trying to do to fix it.

Case Study

In my case study I will be researching into the claim that  ‘Twitter rivals traditional news methods’.

Twitter is a product of New Media from web 2.0 and it allows normal, everyday people to instantainiously  post their own personal views  and provide them with freedom of speech, ultimately giving people a voice in society.

 It challenges traditional methods of delevering news and braodcasting people’s view on the subject as it allows people to react immediately where as the original way to learn of news and events happening around the world would be too wait for the 6 o’clock or 10 o’clock news; or to read the paper in the morning, whilst New Media products such as Twitter allow instant access to the news and gives people the opportunity to react to it.

Below are a few links that may help me with my research into the developments of New Media; specifically Twitter with Social Networking.



Will Newspapers ever be able to charge for their online content?

Will Newspapers ever be able to charge for their online content?




A Paywall is a strategic system put in place to block the access to certain areas of a websites without membership payment. The websites that usually employ a Paywall scheme are those of periodical publications, those who release new editions of publications on a regular schedule.


An example of a Paywall can be found in the Wall Street Journals online website. They use a screen that requires payment to pass, to block certain articles from non-members, and therefore non-paying readers, to encourage them to pay for full access to the site. For Wall Street Journal, this has become a very successful scheme, making an estimated $65 million every year. It has however, also caused some controversy over raising the price for advertisers who pay to be behind the Paywall, appose to being accessible on the free site. Some people, for example George Crovitz, think this is acceptable as “ if people pay for a subscription, that’s an excellent indicator of the “engagement” that advertisers and agencies are looking for.” [1] 


An example of an unsuccessful Paywall is that of The New York Times online. They charged $49.95 a year or $7.95 a month for a subscription that allowed them access the latest publications on their website, which were blocked to non-members. This however drove advertisement charge through the roof, and it became almost impossibly unrealistic for advertisement companies to pay for their products to be shown within the Paywall site. This lead to the Paywall being taken down, only remaining for their ‘pre 1980s’ archive.  However, earlier in 2011, the New York Times Online released a statement[2] announcing that they would be re-starting their paywall, but would be running it differently. They stated that they have created a “paywall that will let you see 20 articles a month and thereafter redirect you to a signup for paid access.” However people have managed to find a way around this by using links into the site found on Google and Twitter, where people have posted them, inadvertently giving access to members of the public that have exceeded their limit.


Global events also affect the Online Newspapers ability to charge for their articles, or at least their need too. The latest and most prominent example of this was Hurricane Irene; which caused devastation across America. The New York Times announced via Twitter that “As a public service, @nytimes will allow free access to storm-related coverage on and its mobile apps. #irene”[3] This was followed with several other Newspapers doing the same; such as Wall Street Journal and, a Long Island publication.


Some blogging sites and online forums have publicly debating the worth of having a paywall within news websites; whether people felt that having to pay for access to the information is unnecessary and should not be forced upon the public; whilst others argue that if you were to buy a Newspaper that has been printed, but to gain access to the online content for free is unfair. People giving their opinions on the Q and A section of the ‘Yahoo!’ website seemed to frown upon the idea of a paywall being introduced to The Guardians online Newspaper, with one person stating that “- no. I think not. I suspect even executives from the GMG would say no. It is a common misconception that newspapers and other modern media make most of their revenue from sales and subscriptions. They do not. It comes from the sale of advertising space or time. The Guardian website is one of the most visited on the planet. If push came to shove I suspect that advertising revenue alone could keep the site afloat.”[4]


In conclusion; a paywall can be successful for certain articles and Newspapers that have a certain demographic following them; whilst if they are unsuccessful in holding up their paywall it can seriously damage both the financial side and credibility of the Newspaper in question.