cyber bullying in south africa: impact and...

Introduction

The considerable increase over the past fewyears in the use of mobile phones, textmessaging, emails, chat rooms and socialnetworks has altered our social environ-ments and has in many ways directed oursocial interactions. Comparative datasuggests that South Africans ‘are one of thehighest users of mobile technology andmobile social networking on the continent’compared to other countries such asCameroon, Ethiopia, Namibia, Tanzania,Uganda and Zambia.1 Young people, whoare known to acquire technological skillsmore rapidly than adults, lead the way inthe daily use of information and communi-cation technologies (ICTs).

Recent studies show that nine out of ten(92.9%) 12- to 24-year-olds either own orhave access to a mobile phone, which theyexpend for their personal use.2 A surveyconducted in Cape Town, Durban andJohannesburg of learners aged between 13and 17 years old found that 81% had accessto a computer at home and 62% were ableto use their home computers to access theinternet.3 The growing affordability ofsmartphones and data bundles has furtherdecreased the number of youth in SouthAfrica who have no access to the internet.

While there are countless benefits to thistechnology, including rewarding socialconnections, creating opportunities foracademic and social support, identityexploration and cross-cultural interactions,this technology has the potential to exposeyoung people to high-risk content and

individuals they may not otherwise havehad contact with. The often uncensoredand unmonitored nature of the cyberenvironment can expose young people topornography, violence, harmful informa-tion, sexual predators, disturbing imagesand, more alarmingly, has paved the wayfor new forms of aggression andvictimisation to be perpetrated against thecountry’s child and youth population.

Cyber bullying, cyber violence, cyberaggression, internet bullying, electronicbullying, internet harassment or onlineharassment are terms used to refer toviolence and aggression perpetratedthrough ICTs. Although studies make use ofdiffering terms, these concepts generallyrefer to any discomfort or harm that isintentionally and repeatedly inflicted on aspecific person or group.4 These cruel actsmay include the sending of harassing e-mails or instant messages, posting obscene,insulting and slanderous messages on onlinebulletin boards or social networking sites, ordeveloping web pages to promote anddisseminate defamatory content.

Cyber bullying via mobile phones may takethe form of sending malicious text messagesor text messages of a sexual nature (knownas sexting), or taking pictures and videos ofsomeone with the intention of distributingthe content to others via mobile phones oronline.5 Individuals may also impersonateothers online or create fake profiles withwhich to perpetrate cyber aggression.

While adults tend to use the term ‘cyber

CENTRE FOR

JUSTICE AND

CRIME PREVENTION

CJCP Issue Paper No. 13

June 2012

Cyber bullying in South Africa:Impact and responses

Maša Popovac & Lezanne Leoschut

While adults tend touse the term ‘cyberbullying’, youngpeople do notnecessarily identifywith the term in theexperiences theyhave online.

bullying’, young people do not necessarilyidentify with the term in the experiencesthey have online. According to Marwickand Boyd, adolescents are more inclined touse terms such as ‘drama’ to conceptualisebullying – a term that trivialises theexperience, while at the same time retainstheir sense of agency as opposed topositioning themselves as victims within theexchange.6 Dismissing online interactions as‘drama’ further lessens the importance ofthe conflict and situates the experience as asimple and natural part of adolescent life.7

This is important to consider in addressingthe issue and educating youth about cyberbullying, as many teenagers may notnecessarily place themselves within abullying rhetoric used by parents oreducators. This highlights the need for achild-centred response to cyber violencerather than adult-centred approaches,which often tend to be instinctual andbased on gut responses.

The study of cyber bullying has not kept upwith the proliferation of ICTs in SouthAfrica. Hence, there is a dearth of literatureon the nature and extent of cyber violenceat a national level, including theconsequences of such aggression. Thispaper attempts to bridge the gap andcontribute to the understanding of this

social phenomenon by describing theimpact that cyber aggression has onchildren and youth. By drawing on currentliterature, the paper further outlines someof the more common safety initiatives andprogrammes employed in response to thescourge of cyber violence both locally andinternationally. Finally, the paper highlightsthe need for evidence-based approaches tocyber violence that take into account theeveryday lived experiences of children andyouth by emphasising a whole-schoolapproach to addressing cyber violence. Thisapproach has proven to be successful inaddressing traditional bullying and may alsobe the way forward in cyber violenceprevention.

The nature of cyber bullying in South Africa

Two major quantitative studies have beenconducted recently to gauge youngpeople’s access to, use of and experiencesin using ICTs. The findings from the 2009Centre for Justice and Crime Prevention’s(CJCP) pilot study8 and the 2011 NelsonMandela Metropolitan University study9

support the notion that ICTs are in high useamong young people in South Africa, just asthey are internationally (see text boxbelow).

Adolescents are moreinclined to use termssuch as ‘drama’ toconceptualisebullying – a term thattrivialises theexperience, while atthe same time retainstheir sense of agencyas opposed topositioningthemselves as victimswithin the exchange.

2

CJCP Issue Paper 13 June 2012

The 2009 CJCP pilot study of 1,726 youthsrecruited from Cape Town, Durban,Johannesburg and Port Elizabeth foundthat:i

73.9% of young people had access to theinternet either at home or at school

64% reported using MXitii

47.9% had access to the internet on theirmobile phones

31.4% had a profile on a social networkingsite such as Facebook, Myspace, Twitter orHi5

30.4% participated in online chat roomsand used instant messaging applicationssuch as MSN and Yahoo chat

The 2011 Nelson Mandela MetropolitanUniversity study of 1,594 learners in grades6-12 at six schools (three primary schoolsand three secondary schools) in the NelsonMandela Bay area found that:iii

90% of young people use social networkingsites

MXit and Facebook were favoured aboveall other sites, with 67% accessing thesesites on a daily basis

Social networking (51.2%) was SouthAfrican youth’s favourite online activity,followed by gaming (20.2%), web surfing(13.8%), music (7.3%), downloading (5.5%)and other (2.1%)

i Burton P & Mutongwizo T, Inescapable violence: Cyber bullying and electronic violence against young people in South Africa.Centre for Justice and Crime Prevention, CJCP Issue Paper, No. 8, 2009.

ii MXit is a free chat application for mobile phones that incorporates elements of chat rooms, instant messaging and socialnetworking.

iii De Lange M & von Solms R, The importance of raising e-Safety awareness amongst children in South Africa. Proceedings of the13th Annual Conference on world wide web applications, 13-16 September 2011. Johannesburg, South Africa, 2011. Availableonline: http://www.zaw3.co.za/index.php/ZA-WWW/2011/paper/viewFile/423/131 [accessed 10 January 2012].

This highlights theneed for a child-centred response tocyber violence ratherthan adult-centredapproaches, whichoften tend to beinstinctual and basedon gut responses.

Cyber bullying in South Africa: Impact and responses

3

The statistics also demonstrate the highincidence of cyber aggression among SouthAfrica’s youth. Over a third (37%) of youngpeople surveyed in the CJCP studyadmitted to having experienced some formof cyber aggression either at home or atschool.10 This was consistent with the 36%of young people who were found to havebeen cyber bullied in the Nelson MandelaMetropolitan University study.11

According to the CJCP, this figure increasesto nearly half of all respondents (46.8%)when harassment via the telephone isincluded in the analysis.12 These figures arein line with international statistics: a study inthe United States (US) found that 30% of asample of young people reported beingvictims of cyber bullying,13 while a Canadianstudy showed that 21.9% of young people ingrades 6–11 experienced at least one formof cyber bullying behaviour during the threemonths prior to the study.14

Cyber bullying occurs across a diverse rangeof mediums, the most common being voicecalls (28%) and text messages (25.6%) (seeFigure 1). Since many young people carry

their mobile phones with them at all times,this form of cyber aggression has becomethe most difficult to escape.15 Cyberaggression via mobile phones also tends tooccur via MXit, with 26% of respondentsexperiencing insults, particularly race-basedinsults, according to a UNICEF study.16

South African girls are found to be onlyslightly more susceptible to cyber bullyingboth at home (43.4%) and in the schoolenvironment (33.1%) compared to boys(42.4% at home and 29.3% at school)17 – atrend observed internationally as well.Wade and Beran suggest that this is becausethe verbal and relational nature of cyberbullying fits in closely with femalesocialisation processes.18

Research, however, indicates no significantdifferences between the sexes with regardto the perpetration of cyber violence.19 Inthe 2009 study, 18.3% of the participantsadmitted to bullying someone via textmessage (SMS), 16.9% had bulliedsomeone via phone calls, 12.2% via chatrooms, 11.8% via instant messaging and9.2% via video or photos.

Figure 1: Young South Africans’ experiences of cyber aggression

Source: Burton P & Mutongwizo T, Inescapable violence: Cyber bullying and electronic violence against young people in South Africa.Centre for Justice and Crime Prevention, CJCP Issue Paper, No. 8, 2009.

In the US, 11% of young people admitted to being perpetrators of cyber bullying.i

A higher proportion of young people in a Canadian study reported being the perpetrators ofcyber bullying (29.7%).ii

i Patchin JW & Hinduja S, Bullies move beyond the schoolyard: A preliminary look at cyber bullying. Youth Violence and JuvenileJustice, 4(2), pp 148-169, 2006

ii Wade A & Beran T, Cyber bullying: The new era of bullying. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 26(44), pp 44-61, 2011.

An important finding in the CJCP study isthat the line between perpetrators andvictims of cyber bullying is most oftenblurred; seven out of ten (69.7%)perpetrators of cyber bullying hadthemselves been bullied. It thereforeappears that being a victim of cyberaggression may increase the likelihood ofperpetrating such aggression against others,perhaps in retaliation. This is in line withinternational data, with one studyindicating that three-quarters (75%) ofthose who victimised others online werealso targets of cyber bullying themselves.20

In addition to young people beingvictimised and/or perpetrating cyberaggression, nearly half (46%) claimed tohave witnessed cyber bullying in onlinespaces.21 This indicates that young peopleare exposed to high levels of aggressiononline as witnesses, victims or perpetratorsor, more likely, a combination of thesethroughout their daily ICT use.

Cyber bullying: Why should we worry?

Cyber bullying tends to have similar effectson children as traditional bullying, but witha number of important differences that canexacerbate its negative consequences. It isargued that one of the most harmful aspectsof the internet is that people can remainanonymous when communicating withothers. This increases the possibility ofpeople communicating in ways that theymay not do in a face-to-face interaction.22

Believing that they will not get caughtmeans that the fear of discovery, whichgenerally acts as a behavioural control inpeople, is absent in the cyber world.23

Apart from anonymity, cyber bullying isfurther distinguished from traditional formsof bullying due to the absence of non-verbal cues, such as body language andemotional reactions. As a result, individualsmay not realise the effect they are havingon others, whether they have taken thesocial exchange too far, or when theircomments have been misinterpreted.24 Andnot being able to see the harm that iscaused to another person diminishes thelikelihood of an empathic reaction.

Another troubling aspect of cyber bullying is

that, unlike traditional bullying which occursin the physical environment, cyber bullyingcan occur at any time and place. This meansthat cyber bullying can occur at ease andwithout constraint, and a victim can bemistreated and tormented continuously,using communication tools. In addition,online bullying comments and images canbe distributed to a wide audience veryquickly, which affects the everyday realitythat victims may experience in the physicalenvironment.25 Insults and comments viaICTs, unlike traditional bullying, can bepreserved and reread several times, whichexacerbates its harmful consequences. Theseverity of cyber bullying is underscored byreported suicides, murders and school drop-outs as a result of the experience.26

Although there is evidence to suggest thatcyber bullying is correlated with traditionalbullying and that it can be an extension ofschool bullying, whereby perpetratorscontinue to victimise youth who are alreadytargets at school,27 the new technology isalso exposing new groups of adolescents,who are not victims of traditional bullying,to victimisation online. In fact, internationalliterature indicates that less than a quarter(23%) of youth who are victimised onlinealso experience harassment at school.28 Thismeans that the new forms of technologyhave created a vulnerability for over two-thirds of victims, which they may not haveotherwise experienced.29 As with traditionalbullying, which can spill over into the cyberworld, children who are cyber bullied mayalso begin to be bullied at school.

Victims of cyber bullying can suffer manyemotional and psychological problems thatare similar to traditional forms of bullying.According to a 2006 study by Patchin andHinduja, 42.5% of young people whoexperienced cyber bullying in the USreported feeling frustrated, almost 40%were angry and over a quarter (27%) feltsad.30 Other literature suggests that victimsof cyber bullying are significantly morelikely to report depressive symptoms,emotional distress and becomingperpetrators of cyber bullying themselves.31

The use of different types of technology toperpetrate violence varies in prevalenceand may give rise to differing levels of

Young people areexposed to highlevels of aggressiononline as witnesses,victims orperpetrators, or,more likely, acombination of these throughouttheir daily ICT use.

Cyber bullying tendsto have similareffects on children astraditional bullying,but with a number ofimportant differencesthat can exacerbateits negativeconsequences.

4


distress. For example, receiving anaggressive text message on a mobile phonemay have a different effect compared tohaving a defamatory message about oneselfposted on a public forum. While thesedifferences are not yet well understood,there is growing evidence to suggest thatexperiences of cyber violence negativelyaffect school functioning and the schoolenvironment in general.32 For example,experiences of cyber bullying have beenlinked to school conduct problems,weapon-carrying at school and lowcaregiver–adolescent connectedness.33

Hinduja and Patchin elsewhere purport thatvictims of cyber bullying may be at risk ofother negative developmental andbehavioural consequences, such as schoolviolence and delinquency. The study foundthat victims of cyber bullying weresignificantly more likely to report substanceuse, cheating on a school test, being absentfrom school without an excuse, assaulting apeer and damaging property, indicating thatemotional distress may lead to deviantcoping behaviours.34 Another study by thesame authors found that suicide was afurther risk factor linked to cyber bullying(termed cyberbullicide), and that victimswere nearly twice as likely to haveattempted suicide compared to youth whohad not experienced cyber bullying.35

It is argued that young people are sovulnerable to cyber aggression because theyare not aware of how to behave in the

cyber world. Some young people may beunable to differentiate between virtualreality and physical reality, and may beginto view the cyber world as an extension oftheir real world.36 This world can becomeso real that children may choose to commitsuicide over it. This speaks to the need toeducate children (and adults) morerealistically about internet usage and thecontext of cyberspace. However, in caseswhere cyber bullying is an extension oftraditional bullying, the cyber world affectstheir day-to-day reality. In these instances, itis difficult to separate the cyber world fromthe lived reality of the individual.

Studies also indicate that there is a low levelof support offered to victims of cyberaggression. Over a third (36%) of highschool students in Canada believed thatadults in the school did not try to stop cyberbullying when they were informed that itwas happening.37 These findings show thatchildren may not trust adults to understandcyber bullying enough to respond to it in away that will not aggravate their situation.There is therefore an urgent need forresponses to cyber bullying within theschool context which facilitate the reportingof these incidents. Increasing awarenessabout the issue among adults is also criticalin order to tackle the issue effectively.

Given the dearth of literature on the impactof cyber bullying in the South Africancontext, international findings may pinpointsome important effects on children that

Victims of cyberbullying weresignificantly morelikely to reportsubstance use,cheating on a schooltest, being absentfrom school withoutan excuse, assaultinga peer and damagingproperty, indicatingthat emotionaldistress may lead todeviant copingbehaviours.


5

CYBER BULLYING CAN LEAD TO:

Depression, suicidal ideation and other psychological problems Development of somatic complaints such as headaches and stomach aches Impaired concentration (affecting school performance) Truancy Anxiety and fear of being rejected, excluded or humiliated Loneliness and isolation Substance abuse Delinquency and aggression Weapon-carrying Poor parent-caregiver relationships (as a result of children lashing out at family members who

are often unaware of the cyber bullying being experienced) Offline victimisation

Source: Kowalski RM, Limber SP & Agatston PW, Cyber bullying: Bullying in the digital age.UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2008; DeWet C, The voices of victims and witnesses of school bullying. Department of Comparative Education and Education Management.University of the Free State, 2005.

need to be considered in drawing up safetyinitiatives and programmes. The emergingevidence that cyber aggression is related to arange of psycho-social and school problemshighlights the need for a comprehensivechild-centred intervention strategy to ensurethat perpetrators face consequences andthat victims are offered the necessarysupport to mitigate the negative effects ofcyber bullying.38 Unfortunately, there is littleempirical data about how exactly thisproblem should be addressed.

The paper now takes a closer look at someof the more common safety initiatives andprogrammes that are currently in place bothin South Africa and internationally.

Responses to cyber bullying: What iscurrently being done?

There are a number of government policiesand acts in place in South Africa, which areintended to keep children safe fromexposure to harmful content in the media.While it does not specifically deal withonline safety, the Films and Publications Act(No. 65 of 1996) monitors and evaluatesother media for their suitability for variousaudiences.

The function of the Film and PublicationBoard is to regulate the creation, production,possession, broadcasting and distribution offilms, interactive computer games andcertain publications, as well as to adviseconsumers in making informed decisions so

as to protect the public from unintendedexposure to disturbing and potentiallyharmful material.39 The board has additionalstructures in place, such as a hotline, and hasestablished strong partnerships with lawenforcement and other organisations.40 Theboard is currently in the process of formingpartnerships with various stakeholders tocreate awareness programmes related tocyber bullying and sexting.

In order to deal specifically with the issue ofchildren’s safety and ICT use, theDepartment of Communications is workingon a ‘Children and ICT’ strategy that isexpected to be released this year. Thestrategy aims to support the protection ofchildren in the ICT sector while promotingaccess to and usage of ICTs, which is seen aspromoting the socio-economic wellbeing ofsociety.41 Similarly, the Department of BasicEducation has released draft guidelines one-safety in schools (discussed later).

Safety strategies to deal with cyberaggression need to be addressed from twoperspectives, namely, education andtechnology.42 These two perspectivesshould be aligned to form a coordinatedapproach to online safety, which includeschildren, parents, technology-related busi-nesses, government departments and othersworking together to make online spacessafe for young users. There is also a constantneed to update strategies due to the fluidityand rapid evolution of technology. Researchin the field needs to occur on an on-going

The emergingevidence that cyberaggression is relatedto a range of psycho-social and schoolproblems highlightsthe need for acomprehensive child-centred interventionstrategy to ensurethat perpetrators faceconsequences andthat victims areoffered the necessarysupport to mitigatethe negative effectsof cyber bullying.

6


There is often a lack of monitoring and supervision of children in their use of ICTs, which allowscyber bullying to occur unnoticed and for an extended period of time without any intervention.Many young people suffer in silence and do not report instances of cyber bullying for fear thattheir access to computers or mobile phones will be limited, especially since computers andmobile phones have become a central means of communication among young people.

The study by Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University further established young people’sreporting of cyber bullying and found that nearly half did not report the incident to anyone. Whenasked who the most likely person was that they would report cyber bullying to, 50% said theywould prefer to talk to a friend or peer, 40% would talk to a parent, while only 2% would talk toan educator.i Once again, these findings are in line with international findings. A study in the USfound that 56.6% of young people were comfortable talking to a friend about their victimisation,but fewer than 9% informed a parent or teacher about their experience.ii

i De Lange M & von Solms R, The importance of raising e-Safety awareness amongst children in South Africa. Proceedings of the13th Annual Conference on world wide web applications, 13-16 September 2011. Johannesburg, South Africa, 2011. Availableonline: http://www.zaw3.co.za/index.php/ZA-WWW/2011/paper/viewFile/423/131 [accessed 10 January 2012].

ii Patchin JW & Hinduja S, Bullies move beyond the schoolyard: A preliminary look at cyber bullying. Youth Violence and JuvenileJustice, 4(2), pp 148-169, 2006.

basis in order to build on the limitedknowledge base. The following sectiondiscusses some of the technological andeducation responses for online safety.

Technological responses

In response to the negative effects of cyberaggression and the need to safeguardchildren and their wellbeing, the ICTindustry has been compelled to developand implement strategies in order to protectyoung users. Blocking and filtering softwareis one of the primary means to keepchildren from accessing harmful contentonline. While of paramount importance,the sole reliance on this software isinsufficient to address the problem as youngpeople are very knowledgeable about theways to circumvent various content filters.43

Apart from this, it has been found that themost effective filtering software only blocksbetween 10% and 20% of the inappropriatecontent found on the internet, providingfurther evidence that this cannot be the soleaction taken to ensure safety.44

Various service providers have taken actionto increase the security of their users. In2010, MXit announced a zero tolerancepolicy for any user found to be postingexplicit or offensive material in public areasof the service, which would result in thembeing banned from MXit. The companyannounced that it had made newdevelopments in tracing and identifyingusers who post such material or who use theservice to prey on others, which allows fortheir immediate removal from the system.

Additionally, if the situation warrants,information may be handed over to thepolice cyber crimes unit.45 Section 24 of theFilms and Publications Act holds ownersand operators of telecommunicationstargeted at and used by children respon-sible for taking the necessary steps to ensurethat their services are not used forcommitting offences against children.46 Themove by MXit was thus welcomed by theFilm and Publication Board.

In the same year, the three major mobilenetworks in South Africa (MTN, Cell C andVodacom) blocked access to the Outoiletwebsite, which was found to be a hub for

cyber bullying and exposed children togrooming by paedophiles as well as thepotential exchange of child pornography onthe website.47 The site owners have sinceshut down the chat rooms on the website.48

Social networks such as Myspace have alsoadopted safety measures to protect theirusers by airing public service announce-ments promoting online safety, as well as byhaving rotating banners on their pages in2006. Myspace has strengthened its staff’scapacity to screen and remove in-appropriate content and profiles, includingdeleting thousands of profiles belonging toregistered sex offenders in the US, as well asimplementing restrictions that prevent suchoffenders from creating profiles in future.49

In addition, Myspace has implemented arange of other practical strategies, theseinclude:50

restricting access to younger users aged13 to 16 years by automatically settingtheir profiles to private (individualsyounger than 13 are not allowed to setup Myspace pages). This was done toprevent younger users from beingcontacted by adults. Users aged 16 andolder can set their profiles to private ifthey choose to do so.

not allowing users who are 18 and olderto add users who are younger than 16,unless they can supply the person’s fullname or email address to prove that theyknow them.

Facebook has also taken steps to reducerisks to safety by providing children withsafety messages when they are in danger ofgiving out personal information, restrictingthe ability of users to change their listedages, acting more aggressively to removeinappropriate and hazardous content, andensuring that third-party vendors adhere toFacebook’s safety and privacy guidelines.51

It further prevents access to a range of listedpornographic sites and the creation of anyFacebook groups or pages that violate thecompany’s terms and conditions, includingincest, paedophilia, cyber bullying andothers. Profiles of individuals who do notadhere to Facebook’s terms and conditionsare deleted. Facebook has deleted at least100 registered sex offenders from its

In response to thenegative effects ofcyber aggression andthe need to safeguardchildren and theirwellbeing, the ICTindustry has beencompelled to developand implementstrategies in order toprotect young users.


7

system.52 Safety tips are also shared on thesite and reporting mechanisms have beenimproved.

These technological measures are anexcellent step in improving the safety ofyoung users, but they are not foolproof.ICTs have more work to do to create safeonline spaces.

Educational responses

A particular concern raised in the literatureboth internationally and locally is that mostyoung people have the ability to be onlinewithout any adult supervision or monitoringof the websites that are accessed.53 Evenwhere supervision is available, youngpeople’s technological sophistication meansthat they often know how to sidestepcontent filters and delete histories, whichindicate the websites they have accessed.54

The South African Film and PublicationBoard has stated that parental control is amajor component in ensuring that childrenare not exposed to cyber violence.55

Unfortunately, most parents are unable tosupervise their children due to a lack ofknowledge about technologies and thedangers they pose. Moreover, there arecurrently no structures in place that parentscan refer to when they become aware ofcyber bullying. These issues are reflected inthe Nelson Mandela MetropolitanUniversity study: 37% of young peoplesurveyed had access to the internet in theprivacy of their bedrooms; 63% did nothave to ask permission before accessing theinternet; and more than half (54%) werenot supervised when using the internet.56

Low parental supervision and monitoring ofinternet use is an issue internationally as

well. A study in the US found that 41% ofyoung people do not share informationwith their parents about where they go andwhat they do online, and a quarter (26%)said their parents would be concerned ifthey were aware of what they did on theinternet. In New Zealand, over half ofprimary school learners (52%) reportedhardly ever being controlled when using theinternet at home.57

Interestingly, perceptions relating to thepresence of supervision and monitoringdiffer greatly between children and parents.A study shows that two-thirds (66%) of highschool students reported that parentsprovide no supervision of their internetactivities, while only 7% of parents reportedthat they provide no supervision.58 This is anindication that parents believe they areproviding some monitoring of internet use;however, the high proportion of youngpeople perceiving this supervision to beabsent shows that parental awareness andknowledge of technology is lacking.

A lack of awareness among adults meansthat they are unable to take precautions onbehalf of children, who are also largelyunaware of the risks in electronic media.This results in a lack of parental control dueto inadequate education about online safetyand prevents children from taking charge oftheir own safety. Awareness campaigns andsafety programmes are therefore importantto make both children and adults aware ofthe potential threats and how to minimisethem. One such campaign, the Girls’ Net‘Keep your chats exactly that’, was launchedin Johannesburg on 15 May 2009. The aimwas to prevent young people, especiallygirls, from becoming victims of cyberviolence and harassment by raisingawareness, disseminating information and

A particular concernraised in theliterature bothinternationally andlocally is that mostyoung people havethe ability to beonline without anyadult supervision ormonitoring of thewebsites that areaccessed.

8


A SURVEY IN THE US OF INTERNET AND AT-RISK BEHAVIOURS FOUND THAT:

25% of parents believe their children know more about computer technology than they do,while 14% believe they know the same about computers as their children

Parents are generally aware of filtering, blocking and information security software, but only30% of parents surveyed reported that they use this software

14% of parents have caught their children doing something with a computer device that theyshould not have been doing

Source: McQuade SC & Sampat N, Survey of Internet and At-risk behaviours. Report of the Rochester Institute of Technology,2008.

promoting the use of ICTs for positive socialparticipation.59 The campaign further callsfor more engagement with adults, who canhelp encourage the responsible use of ICTsand address problems when they occur.

Rather than prohibiting the use ofelectronic media or merely supervising theiruse, adults need to work towardsempowering young people in their use ofsuch technology so that they can takeprecautions and keep themselves safeonline.60 The Nelson Mandela MetropolitanUniversity’s Institute for ICT Advancementalso holds a series of targeted educationaland awareness programmes for children,parents and educators as part of its project.

Several interventions in the US wereevaluated to assess their effectiveness inincreasing internet safety knowledge andbehaviour. These include the i-Safe cybersafety programme, the ‘Missing’ cybersafety programme and an in-school cyberbullying intervention (HAHASO). The i-Safeproject in the US provides communityoutreach and educational programmeinitiatives designed to inform individualsand communities about online safety. Itstrives to empower young people of all agesto make their internet experiences safe andresponsible by teaching them how to avoiddangerous and inappropriate onlinebehaviour. In addition to teaching childrendirectly, it is also targeted at parents,educators, community leaders and lawenforcement agencies.61

An evaluation of the project found thatyoung people displayed increasedknowledge of internet safety. They weremore aware of how to manage online risks,including ways of identifying sexualpredators and risks related to the divulgingof personal information. They were alsomore likely to discuss their knowledge withfriends and siblings.62 However, theevaluation also found that the young peoplewho participated in the project did notutilise their newfound knowledge on apractical level; they were not found to beless likely to engage in inappropriatebehaviour online or to provide strangerswith personal information (although theydid say they would wait longer to give outsuch information).63

The ‘Missing’ cyber safety programme is amultimedia game designed for childrenaged 11 to 15 years old. It presents the storyof an adolescent boy who meets a sexualpredator online and is lured away from hishome. The game-based software pro-gramme, based on a true story, involvestaking on the role of a detective to piecetogether what happened by searchingthrough chat room conversations betweenthe teenager and the predator, as well asother clues, in order to locate him andreunite him with his family. The gameteaches children about internet safety in afun and positive manner and is designed foruse in a classroom setting.64

In June 2011, a game aimed at youngerchildren was launched on America’sNational Centre for Missing and ExploitedChildren’s popular child-focused internetsafety website during that country’s InternetSafety Month.65 The game, called ‘Tad’sProfile Panic’, is aimed at children aged 8 to12 years and teaches them about whatinformation should be kept private in onlineprofiles. The aim of the game is to help thegame’s character, Tad, edit his profileinformation. The game was developed toeducate children before they reachadolescence, a time when their use of socialnetworking increases. The website ispopular in the US and attracted nearly halfa million children between 2010 and2011.66

Interactive media is a crucial way ofengaging children in serious issues thataffect them. However, similar to the i-Safeprogramme, an evaluation of the ‘Missing’game found that it did not significantly alterinternet-related safety attitudes or thelikelihood of posting or sharing personalinformation. Furthermore, youths whoreceived the intervention were notsignificantly less likely to participate inonline spaces such as chat rooms or toemail strangers.67 Older children mayalready have certain online habits andbehaviours that make them reluctant to puttheir knowledge into practice.

Another major intervention, the in-schoolcyber bullying intervention (HAHASO), alsodid not change the number of reportedcyber bullying incidences experienced by

Rather thanprohibiting the use ofelectronic media ormerely supervisingtheir use, adults needto work towardsempowering youngpeople in their use ofsuch technology sothat they can takeprecautions and keepthemselves safeonline.


9

the learners.68 This highlights the challengein translating children’s knowledge intopractical, safer online behaviours.Interventions therefore need to bedeveloped that go beyond awarenessraising to interventions that specificallyplace emphasis on reducing risky onlinebehaviours.69

A whole-school approach to cyberbullying prevention

Educators also have a major part to play inteaching children about the dangers ofinternet use, particularly since the statisticsindicate that cyber bullying occurs both inthe home and school contexts. According toSouth Africa’s Film and Publication Board,just over a half of educators (53%) haddiscussed internet usage with their learnersat school.70 While schools by no means holdthe sole responsibility for educatingchildren about internet safety, they areconsidered an important role player tocounter the potential negative effects ofinternet use because children spend aconsiderable amount of time in this setting.

Schools further provide the ideal entrypoint for prevention of violence since theyhave the potential to reach the homes ofthe learners they teach and access parentsboth directly (through holding meetings) orindirectly (through educating children). Inthis way schools are able to have an impacton the communities in which they aresituated.

In line with the need for a comprehensiveapproach to cyber violence, a whole-schoolapproach in the educational setting is basedon the assumption that bullying is asystematic problem and that interventionsneed to be directed at the entire schoolcontext, including learners, educators,principals, parents, school governing bodiesand external school members, whichinclude provincial, district and nationalgovernment, rather than just individualvictims and bullies.71 By intervening in allareas of the school community, one is ableto change beliefs, behaviours and socialnorms, and to create a supportive andtrusting school environment that has accessto external support structures.

Schools furtherprovide the idealentry point forprevention ofviolence since theyhave the potential toreach the homes ofthe learners theyteach and accessparents both directly(through holdingmeetings) orindirectly (througheducating children).

10


CHARACTERISTICS OF SUCCESSFUL PREVENTION CAMPAIGNS

There is limited literature about the success of campaigns targeted specifically at cyber violenceand online safety. However, analyses into prevention campaigns in various fields such as alcoholabuse, traffic safety and school drop-out have allowed for general characteristics of successfulapproaches to be identified, which can be considered in the development of interventions forcyber safety. According to the analysis by Luna and Finkelhor, interventions tend to be successfulwhen:

they are grounded in a theoretical framework they focus on concrete skills development they consist of different components that take into account different target audiences (e.g.

parents, teachers, pupils) interactive instructional strategies are applied the approach considers the individual and/or small groups in the target audience the training is implemented in a comprehensive way the intervention exceeds about 20 hours of involvement of the target audience

Campaigns have also been found to work best when they are targeted at early age groups (9 to12 years) and consider factors such as gender in the programme development. Unsuccessfulcampaigns have been found to be limited to the transmission of knowledge as opposed tobehaviour change, when the campaign is based on inducing fear, and when the focus is limitedto changing attitudes and has an approach that is too general.

Source: Luna R & Finkelhor D, School-based prevention programs: Lessons for child victimisation prevention. Unpublishedmanuscript. Durham, NH: Family Research Laboratory, University of New Hampshire, 1998. As cited in Valcke M, Schellens T, VanKeer H & Gerrarts M, Primary school children’s safe and unsafe use of the Internet at home and at school: An exploratory study.Computers in Human Behavior, 2006. Available online: http://users.ugent.be/~mvalcke/CV/vecits.pdf [accessed 13 January 2012].

Whole-school approaches designed toaddress traditional forms of bullying canhelp to shed light on cyber bullyingbehaviours and can be adapted to suit thisnew context.

The first comprehensive whole-schoolintervention, the 1993 Olweus BullyingPrevention Program, was implemented on alarge scale and was premised on thefollowing components:

Awareness

All members of the school community mustbe made aware of what cyber bullying isand how they should respond to it. This isespecially important in the light of:

poor parental knowledge and subse-quent control of children’s ICT use; and

children’s tendency to conceptualiseonline aggression as ‘drama’ rather thanbullying or violence.

The issue needs to be described anddiscussed in detail so that everyoneunderstands and has a shared idea of whatconstitutes cyber violence and theimportance of addressing it, particularly dueto the grave implications cyber bullying canhave on individuals.

Curricular activities are important ininstilling anti-bullying attitudes amonglearners and assisting them in developingpro-social conflict-resolution skills. Childrenshould be engaging with these importantissues in the classroom. This will allow aclimate of empathy and respect to beestablished, both in the classroom and inthe school in general. Life Orientationclasses provide a perfect opportunity to addelements of cyber bullying and ‘netiquette’into the formal curriculum.

Policy

Codes of conduct and other school policiesthat address cyber bullying need to bedrawn up and communicated to allmembers of the school community. Thereneeds to be a policy in place that is not onlyimplemented but consistently enforced,and there need to be appropriateconsequences relating to cyber bullying.This will indicate that the issue is takenseriously and will not be tolerated, andeach member of the school community willbe held accountable for their behaviour.

The Department of Basic Educationprovides guidelines on e-safety in schoolsand calls for a safe school committee to beformed to manage e-safety, with thefunction of developing, implementing and

A whole-schoolapproach in theeducational setting isbased on theassumption thatbullying is asystematic problemand thatinterventions need tobe directed at theentire school context.


11

The Department of Basic Education’s 2010 draft guidelines on e-safety suggest that a safe schoolcommittee be formed in each school to manage e-safety. The committee would comprise thefollowing members:

School management Network administrator IT teacher Teacher-librarian/counsellor/Life Orientation teacher School governing body representative Member of the local police service Learner representative Other appropriate specialists

The draft guidelines on e-safety also suggest that an acceptable use policy covers the following:

The school’s responsibility and rights towards ICT use The learner’s responsibility and rights towards ICT use The parent/guardian’s responsibility and rights towards ICT use The consequences if the policy is not adhered to

Source: Department of Basic Education, Guidelines on e-safety in schools: Educating towards responsible, accountable and ethicaluse of ICT in education. Draft guidelines, South Africa, 2010.

enforcing an acceptable use policy for ICTsin the school environment.72 This policywould not only outline the responsible useof such technology but would also outlinethe consequences of being in breach of thepolicy for both learners and school staff.

The policy needs to be linked to the existingcode of conduct in each school. Theguidelines further suggest that all learners,parents and educators sign the policy, andthat the policy is made visible throughoutthe school. It is also considered importantthat policies be values-based rather thanrules-based.

Monitoring and accountability

The acceptable use policy in the schooloutlines the responsibilities and rights ofeach member of the school community toensure that ICTs are used appropriately andsafely. For example, schools are responsiblefor ensuring that policies are in place so thatICTs are used positively to enhance thelearning environment, educators areresponsible for monitoring the use of ICTsand providing guidance and advice on howto deal with cyber bullying, and learners areresponsible for ensuring that their use ofICTs is in line with school policy.

In addition, parents are responsible formonitoring their child’s use of ICTs both inand out of the home, which requiresparents to be educated in order to be ableto supervise their children effectively.

Government departments at provincial,district and national level have an importantrole to play in monitoring schools and theirimplementation of the various policies.Communication between school membersresults in active collaboration and acoordinated approach to the problem.

The consequences of being in breach ofschool policy need to be adjusted accordingto the severity of the incident and the harmcaused.

In addition, individualised interventions forchildren affected by cyber bullying, eitheras victims or as bullies, need to bedeveloped to resolve conflict and mitigatenegative consequences that may result.

A whole-school approach is advantageousas it provides a framework of action thatcan be drawn on when incidents arereported. It further creates a systematicintervention that involves the cooperationof all relevant role players and raisesawareness about the importance placed onaddressing this issue.

In addition, children will be a lot moreconfident in reporting incidents when theyknow that they will be supported and thatthe issue will be dealt with efficiently.

Conclusion

Cyber bullying can have severe conse-quences for children’s well-being anddevelopment. While there are currently noempirically based responses to the issue,several successful interventions on relatedtopics, such as traditional bullying, help toshed light on possible ways of addressingthe issue. What becomes apparent is theneed for integrated, evidence-based andchild-centred approaches that take intoaccount the everyday lived experiences ofSouth African children and youth as theyuse ICTs.

For the most part, young people are awareof the risks and dangers associated withtheir online use of communication tools.The information that is lacking, and shouldbe explored, is how young people negotiatethese online risks and dangers. Childrenand youth’s voices and qualitativeexperiences are largely missing in thedevelopment of effective online safetystrategies. Such evidence is fundamental tothe development of empirically basedprevention strategies to address onlineviolence.

While important, one cannot merely relyon technological measures to keep childrensafe. Instead, technological measures needto be utilised in conjunction witheducational responses that focus oneducating not only learners, but parents,educators and principals too, on the risks ofelectronic media and the importance ofsupervision. Since schools are an importantcontext in which cyber bullying can occur, acomprehensive methodology is needed thatwill create a coordinated and collaborative

A whole-schoolapproach isadvantageous as itprovides a frameworkof action that can bedrawn on whenincidents arereported.

12


approach between the different membersof the school community.

A whole-school approach to cyber bullying– one such example of a comprehensiveprevention methodology – has three basiccomponents. First, it will educate learners,parents and school staff, as well as help tocreate a change in the tolerance andacceptance of this form of bullying. Second,the issue of cyber bullying will beincorporated into the curriculum, which willequip at-risk learners to handle situations ofcyber bullying and inform them of themechanisms in place to support them.

It will also outline clear consequences forbullies and hold each individual accountablefor their role in addressing cyber bullying.Finally, specialised interventions for victimsand bullies will be developed for children inthe school context.

These three components are essential indealing with the issue holistically. It isimportant to acknowledge the problem ofcyber bullying for children in South Africaand to be aware of the impact it can have onthem, especially since the situation is onlylikely to get worse as technology evolves.

Such partnerships between parents andschools can only yield positive benefits foryoung people’s online safety.

We need to start engaging more with youngpeople and discussing the ways theyexperience online violence, and how theycan negotiate these online spaces andprevent online victimisation.

Only then will we be able to better ensurethat young people profit from the manybenefits that technology does bring, whileminimising the potential for harm.

Technologicalmeasures need to beutilised inconjunction witheducationalresponses that focuson educating not onlylearners, but parents,educators andprincipals too, on therisks of electronicmedia and theimportance ofsupervision.


13

14


1 Berger G & Akshay S, South African mobilegeneration: A study on South African youngpeople on mobiles. UNICEF NY, Division ofCommunication, Social and Civic MediaSection, 2012. Available online: http://www.unicef.org/southafrica/SAF_resources_mobilegeneration.pdf [accessed 15 June 2012].

2 Burton P & Mutongwizo T, Inescapableviolence: Cyber bullying and electronicviolence against young people in South Africa.Centre for Justice and Crime Prevention,CJCP Issue Paper, No. 8, 2009.

3 Chetty I & Basson A, Report on internetusage and the exposure of pornography tolearners in South African schools. Researchreport for the Film and Publication Board,Houghton, South Africa, 2006.

4 William KR & Guerra NG, Prevalence andpredictors of internet bullying. Journal ofAdolescent Health, 41, S14-S21, 2007.

5 Hinduja S & Patchin JW, Cyber bullying FactSheet: What you need to know about onlineaggression. Cyber Bullying Research Center,2009. Available online: http://www.cyberbullying.us/cyber bullying_fact_sheet.pdf[accessed 6 January 2012].

6 Marwick A & Boyd, D, The Drama! Teenconflict, gossip, and bullying in networkedpublics. Draft version of paper to besubmitted at the Oxford Internet Institute’s ‘Adecade in internet time’ symposium on thedynamics of the internet and society, 22September 2011.

7 Ibid. 8 Burton & Mutongwizo, op cit.9 De Lange M & von Solms R, The importance

of raising e-Safety awareness amongstchildren in South Africa. Proceedings of the13th annual conference on world wide webapplications, 13-16 September 2011.Johannesburg, South Africa, 2011. Availableonline: http://www.zaw3.co.za/index.php/ZA-WWW/2011/paper/viewFile/423/131[accessed 10 January 2012].

10 Burton & Mutongwizo, op cit.11 De Lange & Von Solms, op cit.12 Burton & Mutongwizo, op cit.13 Patchin JW & Hinduja S, Bullies move

beyond the schoolyard: A preliminary look atcyber bullying. Youth Violence and JuvenileJustice, 4(2), pp 148-169, 2006.

14 Wade A & Beran T, Cyber bullying: The newera of bullying. Canadian Journal of SchoolPsychology, 26(44), pp 44-61, 2011.

15 Burton & Mutongwizo, op cit.16 Beger G, Hoveyda PK & Sinha A, From

‘What’s your ASLR’ to ‘Do you wanna goprivate?’. The United Nations Children’s Fund(UNICEF), 2011. Available online:http://www.unicef.org/southafrica/SAF_resources_mxitstudy.pdf [accessed 10 January2012].

17 Burton & Mutongwizo, op cit.18 Wade & Beran, op cit.19 Ibid; Smith P, Mahdavi J, Carvalho M &

Tippett N, An investigation into cyber

bullying, its forms, awareness and impact,and the relationship between age and genderin cyber bullying. A report to the Anti-Bullying Alliance, 2006. Available online:http://www.anti-bullyingalliance.org.uk/pdf/Cyber bullyingreportFINAL230106.pdf[accessed 9 January 2012].

20 Patchin & Hinduja, Bullies move beyond theschoolyard, op cit.

21 Ibid.22 Kowalski RM & Limber SP, Electronic bullying

among middle school students. Journal ofAdolescent Health, 41, S22-S30, 2007.

23 Bauman S, Cyber bullying: A virtual menace.Paper presented at the National CoalitionAgainst Bullying National Conference, 2-4November 2007. Melbourne, Australia, 2007.Available online: http://www.ncab.org.au/Assets/Files/Bauman,%20S.%20Cyberbullying.pdf [accessed 9 January 2012].

24 Kowalski & Limber, op cit.25 Ibid.26 Bauman, op cit. 27 Beran T & Li Q, Cyber harassment: A study

of a new method for an old behaviour.Journal of Educational Computing Research,32(32), pp 265-277, 2005.

28 Ybarra M, Diener-West M & Leaf P,Examining the overlap in internet harassmentand school bullying: Implications for schoolintervention. Journal of Adolescent Health,41, S42-S50, 2007.

29 Ibid, op cit.30 Patchin & Hinduja, Bullies move beyond the

schoolyard, op cit.31 Ybarra, Diener-West & Leaf, op cit.32 David-Ferdon C & Feldman Hertz M,

Electronic media, violence and adolescents:An emerging public health problem. Journalof Adolescent Health, S1-S5, 2007.

33 Ibid.34 Hinduja S & Patchin JW, Offline

consequences of online victimization: Schoolviolence and delinquency. Journal of SchoolViolence, 6(3), pp 89-112, 2007.

35 Hinduja S & Patchin JW, Cyber bullying andsuicide. Cyber Bullying Research Summary,2009. Available online: http://www.cyberbullying.us/cyber bullying_and_suicide_research_fact_sheet.pdf [accessed 9 January2012].

36 Von Solms R, Cyber bullying- A real threat.Presentation at the Centre for Justice andCrime Prevention Roundtable discussion,Southern Sun Hotel, Cape Town, 19 August2011.

37 Li Q, Cyber bullying in schools: A research ofgender differences. School PsychologyInternational, 27, pp 157-170, 2006.

38 Bhat CS, Cyber bullying: Overview andstrategies for school counsellors, guidanceofficers, and all school personnel. AustralianJournal of Guidance and Counselling, 18(1),pp 53-66, 2008.

39 Film and Publication Board. Presentation byMakola M at the Centre for Justice and Crime

Notes


15

Prevention Cyber bullying Roundtablediscussion, Southern Sun Hotel, Cape Town,19 August 2011.

40 Ibid.41 Department of Communications, Children

and ICT strategy: First draft. Attendance atconsultative workshop towards thedevelopment of the second draft. AirportGrand Hotel, Johannesburg, 29 November2011.

42 Serra SM & Venter HS, Mobile cyber-bullying: A proposal for pre-emptiveapproach to risk mitigation by employingdigital forensic readiness. Information SecuritySouth Africa, 2011. Available online:http://icsa.cs.up.ac.za/issa/2011/Proceedings/Full/99_paper.pdf [accessed 11 January2012].

43 David-Ferdon & Feldman Hertz, op cit.44 Digital Chaperones for Kids. Consumer

Reports, 66, pp 20-23, March 2001.45 Skade T, MXit to take ‘zero tolerance’

approach to cyber criminals, The Star, 14May 2010.

46 Film and Publication Board, Film andPublications Act receives support in crackingdown child predators on MXit, 26 May 2010.Available online: http://www.fpb.gov.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=171&Itemid=129 [accessed 11January 2012].

47 Internet providers block Outoilet website, TheCitizen, 24 November 2010. Availableonline: http://www.citizen.co.za/citizen/content/en/citizen/local-news?oid=153033&sn=Detail&pid=146820&Internet-providers-block-Outoilet-site [accessed 11January 2011].

48 Major networks blocking access to Outoiletchat site, Cape Times, 25 November 2010.Available online: http://www.fpb.gov.za/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_view&gid=128&tmpl=component&format=raw&Itemid=103 [accessed: 11 January2012].

49 Patchin JW. & Hinduja S, Trends in onlinesocial networking: Adolescent use ofMySpace over time. New Media and Society,12(2), pp 197-216, 2010.

50 Ibid.51 Facebook agrees to update safety measures,

Consumer Affairs.com., 5 August 2008.Available online: http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2008/05/facebook_ags.html[accessed 11 January 2012].

52 Ibid.53 Agatston PW, Kowalski R. & Limber S,

Students’ perspectives on cyber bullying.Journal of Adolescent Health, 41, S59-S60,2007.

54 Ibid.55 Film and Publication Board. Presentation by

Makola M, op cit. 56 Von Solms R & De Lange M, Children at risk

of online bullying. Mail and Guardian Online,4 February 2011. Available online:http://mg.co.za/article/2011-02-04-children-at-risk-of-online-bullying [accessed6 January2012].

57 Valcke M, Schellens T, Van Keer H & GerrartsM, Primary school children’s safe and unsafeuse of the Internet at home and at school: Anexploratory study. Computers in HumanBehavior, 2006. Available online:http://users.ugent.be/~mvalcke/CV/vecits.pdf[accessed 13 January 2012].

58 McQuade SC & Sampat N, Report on theRochester Institute of Technology Survey ofInternet and At-risk Behaviors. Undertaken bySchool Districts in Monroe County, New York,2008. Available online: http://www.rrcsei.org/RIT%20Cyber%20Survey%20Final%20Report.pdf [accessed: 9 January 2012].

59 Girl’s Net, Keep your chats exactly thatcampaign, 2009-2010. Available online:http://www.girlsnet.org.za/projects/keep-your-chats-exactly [accessed 11 January 2012].

60 NGO Pulse, Texting and Sexting: Keep yourchats safe, 2009. Available online:http://www.ngopulse.org/article/texting-and-sexting-keep-your-chats-safe [accessed 11January 2012].

61 I-Safe website. About i-Safe. Available online:http://www.isafe.org/channels/?ch=ai[accessed 11 January 2012].

62 Mishna F, Cook C, Saini M, Wu M &MacFadden R, Interventions to prevent andreduce cyber abuse of youth: A systematicreview. Research on Social Work Practice,21(1), pp 5-14, 2011.

63 Ibid.64 ‘Missing’. Office of the Massachusetts District

Attorney website. Available online:http://www.mass.gov/daplymouth/protection/missing.html [accessed 11 January 2012].

65 PR Newswire, New game for kids 8 to 12teaches them how to stay safe on theinternet, 2011. Available online:http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/new-game-teaches-kids-8-to-12-how-to-stay-safe-on-the-internet-as-they-head-back-to-school-129721458.html[accessed 11 January 2012].

66 Ibid.67 Mishna et al, op cit.68 Ibid.69 Ibid.70 Chetty I & Basson A, Report on internet

usage and the exposure of pornography tolearners in South African schools. Film andPublication Board Research Report, 2006.Available online: http://www.info.gov.za/view/DownloadFileAction?id=81355[accessed 16 April 2012].

71 Smith PK & Ananiadou K, The effectivenessof whole-school anti-bullying programs: Asynthesis of evaluation research. SchoolPsychology Review, 33(4), pp 547-560, 2004.

72 Department of Basic Education, Guidelineson e-safety in schools: Educating towardsresponsible, accountable and ethical use ofICT in education. Draft guidelines, SouthAfrica, 2010.

16


The Centre for Justice and Crime Prevention(CJCP) is dedicated to developing, informingand promoting innovative evidence-basedcrime prevention focused on the groupsidentified as being vulnerable tovictimisation or offending. The CJCP doesthis by:

• conducting rigorous research into issuesof relevance to policy makers, publicservice officials, development partnersand crime prevention practitioners;

• facilitating the implementation of crimeprevention projects;

• providing sector-specific and accreditedtraining in crime prevention for policymakers, public sector officials and non-governmental organisation practitioners;and

• disseminating the results of its researchand lessons learned to relevantaudiences.

The proliferation of information andcommunication technologies (ITCs) over thepast few years has altered our socialenvironments and has in many ways directedour social interactions. Young people leadthe way in the daily use of ICT tools.Although beneficial, ICTs have inadvertentlyopened up new avenues for violence andvictimisation against the country’s mostvulnerable, i.e. children and youth.

While there is a dearth of literature on thetopic, this paper draws on the data availableto demonstrate the need for an evidence-based child-centred approach that takesinto consideration children’s everyday livedexperiences in their use of ICTs to safe-guard them against online dangers.

In response to the negative effects of cyberaggression the ICT industry has beencompelled to develop and implementstrategies to protect young users. Blockingand filtering software is one of the primarymeans developed to keep children fromaccessing harmful content online. While ofparamount importance, the sole reliance onthis software is insufficient in addressing theproblem.

The paper argues for schools as an importantentry point in cyber bullying preventionsince they provide the ideal context in whichto bring together technological measures aswell as education awareness initiativesinvolving most of the role players responsiblefor protecting children and youth.

CJCP mission

About this paper

© 2012, Centre for Justice and Crime Prevention ISSN: 1819-2661

The opinions expressed in this paper do not necessarilyreflect those of the Centre, its Trustees, members of theAdvisory Board or donors. Authors contribute to CJCPpublications in their personal capacity.

Published by the Centre for Justice and Crime PreventionPO Box 44702 Claremont 7735 SOUTH AFRICATel: +27 (0)21 447 1818 Fax: +27 (0)21 447 0373 Email: [email protected]

Editing & layout: Tyrus Text and Design [email protected]

About theauthors

At the time of writing,Maša Popovac was aresearcher at the CJCP.She holds a master’sdegree in ResearchPsychology from theUniversity of theWestern Cape.

Lezanne Leoschut isdirector of research atthe CJCP and hasundertaken research inSouth Africa, Namibia,Mozambique, Kenya,South Sudan and theDemocratic Republicof Congo. She holds amaster’s degree inResearch Psychologyfrom the University ofthe Western Cape.

cyber bullying in south africa: impact and...

Documents