Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Teachers College Educational ...

A Difficult Balance: Regulating Cyberbullying in the Age of Social
Media
Dino Sossi,
Teachers College, Columbia University, 525 West 120 th Street, New York, NY, 10027,
Email: dds2130@columbia.edu
Abstract: Online environments have promoted interconnectivity in ways that were once
unimaginable. Unfortunately, hate speech, intimidation and harassment have made the
dreamlike promise of online worlds devolve into an ongoing nightmare for some students
who feel they cannot escape. Even the presumably safe environment of the home can
become tainted by hostile words mediated online. This paper examines different attempts
to regulate cyberbullying within educational environments. It focuses on the jurisdictions
of New York State and New York City. To contextualize this issue, the paper also reviews
common law precedent as a guide to possible future legal developments. Finally, related
non-legal issues such as policies created at the local level as well as difficulties youth
have distinguishing between real and virtual environments are considered. The paper
concludes that cyberbullying laws/policies are diverse in their protection and textured in
their balancing of the competing interests of the aggrieved and alleged perpetrators.
Introduction
Cyberbullying laws/policies are generally well-crafted in their conception of what constitutes this problem,
diverse in protection and textured in balancing competing interests of the aggrieved and alleged
perpetrators. Given the harm caused by cyberbullying and the responsibility of governments and schools
to provide safe environments, these measures favoring the rights of alleged victims appears just given the
breadth of the problem and the tremendous mental/social/emotional toll it exacts.
Regulation
New York City (NYC)
The NYC Department of Education Disciplinary Code (2010) appears to be a good faith attempt to
balance the interests of the aggrieved and the alleged perpetrator. With respect to “bullying,” the Code
states “When a student or group of students engages in bias-based bullying, intimidation or harassment
of another student or group of students, both the victim and the student who engages in this behavior
should be referred to separate appropriate counseling, support and education services provided by
school staff or a community-based agency. Neither mediation nor conflict resolution are, under any
circumstances, appropriate interventions for bias-based bullying, intimidation or harassment” (2010, p. 5).
It appears both parties are dealt with constructively and separately.
Regardless of the intensity of the bullying, both parties are separated and “[n]either mediation nor conflict
resolution” are engaged in (Code, 2010, p. 5). Although in the short-term this appears prudent, what
about disruption caused by the absence of mediation or conflict resolution. Assuming both parties remain
at the same school, without adult-supervised communication, will there be a resolution of the underlying
problem that motivated the abuse?
Specific protection from “cyberbullying” appears later in the Code - “Engaging in intimidating and bullying
behavior through electronic communication, such as texting, e-mail, instant messaging, etc.” (2010, p.
15). Section A37 protects K-5th Grade students (2010, p. 15), B40 protects Grades 6-12 (2010, p. 22)
with identical language - “Engaging in intimidating and bullying behavior, including cyber-bullying —
threatening, stalking or seeking to coerce or compel a student or staff member to do something; engaging
in verbal or physical conduct that threatens another with harm; taunting and/or intimidation including
through the use of epithets or slurs involving actual or perceived race, ethnicity, color, national origin,
citizenship/immigration status, religion, religious practices, gender, gender identity, gender expression,
sexual orientation or disability” (2010, p. 15 and 22). Students or staff subjected to these enumerated
types of discrimination through electronic means would be afforded similar protections against this type of
64