Connect with us

Dharun Ravi And Liam Stacey: Online Bias Intimidation Explored

Published

on

On May 21, 2012 we learned that Dharun Ravi was found guilty by a court in New Jersey of invasion of privacy, hindering apprehension, witness tampering, and four counts of bias intimidation following the suicide of Tyler Clementi, a gay student he had secretly filmed kissing another man in his dorm room at Rutgers University. Ravi was sentenced to 30 days in prison, three years probation, 300 hours community service, a $10,000 fine, and counseling on cyberbullying and alternative lifestyles. While the story of Tyler Clementi and Dharun Ravi has been rehearsed several times in the media, and while we still have to hear Ravi make an apology that acknowledges his part in a series of events that resulted in a talent young man taking his own life, the question I wish to reflect upon here is, quite simply, what turned this popular and outgoing student into a convicted felon?

In the UK, we have several laws which protect citizens from harassment and have also recently seen such laws put into effect. On March 17, 2012, Bolton Wanderers soccer star, Fabrice Muamba suffered a cardiac arrest during a quarter-final match against rival soccer club Tottenham Hotspur. While doctors fought to save his life on the pitch, Swansea University student, Liam Stacey, posted a series of drunken tweets which were considered grossly offensive and racist. Realising his error (and this bears some remarkable similarities to Ravi’s apology that occurred moments before Clementi’s death), Stacey apologised profusely and claimed that his Twitter account had been hacked and that he had not posted the comments. Stacey eventually pleased guilty to a public order offence and was sentenced to 56 days in prison. Like Dharun Ravi, this was a young man with no history of hate, an educated and well-liked individual who had no reason to embark upon a campaign of racism against a soccer player who had come so close to death.

In trying to understand what turns these young men into criminals, it is important to understand the drivers that encouraged them to express, in public forums, sentiments that ultimately brought them to the attention of law enforcement.

In my research looking at the reasons why young people bully others, I have explored the issue of bias intimidation and looked at the factors that anger those we call “bullies.” Ultimately I found that issues of “difference,” judgements about the relative “value” of those who are different, and expectations or assumptions about those people are key drivers in someone becoming a “bully.” But, what do these three things have in common with Dharun Ravi and Liam Stacey? At face value both chose to abuse people who were different from themselves: Tyler Clementi was “gay” and Fabrice Muamba was “Black.” Perhaps Ravi and Stacey believed that the men they abused were easy targets, and their public humiliation was in some way less meaningful than if it had been a heterosexual room-mate or white soccer star. However what we do know is that both – despite having no overt homophobic or racist attitudes – engaged in behaviours that led them to prison.

So what happened to these two bright young men? In the first instance both were interacting online with others; they fed off those who responded positively and ignored or reacted angrily to those who responded negatively. Secondly, they were engaged in what is, in effect, a solitary activity, with few if any social cues to moderate their behavior. In Ravi’s case, Molly Wei was a willing confederate and thus did not provide Ravi with any physical cues (as far as we know) that would make him think twice. Much more important in understanding their behavior is both Ravi’s and Stacey’s mind set which governed the way they interacted with others online. It was, in essence, solipsistic. Solipsism is a philosophical idea that only one’s own mind truly exists, and that anything existing outside of one’s own mind is questionable at best, or non-existent. In other words, the only “truth” comes from one’s own perspective.

As we become increasingly reliant upon technology in our daily lives, are we too becoming the embodiment of solipsism, acknowledging only our own existence and devaluing or rendering irrelevant the beliefs, attitudes and existence of others? Is this the trap that Dharun Ravi and Liam Stacey fell into? Did they feed off the frenzy of positive reinforcement and ignore those who sought to moderate their behavior? In face-to-face interactions their behavior would have been criticised by their peers, but online we can always find like-minded individuals who are willing, often through the veil of anonymity or pseudonymity, to encourages us to more extremes of behavior. Similarly we should also consider, as social psychologists do, how much a person’s explicit attitudes correlate with his or her implicit ones? Are we more likely to express those implicit attitudes online because our interactions with others are disembodied and thus not “real” (see image above)?

Just how “real” was the hurt experienced by Tyler Clementi in Dharun Ravi’s eyes? Did he truly understand that something watched on a screen, or communicated via Twitter, was not another person’s reality? Did a drunken student, watching a soccer match on a TV really understand how his words could not only hurt the family of Fabrice Muamba but shock online and offline communities alike? Both Ravi and Stacey have lives to build after their sentences, alas Tyler Clementi does not. Fabrice Muamba is well on the road to recovery following his cardiac arrest. We may never fully understand why Ravi and Stacey did what they did and whether they their words and actions online are true reflections of their feelings towards others they perceive to be different. We do know that, despite its prevalence in our daily lives, we do not fully understand how human interact with technology.

 

Ian Rivers is Professor of Human Development at Brunel University, London. He is the author of ‘Homophobic Bullying: Research and Theoretical Perspectives’ (Oxford, 2011), and has researched issues of discrimination in LGBT communities, particularly among children and young people, for nearly two decades.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Dr Oz: Americans Must ‘Earn the Right’ to Be on Medicaid

Published

7 hours ago

on

June 17, 2025

By

Dr. Mehmet Oz, Administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, is promoting President Donald Trump’s sweeping and highly controversial budget legislation by claiming it will guarantee access to the social safety net for the “right” people. He argues that, under the GOP plan, individuals will need to “earn” the right to use Medicaid—suggesting that many current recipients are capable of working but choose not to.

Almost half (47.9%) of Medicaid users under 65 are children aged 0 to 18, according to KFF, the well-known nonpartisan health policy organization. Six in ten families accessing Medicaid have at least one family member who works full time.

In a nationalistic plea, Dr. Oz, on Tuesday, standing with Senate Republicans, told people using the service to “demonstrate that you are trying your hardest to help this country be greater, by at least trying to fill some of the jobs that we have open.”

READ MORE: ‘Unconditional Surrender’: Trump’s Iran Posts Trigger Fears U.S. Is Entering the War

America has a near-historically low unemployment rate of 4.2%.

“By doing that, you earn the right to be on Medicaid,” Oz added.

Dr. Oz also praised the Republicans’ legislation that would gut at least $800 billion from Medicaid, saying it is “the most ambitious health reform bill ever” and will “curb the growth of Medicaid.”

During his confirmation hearing, Dr. Oz said, “I think it is our patriotic duty to be healthy.”

Earlier this month, Dr. Oz faced widespread criticism for telling Medicaid users, “Go out there, do the entry-level jobs, get into the workforce. Prove that you matter, get agency into your own life.”

His statements suggest a possible lack of awareness of the statistics and circumstances affecting the very people he was nominated to serve.

On June 5, Dr. Oz told those who are not willing to go back to work, volunteer, or take care of a loved one, that “we are going to ask you to do something else. Go on the exchange, or get a job and get onto regular commercial insurance. But we are not going to continue to pay for Medicaid for those audiences.”

Nearly half of employers—about 46%—do not offer health insurance at all. Most exclude part-time workers from coverage. Gig workers typically receive no health benefits through their jobs. And many seasonal workers struggle to meet the monthly hour thresholds needed to remain eligible for Medicaid.

READ MORE: Tapper Tells Ex-Viewer Trump’s Behavior Is More About ‘Personality’ Than Cognitive Decline

Under the current bill, an estimated 10.9 million more people will become uninsured, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

Once again, critics are blasting Dr. Oz.

“Just want to point out, Dr. Oz has a networth of $200+ million and he is telling a single person who makes a maximum of $21,597 they don’t deserve healthcare,” noted Monique Stanton, President and CEO of Michigan League for Public Policy.

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Stephen Miller Gets His Way’: Trump Slammed for Farm Workers Flip-Flop

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

News

‘Unconditional Surrender’: Trump’s Iran Posts Trigger Fears U.S. Is Entering the War

Published

10 hours ago

on

June 17, 2025

By

President Donald Trump’s latest social media posts have many wondering if the United States is entering the war against Iran, and if so, what is his strategy?

At 11:55 AM, Trump posted to Truth Social, “We now have complete and total control of the skies over Iran. Iran had good sky trackers and other defensive equipment, and plenty of it, but it doesn’t compare to American made, conceived, and manufactured ‘stuff.’ Nobody does it better than the good ol’ USA.”

Minutes later, at 12:19 PM, he added, “We know exactly where the so-called ‘Supreme Leader’ is hiding. He is an easy target, but is safe there – We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now. But we don’t want missiles shot at civilians, or American soldiers. Our patience is wearing thin. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”

And then, at 12:22 PM, he demanded, “UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!”

READ MORE: Tapper Tells Ex-Viewer Trump’s Behavior Is More About ‘Personality’ Than Cognitive Decline

To that last post, political scientist Ian Bremmer responded, “Hard to pull back from this.”

Barbara Starr, the longtime, now former CNN national security reporter, responded to Trump’s posts:

“Sometimes you want ambiguity some officials might say. But when it comes to nukes, clarity is vital to avoid catastrophic miscalculation. So there is no other conclusion…Trump is deep into a Middle East war. Just my opinion of course.”

Pointing to Trump’s social media posts, attorney George Conway, a top Trump critic, wrote: “Remember this moment. @realDonaldTrump is reveling in the narcisisstic [sic] and sadistic thrill of threatening others with violent death. He will start to crave that feeling.”

The Bulwark’s Sam Stein, also pointing to Trump’s posts, observed, “Just tweeting through the launch of another Middle East war. Treating the potential bombing of Iran by the U.S. as an episode of reality TV.”

Former Obama National Security Council staffer Tommy Vietor said of Trump’s posts, “The President of the United States can’t say s— like this and then pretend we are not an active participant in this war.”

Trump convened a meeting with his National Security Council (NSC), slated for 1 PM in the Situation Room. Notably, Vice President JD Vance, who ran defense hours earlier for Trump over the possibility of entering the war, was reportedly not in attendance.

“U.S. officials said Trump is seriously considering joining the war and launching a U.S. strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities, especially its underground uranium enrichment facility in Fordow,” Axios reported.

Former Obama chief campaign strategist and Senior Advisor to the President, David Axelrod, laid out the scene:

“Amazing that in a matter of days we’ve gone from ‘this is not our operation’ to ‘we own the skies over Iran.’ With these proclamations, we also now ‘own’ what WAS an Israeli assault. We’re thoroughly in it now. What is the strategy here?”

READ MORE: ‘Stephen Miller Gets His Way’: Trump Slammed for Farm Workers Flip-Flop

CNN reports that “President Donald Trump is growing increasingly warm to using US military assets to strike Iranian nuclear facilities and souring on the idea of a diplomatic solution to end Tehran’s escalating conflict with Israel, two officials familiar with the ongoing discussions told CNN.”

U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren noted that Congress, not the President, has the authority to declare war:

“Allowing Netanyahu to drag us into another endless war in the Middle East would be a catastrophic error by President Trump and Republicans in Congress. Every lawmaker needs to ring the alarm against U.S. military action in Iran. Only Congress has the authority to declare war.”

Many, including BBC Verify senior journalist Shayan Sardarizadeh, are pointing to Trump’s use of the word “we” in his posts. Military.com’s Pentagon reporter Konstantin Toropin suggested it would be difficult to not see the U.S. as involved.

“President Trump is using the term ‘we’ when referring to Israeli attacks on Iran, including a potential strike on the supreme leader, and calling for ‘unconditional surrender,” Sardarizadeh wrote.

“…and yet the US is not a participant in this conflict?” posited Toropin.

Pointing to polling that shows 60% of Americans oppose U.S. military becoming involved in the Israel-Iran war, former U.S. Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul wrote: “If Trump is serious about bombing Iran, he’d be wise to declassify intelligence showing that the threat of Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon is imminent. The American people are not just going to take him at his word. Been there; done that (in 2003).”

Former Clinton Cabinet Secretary Robert Reich noted, “For Trump, a military conflict with Iran would distract from:
-Sinking poll numbers
-A devastating (and unpopular) budget bill
-Harmful trade wars
-Unleashing the military on American soil
-Millions of people protesting his authoritarianism
We must remain on high alert.”

U.S. Senator Ruben Gallego (D-AZ) wrote: “Having seen some of the worst fighting of the Iraq War, I know the devastating toll of rushing into a conflict. I came back from Iraq angry at our government for sending us out to an illegal war. We must learn from our mistakes: no president should unilaterally deploy troops to the Middle East. Congress, not the President, has the sole power to declare war.

READ MORE: ‘Buffoonery’: New Senate GOP Budget Slashes Medicaid Even Deeper Than House Bill

Continue Reading

News

Tapper Tells Ex-Viewer Trump’s Behavior Is More About ‘Personality’ Than Cognitive Decline

Published

12 hours ago

on

June 17, 2025

By

A former viewer of Jake Tapper’s CNN program, expressing deep disappointment, publicly criticized the veteran journalist for publishing a book that portrays President Joe Biden in an unflattering light and alleges cognitive decline. The viewer argued that Tapper should instead be scrutinizing what she described as the “erratic” behavior of President Donald Trump. Tapper defended his stance, attributing Trump’s behavior more to “personality” traits than to “cognitive decline.”

On a C-SPAN call-in show (video below), the viewer, identified by the name “Sarah,” told Tapper, “right now, I really don’t like you.”

She accused Tapper of doing a “disservice” to President Biden, “and also to the American people.”

READ MORE: ‘Stephen Miller Gets His Way’: Trump Slammed for Farm Workers Flip-Flop

“When are you going to examine, you know, what is going on with Trump?” she asked.

“Joe Biden conducted himself for four years, taking care of the United States. He took meetings, he went overseas, he negotiated with other leaders.”

But President Trump, Sarah said, “has been pure chaos, which indicates to me that there is something wrong with him.”

“We will never get a straight answer on his medical examination. What medication he is on,” she charged.

She also accused Tapper of going after President Biden “with a vengeance,” and expressed that she is “very disappointed” in the reporter.

“I enjoyed watching your show, but not anymore,” she added.

The caller urged Tapper to write another book, focused on President Trump, “and how erratic and what he is doing—calling out the National Guard, the Marines and everybody. When has a President ever done that? It is pure erratic.”

Tapper, who sat through the 75-seconds of criticism largely stone-faced, responded by saying that on CNN he does cover President Donald Trump “every day for two hours, every day from 5 to 7 Eastern.”

READ MORE: ‘Buffoonery’: New Senate GOP Budget Slashes Medicaid Even Deeper Than House Bill

He insisted that they “cover all the things you talk about, in terms of the president, the current president’s behavior. We have covered times that he has confused Nancy Pelosi with Nikki Haley.”

But Tapper appeared to disagree with Sarah’s perception that “there is something wrong” with President Trump. Despite his age (79) and reported lifestyle, Tapper insisted, “I think some of the questions about President Trump’s behavior have more to do with personality than with cognitive decline.”

“But obviously,” he continued, “whatever lessons we’ve learned from covering President Biden, we would apply to any politician, any future politician or present politician.”

So I’m sorry, if I’m disappointing you by covering President Biden, but journalists, we are supposed to cover stories that we think the American people have a right to know, that we think will enhance their understanding of how the country’s run, and I think Alex and I are proud of this book.”

Watch the video below or at this link.

RELATED: ‘Spending Like Drunken Sailors’: ICE $1B Over Budget Ahead of New Trump Deportation Surge

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.