Younger folks need justice for dangerous social media habits, extra motion from platforms

University of Michigan

We saw it recently: social media’s response to bad behavior has been to ban offenders from platforms for a short time and in some cases permanently, but young people from a University of Michigan study said they want a wider range of responses both include penal and redress means.

The study by Sarita Schoenebeck, associate professor at the UM School of Information, and colleagues shows that 62% of teens and young adults ages 14 to 24 prefer an excuse for online harassment by a perpetrator, followed by deletion of content , social support and the prohibition of perpetrators. Of those who want an apology, 29% want it to be private, versus 14% who want a public statement of regret.

The researchers’ text-based survey of 832 young people also found that 41% did not trust social media to get a fair solution, compared to 20% who trusted companies to handle harassment cases.

“The reactions of young people probably reflect the changing tides, as the general population in the US currently views social media companies – with a mixture of uncertainty, suspicion and concern,” said Schönebeck. “Given these reactions, it is not surprising that young people are also exposed to this type of suspicion.

“Young people are growing up at a time when they are very online and many will face criticism of the economy, capitalism, social inequalities and other issues. They understand that social media companies are for profit and this could conflict with companies’ ability or desire to provide safe and equitable experiences. “

Schönebeck said young people trusted Instagram the most, followed by Facebook and then Twitter.

Social media platforms have community guidelines based on automated systems and human reports for content moderation. If a violation is found, the content is usually removed and the perpetrator is warned and can be banned. However, little remedy is given to the goal of the message in question.

Previous research has compared the social media response to the criminal justice system, where the perpetrator is punished but the victim does not get a real sense of justice. This had led the researchers to suggest that a better response to online harassment could include restorative justice, emphasizing responsibility for the crime and redress for the target.

The researchers define online harassment as behaviors designed to threaten, harm, or degrade another person or group and lead to negative outcomes, including poor health, relationships and job security, and a deterioration in civil discourse, justice and general well-being.

“In all studies we see that there are significant differences in the type of damage and the severity of the damage that people suffer when they are online,” said Schönebeck. “We also see differences in their preferences for how companies respond to this damage.”

The researchers say that when it comes to dealing with online harassment, companies take consistent approaches that ignore the diverse needs and preferences of individuals and communities.

“I think it’s time to rethink many of the basic premises of social media,” said Schönebeck. “This could include creating regulations aimed at reducing harm and increasing wellbeing, or a healthier, publicly funded ecosphere of smaller social media platforms that create more opportunities for online participation, or more creative approaches to design Prioritize justice, healing, slowing down, community accountability, and other alternative approaches to people being together in common spaces. “

Other UM writers include: Carol Scott, Emma Hurley, Tammy Chang, and Ellen Selkie.

/ Public release. This material is from the original organization and may be of a temporal nature and may be edited for clarity, style and length. Full view here.