Dylann Roof and Google

Though this article brought up good points on biases that can occur on Google search, I disagreed with its entire suggestion or implication that Google search was responsible for Dylann Roof's hate crimes. To start off, Dylann Roof suffered a variety of mental illnesses such as "social anxiety disorder, mixed substance abuse disorder, schizoid personality disorder, depression by history, and a possible Autistic spectrum disorder," which this article completely failed to mention (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/02/us/dylann-roof-charleston-killing-mental.html?_r=0

). To completely ignore such vital information that played a big part in Roof's killing of nine black lives, suggesting that Google's search results were the catalyst, seems ridiculous. This is because no person in a stable state of mental health would commit such crimes just because he read about it on the Internet. Rather than blaming Google for showing Roof such results that influenced his behavior, the blame is entirely on Roof alone, possibly as well as his guardians who failed to take precautionary acts to ensure that their mentally ill child was not taking part in any dangerous acts in his unstable state of mind.

Nonetheless, it cannot be denied that Google may present bias in what it displays as primary suggestions. For example, during the 2016 presidential election, studies and reports showed that Google searches may have been highly biased, in favor of Hilary Clinton (http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-09-12/google-bias). For example, when "hilary clinton cri-" was typed into the search, suggestions such as "hilary clinton crime reform" or "hilary clinton crisis" popped up, instead of "hilary clinton crimes" which were displayed in other search engines such as Bing or Yahoo. In response, Google defended itself claiming that the "autocomplete algorithm purposefully avoids suggesting offensive words in conjunction with any person's name," as a response to people's criticism that negative and offensive suggestions were displayed after typing in a name. (http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2016/06/10/google-says-search-isnt-biased-toward-hillary-clinton/85725014/). Still, studies have shown that Google search results may lean liberal on topics such as abortion, gun control, homosexuality, and politics (https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/family-relationships/googles-search-results-may-have-a-liberal-bias/vp-AAkCc0A). 

So what can be done about this? Should every search engine develop an algorithm that will suggest completely neutral, unbiased information each time? While this may be ideal, I do not consider this to be a realistic solution. Instead, I believe that when doing research or leaning about a new topic, everybody should learn to approach the subject from an unbiased standpoint, learning about all the different sides to it first, and then developing an opinion about it. While individuals must train and practice in doing so, which also may not be a realistic solution since every person using the internet may not have access to such training, in a world where there is so much biased information on (and off) the Internet, it is better to take responsibility for our educated actions instead of being lazy and forming our opinions on the first bit of information presented to us. 

Facebook Trolls

One large factor in Facebook trolling I believe that this article failed to mention is the large group of common people who support the trolls by feeding their insensitive comments or pages with "likes" or "lol's." While the trolls of Facebook are indeed primarily held responsible for their actions, I also believe that they would not be so popular and garner so much attention if nobody encouraged their behavior. As the article briefly mentions, this reflects a greater problem in our generation of internet users where many become desensitized and sociopathic behind a screen where nobody can judge them up front. In a way, it may be so that these silent supporters are more dangerous than the trolls themselves as it is more difficult to target individuals of a large group who click the "like" button on a troll comment rather than the sole writer of that comment himself. Like many digital media ethical issues, this presents a gray area of who is truly responsible for troll behavior: the trolling individual, or the masses who fuel and encourage his behavior.  Nonetheless, I agree wholeheartedly that RIP trolling is harmful and insensitive behavior that can cause serious emotional damage to family members and friends of the deceased.

While it is difficult to shut down every single troll account there is on Facebook, I do believe that, as the article mentions, it is necessary to monitor for trolling behavior and stop as much as possible. Along with not giving troll pages the attention they do not deserve in order to prevent them from getting bigger, it may help for Facebook to implement a stricter policy regarding who can make a Facebook account. One way would be for Facebook to require legitimate identification before creating a page or an account to ensure that the user is indeed a real person and who he says he is. Through this method, trolling may be significantly diminished.







http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20160318-what-is-the-best-way-to-stop-internet-trolls


http://time.com/4457110/internet-trolls/

http://99u.com/articles/25151/dont-feed-the-haters-the-confessions-of-a-former-troll

A Rape in Cyberspace

Upon my first read of this article, bluntly speaking, I thought that LambdaMOO was stupid, its users were stupid, and that the victims describing their post traumatic stress about being virtually raped were overreacting since the entire world was a fake world constructed by a series of code that they could always exit whenever they wanted to. As a person who has never been into video games or anything of that matter, it is always hard for me to empathize with and take seriously anything that is not in the real world. However, when I came across Dibbell's point that "Rape can occur without any physical pain or damage," and that "it must be classed as a crime against the mind," I realized how close-minded I was and how large and serious of an issue this VR rape incident was. What helped me come to this realization was comparing this VR rape incident to videos on the internet or certain scenes in films. When I watch a film, I come to identify myself as the main character. If that main character is raped, I would feel mentally traumatized, even though nothing happened to my physical body. In the same way, because the users of these avatars created a digital character of themselves, it makes sense that they would feel traumatic stress if unwanted, unpredicted assault happened to them. 

This article brought up a good point regarding where to draw the line between real life and virtual life. While the users of these avatars who became victims of virtual rape were affected mentally in the real world, the only punishment the user of Mr. Bungle received was to be temporarily kicked out of the virtual world, which he was able to access again as Dr. Jest. I do not think that this was a fair punishment since the extent to which the victims suffered far outweighed the severity of Mr. Bungle's punishment. Because Mr. Bungle's actions had an effect in the real world, I believe that a fair solution to this incident would be to assign him a punishment in the real world as well. For example, taking a look at online bullying, even though the bullying is taking place in a digital world behind screens, bullies are still punished and convicted in real life. Similarly, even though Mr. Bungle's assaults took place in a virtual world, he should still have been convicted for mental/emotional abuse. Perhaps this was not the case because this incident occurred more than two decades ago, but I believe that this incident will lead creators of this technology in a safer direction. 



https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/26/virtual-reality-sexual-harassment-online-groping-quivr

http://www.springtideresources.org/resource/can-emotional-abuse-be-criminal-act

https://www.privacyrights.org/consumer-guides/online-harassment-cyberstalking