Realizing the Hidden Fear
CYBERSTALKING
Overview
 Background of Cyberstalking
 Explanation of a Cyberstalker
 Ex. Facebook
 Federal Legislation
 Prevention
 Ethical Analysis
Background of Cyberstalking
 Cyberstalking - is the use of the Internet or other electronic
means to stalk someone.
 Use this term interchangeably with online harassment or online
abuse
 Paul Bocij states that CyberAngels has one of the most
useful definitions:
 When identifying cyberstalking “in the field,” particularly when
considering whether to report it to any kind of legal authority, the
following features or combinations of features can be considered
to characterize a true stalking situation: Malice, Premeditation,
Repetition, Distress, Obsession, Vendetta, No Legitimate
Purpose, Personally Directed, Disregarded Warnings to Stop,
Harassment, and Threats
Background Continued
 Victims of cyberstalking might object to the
definition from CyberAngels.
 Disregarded Warnings to Stop
 You cannot claim that you are being a victim of
cyberstalking if you have never said “Leave me
alone” to the stalker. One standard defense
used by stalkers in court is to claim that you
were encouraging their attentions and that you
never said “NO.”
Background Continued…
 The majority of cyberstalkers are men and
the majority of their victims are women
but…..
 Jane A. Hitchcock, president of WHOA
says, “The most surprising thing we've seen
is the rise in female cyberstalkers - this
increased from 27% in 2000 to 35% in
2002 to 38% in 2003.”
Background Continued……
 According to the
Working to Halt Online
Abuse (WHOA) from
2000 to 2006, out of the
total cases, 2036, of
cyberstalking….
Explanation of a Cyberstalker
 P.E. Mullen describes six categories of
cyberstalkers.
 The four most important types are:




Rejected Stalker
Resentful Stalker
Predatory Stalker
Intimacy Stalker
Rejected Stalker
 Most common, persistent, and intrusive
 Obsessed with someone who is a former
romantic partner or friend, and who has
ended their relationship, or indicates that he
or she intends to end the relationship.
Resentful Stalker
 Looking for revenge against someone who
has upset them--it could be someone known
to the stalker or a complete stranger.
 Their behaviors are meant to frighten and distress
the victim
Predatory Stalker
 Least common
 Are a classic sexual predator whose plan is to
physically or sexually attack the victim.
 Their motivated purely by the desire for
sexual gratification and power over their
victim
Intimacy Stalker
 They seeks to establish an intimate, loving
relationship with their victim.
 The victim and himself were “meant to be
together.”
 These types of people think that the victim
owes them love and affection because of all
the time and effort it took for the stalker to
stalk them.
Example
 Is Facebook really private?
 News Feed and Mini-Feed
 Tracks activities of a user’s friends
 Highlights recent social activity
 Invasion of privacy has made critics bring
up the idea that Facebook facilitated
online stalking.
Federal Legislation
 “In 1990, California became the first state
to enact a specific stalking law.” [1]
 An Important Cyberstalking Federal Law:
 18 U.S.C. 875(c). Under 18 U.S.C. 875(c), it
is a federal crime to transmit any
communication in interstate or foreign
commerce containing a threat to injure the
person of another.
Federal Legislation Cont.
 Harry Valetk
 Consider that Arizona’s stalking statute only
prohibits credible threats of violence against
the victim, whereas California and South
Carolina prohibits threats against the victim’s
immediate family. In Maine, a stalker’s course
of conduct can constitute an implied threat.
But what legal standard applies to a
cyberstalker from Maine, terrorizing an
Arizona resident, using a California ISP?
Prevention
 Rule of Thumb:
 NEVER GIVE ANY PERSONAL INFORMATION
ACROSS THE INTERNET!
 The more active a person is on the Internet, the
more information becomes available to others to
view about you.
Prevention Cont.
 Don’t share personal information online.
 Don’t fill out profiles or include personal





information on websites.
Don’t use a gender specific or provocative
screen name or e-mail address.
Don’t flirt or start an argument online unless
you are prepared for the consequences.
Don’t share your password with anyone.
When cyberdating, set up a special e-mail
address.
Use a good anti-virus program and update
daily.
Ethical Analysis
 Kantianism – decipher what is right or wrong
 First Categorical Imperative – ex. Facebook
 General Rule - I may use the new features of
Facebook to stalk other people.
 Universalize Rule – Everyone uses Facebook’s new
features to stalk other people.
 All society has done is create a website that helps
people “stalk” others with the intention of causing
them harm
 Thus, unethical.
Ethical Analysis Cont.
 Act Utilitarianism – based on the Principle of
Utility.
 Is it ethical for parents to be able to stalk their
children through the use of electronic means?
 Sounds ridiculous right?
 Cell Phones
 Motor Vehicles
 GPS
Ethical Analysis Cont..
 Internet software - track
their teenager's Internet
use remotely and can
copy instant messages
and online chats into emails that will be sent to
parents.
 Parents have the ability
for the first time to keep
constant tabs on their
rebellious teens or their
loyal teens.
 Thus, ethical.