If you want to learn something about the impact of social media, you might try discerning fact from fiction in The Social Network, a new movie that purports to tell the story of how Facebook came into existence.
But if what you’re looking for is a quick primer on the real-life impact that social media have had on our society, you don’t have to spend two hours in a dark theater surrounded by people who may not be your (Facebook) friends. Just type the names “Tyler Clementi” and “Anthony Graber” into a search engine.
What happened to Clementi and Graber is a troubling commentary on an individual’s expectation of privacy in a world overrun by technology that all too often peers behind the curtains of our lives. But their stories also are proof of just how much social media have reinforced Marshall McLuhan’s prophesy that “the medium is the message.”
It is worth noting that if this performance had been between and male and female student, the act then being broadcast, there would have been no uproar at all and not merely because neither committed suicide but because such public airings would be unexceptional and those photographed would have been pleased – even if they had had no idea that they were being mini-cammed. And the more I read about this, the less convinced I am that the airing was the primary cause of the suicide. My point is, however, that we can not have it both ways. Privacy does not exist simply because someone wishes to be left alone and others do not. Either it is clear in law as a principle or it is not. Or does culture trump law in such cases, in which case we have a very different view of privacy, one that allows such recordings for an interested public. The row the students are causing is largely political correctness because they want in on a cause celebre. Do you suppo0se they themselves are not guilty of using the internet or other technology to make a mockery or “privacy? Larry
#1- Regardless of whether it was male/male, female/female, or male/female, it is still *wrong* to invade someone’s privacy and broadcast it over the internet. I don’t share your assertion that male/female couples would be “pleased” to see an unpermitted and secret internet broadcast of their sexual encounters.
The invasion of privacy occurred regardless of whether the student took his life, and regardless of who the victim is, they have a legitimate expectation of privacy behind closed doors. This isn’t a “gay” thing, this is an “invasion of privacy” thing.
A certain young lady at a certain college some years ago was known for her proclivity to “go to bed with anyone.” She also had a certain piercing scream…
Naturally, this got recorded surreptitiously (on an Edison wax cylinder, of course), and that recording got played at many a frat party to ribald laughter. I don’t know if she knew about it, and I’ve wondered if she ever found out (or cared) what was being said about her behind her back.
I’m also reminded of the shower scene prank in the M*A*S*H movie. (Remember? Ol’ Hot Lips wasn’t really a blonde.)
Mr. Clementi apparently knew that he had been recorded once, yet he “did it” again a few days later, apparently without having the insight to disable or put a sheet over his roommate’s webcam.
Adolescents haven’t changed much, though the technology certainly has.
#3- So, it’s the victim’s fault for not performing adequate counter-survelliance to prevent invasion of privacy?
I concede that this was probably conceived as an adolescent prank. But, however it was conceived the perpetrators of this are nonetheless responsible for the outcome.
#4, I see it more as a lack of insight (from both sides). That’s the nature of adolescence.
As I’ve noted elsewhere, it’s clear that the young man made a series of unfortunate and tragic decisions.
1. He decided to be deeply involved in internet pornography.
2. He decided to engage in homosexual practice (we don’t know if this was the first time; he was apparently not closeted). He found out about the webcam and reported the incident to a resident assistant and other Rutgers officials.
3. He then decided to engage in homosexual practice again, in the same room, without “performing adequate counter-surveillance.”
4. We don’t know if he decided to seek counseling.
5. He decided to commit suicide, and did so.
One must wonder what else was going on in this young man’s life. Signs of something must have been there.
Was this chain of events preventable? Possibly.
1. I have to wonder where God and the Church were in this young man’s life.
2. I have to wonder why Rutgers officials apparently didn’t do anything about the first webcam report.
3. I have to wonder where this young man’s friends (including his sex partner) were in all this.
4. I have to wonder why the two kids did the webcam thing to begin with, and why they did it again. (But I can’t say that my friends and I wouldn’t have done something similar way back when, if we had the technology.)
5. I have to wonder how much training the Rutgers resident advisors have in recognizing subtle signs of adolescent depression.
This whole scenario could have played out from beginning to end just the way it did, even if the young man had been caught with a female. I agree with #2 – a male/female couple might also have been profoundly distressed. I don’t see this as a uniquely homosexual thing, though it’s being made out to be.
AS to the male/female thing, you seem to have forgotten the things that were posted on Youtube when it first appeared. When casual copulation is encouraged as it is in practice in colleges, then being recorded is nothing to be ashamed about. After all, everyone does it.
NOw to be sure, it is a privacy issue but contemporary culture seems to have outdistanced the common understanding, doesn’t it? Or perhaps you haven’t been paying attention to collegiate social behavior.
Are the college students who practice abstinence (more or less) and believe in the traditional notion of privacy. Sure there are, but the rest who set the standard?
And it is about homosexuality, like it or not. Recall the remarks of the roommate? And it is about this subject in this way, that homosexuality has a special grant to attention and sympathy and protection and encouragement. This means that the response in this case is simply mirroring the rest of liberal America. Once again, if this was a boy and a girl, no one would pay attention or worry about privacy. Larry
And if they had found a camera in a preceding occurrence, then we would have to conclude that they didn’t mind being recorded, wouldn’t we? Larry
I don’t think that you have it right about the the young man’s lack of “countersurveillance”. [url=http://gawker.com/5651659/is-this-webcam-spying-victim-tyler-clementis-last-call-for-help ]Gawker.com published the conversation[/url] of the unfortunate young man from a online chat group. There was apparently two encounters, one recorded and for the second, Clementi states [i]”so I wanted to have the guy over again…turned off and and unplugged his computer, searched like crazy for other other hidden cams…and then had a great time (smiley face)”. [/i]
I have not visited the “justusboys.com” site where Mr. Clementi did his posting. One of the commentators at Stand Firm states that it contains extreme porn (that can’t be good for an 18 year old). The liberal writer at Gawker even comments that the victim seems only mildly annoyed. Certainly, one wonders what else was going on.
9. There’s a good article at The Last Psychiatrist that’s very interesting on this topic. The media’s narrative on this is telling only part of the story. Something happened to trigger the young man’s suicide, beyond simply being bullied or being taped. At this point, it’s all speculation, and it’s all tragedy.
#8- Apparently, his countersurveillance wasn’t good enough or he would have found the camera.
I am certain more was involved than Clementi’s surrepticiously broadcast sexcapades in order for him to commit suicide. My only point is that invasion of privacy is a serious issue, even if we do not approve of the moral life of the victim.