Megan Meier

Megan Meier

Megan Meier is a young 13-year-old suicide victim. She became upset and depressed when a neighbor harassed her on MySpace.

Cyberbullying and Vigilante Justice Online...

When Megan Meier, a 13-year-old girl from Missouri, committed suicide because she was being bullied relentlessly on MySpace, all signs pointed to this being yet another tragic case expressing the typical dangers of online social networks. However, the story then took an unexpected turn when it was discovered that the bullying was done by Lori Drew, who was the mother of one of Megan's classmates, and had created a fake MySpace account under the name of "Josh Evans", also purporting to be 16 years old.

Now, the police had discovered that Lori Drew was the cyberbully responsible for Meier's suicide, and the local newspaper report described the case, but did not identify Drew by name. This is nothing unusual - after all, people are considered innocent until proven guilty. However, a middle-aged mother living in Virginia, Sarah Wells, was so outraged by the story that she did some Google searching, and published Lori Drew's name on her blog. Consequently, her blog readers followed by also posting her husband's name, the family's address and phone number, a cellphone number, the name of the family's advertising company, and the names and phone numbers of clients with whom they worked.

"In retaliation, readers called Drew's advertising clients to urge them to withdraw their business from her. But it wasn't long before there were death threats, a brick through a window and calls to set the Drews' house on fire."

This is more than a simple case of cyberbullying and online vigilantism. As Kim Zetter of Wired writes, "the firestorm that followed illustrates what happens when the social imperative to punish those in a community who violate social norms plays out over the internet... But the drive for social shaming - to right a wrong and restore social balance - can run amok and create paradoxical consequences, especially on the internet where people instigate mobs in ways they wouldn't do offline."

First of all, Zetter is right to point out the paradox of online vigilantism: that shaming people publicly in order to enforce social norms actually creates an anarchic environment, making social norms less enforceable.

Second, privacy advocates ought to have a problem with the vigilantes as well. Posting someone's personal information on a public website, even when they are an alleged perpetrator of some crime, sets a horrific precedent of justifying violations of privacy if "someone deserves it". Tantamount to privacy advocates is the principle that violating someone's personal privacy in such a public manner should never be considered a weapon to coerce certain types of social behavior.

Third, let us take a moment to remember the basic problem with vigilante justice - that they often get it wrong. For example, take the case two years ago when a stock clerk had his cell phone stolen from his car. When pictures from his phone were being posted online, the clerk identified the thief and enlisted internet vigilantes to defame him with racist remarks and other smearing tactics. Only later it was discovered that the "thief" was actually a 16-year-old kid whose mother had bought the cell phone from a street vendor. The poor kid who had been harassed by the vigilantes and had his name and reputation destroyed was actually not the thief at all.

None of this is meant to defend the cyberbullying and adoption of a false identity by Lori Drew, whose actions were certainly despicable. However, the fact is that most of the people who have been publishing Drew's personal information have been doing so under a cloak of anonymity. Whether you consider these people activists or vigilantes, there should be more transparency and accountability. In other words, if these people are so convinced that they are working towards a noble purpose, then have them post their real names. Under such circumstances (which exist in real-space, as opposed to cyberspace), people are less likely to engage in such aggressive behavior if they perceive that there will be consequences for their actions.

In the end, there needs to be more civility in cyberspatial behavior, and less fury and deception. That was surely the original reason for the outrage against Lori Drew. But in their retaliatory tactics, the vigilantes have become the very thing they set out to destroy.
Sponsors
Comments
The naming of Lori Drew has sparked quite a debate indeed. Some major news outlets have chosen to name the perpetrator(s) behind this story such as the New York Times. Some have chosen not to. The mainstream media however has concluded that the blogging community should shoulder the responsibility of first naming the perpetrator behind this story. The first question I have in this debate is simple. What is new here? Since before the French Revolution, the media has been used to 'out' individuals who's actions seem to bear public relevancy in some way. Although Lori Drew has not yet been charged in the case of Megan Meier, the media has never required formal charges to be made before running a story. In the case of some journalist like Dan Rather, some media outlets run with stories before even confirming that they're true. In this particular case, media outlets that have chosen to withhold Lori Drew's identity have done so in consideration of other Drew family members. I'm wondering if by doing this, the media plans to always withhold the names of interesting persons who outrage the community, if those persons have children. This would certainly be quite a ground-breaking event Right at this moment, there is a story of a cop who is under investigation in the strange death of one wife and the disappearance of another. The cop in the story has a family, yet the media huddles outside his home relentlessly. I could go back and list thousands of stories where the media wasted no time in delivering the names and occupations of individuals that were later cleared of any wrong-doing. I've never heard of another instance where the media apologized for naming names. Don Henley's 'Dirty Laundry' certainly applies well to conduct of most major news outlets. Lori Drew is a primary subject of the story, she is not a rape victim, and is not a minor. Identifying her breaks no new ground, nor does it deviate from what news outlets do on a daily basis. I also remind readers that her name and her role in the Megan Meier tragedy were documented as public record. A public record that Lori filed on her own accord. This is a critically important fact in this debate. News outlets, bloggers and the general public were handed Lori's name and Lori's own self admissions when she herself filed that police report and sought to elevate the entire situation into the public domain. Had Lori Drew simply acknowledged what she did was wrong, and apologized - the police report that identified her may have never been filed, and the entire situation may have well been kept at the lowest profile. Will we see the media write about this? Not likely. Danny Vice http://weeklyvice.blogspot.com
I think its interesting how some of the news outlets were refusing to print Lori Drew's name, even though she'd already confessed and tried to shrug it off as unimportant, despite Meier's suicide. Now that she's under inditement, they HAVE to print it. Hahaha.. ƒuckers
I ran across this old blog entry looking for another story related to Drew. Since it mentions me, I'd like to offer a correction or two for whatever internet record manages to persist in connection with myself. The blog entry repeats an error in Kim Zetter's story about a brick being tossed through Drew's window after her identity was revealed online. That act of vandalism occurred well before the Stephen Pokin story that sparked interent interest in Lori Drew's identity: the brick sailed through her window, onto her kitchen counter roughly a year previous. (The other acts of vandalism mentioned in that article also preceded the Pokin story.) Second, I did not limit myself to "looking her up on Google". Not only was I interested in the story because I wanted to know the full story, the other side of the story, if there was one, or to at least verify that Pokin's story as far as it went, but I would not attach Drew's names to those acts without 100% certainty that the correct individual was named, and perhaps not even then. However, once I found public records using clues from Pokin's article that strongly pointed towards Drew as the woman in Pokin's article, I verified the information with a local source in a position to verify her identity. Portions of the relevent police report were read to me. That was the tipping point for my addressing her by name on my blog. She had most willingly and publicly attached her own name to her acts, including creation of a false account to deceive and manipulate Megan Meier. She had instigated the police call herself, and insisted that police take her statement for the record, and her own admissions in that statement were absolutely apalling to me. Especially since she had trespassed upon the Meier's home, banging on the door on the thanksgiving weeked just following Megan's death, ( after being asked to leave, three times), and called police because they refused to see her or speak to her. And my primary motivation for naming Drew when I did, instead of waiting for the MSM to pick it up, was that she had filed charges against one of Megan's parents, and the online court docket indicated he was due in court in a day or two. Public exposure and public pressure, I believed, would affect the perception of prosecutors and outcome of the case. (In fact, Drew did abandon her complaint against Mr. Meier, and I am convinced public exposure was a factor in charges being dropped.) Sarah Wells
Add a Comment:
Already a member? Log In
Sponsors
About the Author

31 Kudos
Top Culture Articles
Top 10 Questions about Body Piercing
"Finally got myself some guts and did this! And oh yes, it hurt!"
Kelly Brook voted 'Best Bikini Body Ever'
Better get into shape if you want to flaunt your figure like Kelly does.
Odd and Extraordinary Beauty Pageants
The party doesn't really start until Miss Klingon, Miss Plastic Surgery and Ms. Pregnant show up.
More From Zimbio
Copyright © 2009 - Zimbio, Inc. Some rights reserved.