As cyberbullying has grown increasingly rampant, China’s judiciary has finally taken action. Recently, the country’s top court and top prosecutor’s office, along with the Ministry of Public Security, issued the Guidelines for Punishing Cyber Violence Crimes in Accordance with the Law (Draft for Solicitation of Comments) for public comment. The draft guidelines, which is the first criminal normative document in China that has been open to public comment, have attracted widespread attention, showing the public’s interest in correcting this longstanding problem.
Not long ago, a mother in the central Chinese city of Wuhan jumped to her death after getting attacked online for her appearance in a widely circulated video that showed her crying over the sudden death of her young son. The release of the draft guidelines for public comment is a belated consolation to her and many other victims of cyberbullying.
The draft takes a strong stance on punishing such abuse. It divides cyberbullying into four categories. The document specifically stipulates that severe punishment should be applied in cases involving minors and disabled individuals, instances where online “armies” or “hired hands” are utilized, fabrication of sexual topics that harm personal dignity, use of “deep fake” technology to disseminate illegal or inappropriate content that contradicts public order and good morals, and scenarios instigated or organized by network service providers. These provisions strike at the core of cyberbullying.
In the face of increasing pressure from the faltering economic recovery and weak job market, the punishment of cyberbullying plays a crucial role in maintaining the order of society. How well this will all work remains to be seen. We propose three benchmarks to evaluate the measure. The first is the number of public prosecutions specifically related to cyberbullying, particularly incidents involving the crimes of defamation and hurling insults. The second is to see whether primary perpetrators in severe cyberbullying cases receive strict punishments, thereby setting a precedent in case law. The third criteria is examine whether investigations can truly get to the root of organized cyberbullying.
Decisively curtailing cyberbullying requires resolute action. At present, the problem only gets attention after there has been a tragedy. And even then, the consequences tend to be weak. Cases involving loss of life often end with lenient punishments, or at times, a complete lack of accountability. This lackluster response does little to foster legal deterrence or proactive prevention measures. Over time, a vicious cycle has emerged: a cyberbullying case ends in tragedy, inciting a public uproar, which eventually subsides as the media spotlight shifts elsewhere, allowing cyberbullying to recur with equally severe repercussions. This monstrous cycle has created a sense of outrage and helplessness.
The scourge of cyberbullying break moral limits, resulting in devastating consequences. Take the case of Zheng Linghua. The young woman had to endure a barrage of online insults after posting photos of her sharing the good news of getting admitted into graduate school with her hospitalized grandfather. What set off the online mob? The photos showed that she had dyed her hair pink.
After battling depression for more than half a year, she took her own life. Most victims of cyberbullying are innocent, yet they endure attacks from strangers. All of society must stand up to all forms of cyberbullying, with judicial authorities taking the lead.
All that said, the fight against cyberbullying must adhere to legal principles. We do not advocate an approach that easily results in “severe punishment.” Additionally, a reasonable distinction must be made between cyberbullying and legitimate criticism and debate, so as not to infringe upon the constitutional right to free speech granted to citizens.
Cyberbullying not only hurts individuals, but also damages societal psychology. It has become a significant breeding ground for malice. Online, it’s easy for what social psychologists call a “crowd mentality” to occur. Under the feverish atmosphere of cyberbullying, biases are continuously reinforced. There is a misguided belief among online denizens that “the law does not come for the masses,” which can easily lead idle bystanders to take a step toward becoming cyberbullies.
Each act of cyberbullying could potentially be a carefully orchestrated business scheme. Observers often suspect a malevolent force behind cyberbullying but struggle to find evidence. The current draft for public opinion proposes prioritizing the punishment of cyberbullying initiated and organized by network service providers, and lawfully punish malicious marketing hype associated with cyberbullying events, confirming that these suspicions are not unfounded. Hence, platforms must genuinely fulfill their responsibilities. While numerous websites have released anti-cyberbullying guidelines covering risk alerts, one-click protection, private message protection, and complaint reporting, the overall effort is relatively late, weak, and notably, the preventative function falls short of societal expectations. There is widespread doubt about how much resolve platforms, which inherently rely on hot topics for traffic, will have toward dealing with the cyberbullying that can drive such traffic. The draft also states that an online platform can be held criminally liable for refusing to make necessary changes after a regulator determines that the platform has failed to meet its legal obligations for managing its network, such as by allowing the widespread dissemination of illegal information.
Soliciting public comment for the draft guidelines is a way of publicizing an issue. One could say it’s a form of enlightenment. The draft needs refinement, which will be critical to the public’s understanding of what constitutes a crime. For instance, China’s Criminal Law already has provisions for the conviction and punishment for online defamation and “human flesh search engines,” but both hinge on whether the cases lead to “serious circumstances.” What constitutes "serious circumstances" requires further clarification.
In addressing cyberbullying, it is also necessary to rigorously eradicate its societal roots. In a sense, cyberbullying is a variant of the once prevalent “mass movements,” the consequences of which were catastrophic, providing painful lessons. This has intricate connections with the dregs of traditional culture, such as the “spectators” and “blood-soaked steamed buns” painfully criticized by luminaries like Lu Xun. So, cyberbullying is not new; it is merely the mob empowered by information technology. The cultural renewal initiated a century ago has yet to be completed, and modern values such as freedom, equality and fraternity still need to take root in the Chinese lands. To prevent a reoccurrence of cyberbullying tragedies, concerted efforts to build a harmonious society are still necessary.
Get our weekly free Must-Read newsletter.
