Media Madness: Webcast of Private Sexual Encounter Results In Suicide

Since its creation, the internet, as well as social media, has generated both criticism and controversy. Parents have crooned about the dangers of online predatation, critics have grappled with the widespread distribution of offensive content, and authorities have struggled to regulate the behavior of online users and providers. While for many the debate surrounding social media regulation has been markedly philosophical, the devastating story unfolding out of Rutgers University has brought to light many questions regarding the use and regulation of social media - as well as the internet. On the evening of September 19, 2010, Rutgers University student Dharun Ravi, sent a message via Twitter to his followers regarding his roommate, Tyler Clementi. According to reports, the message stated: "Roommate asked for the room till midnight. I went into molly's room and turned on my webcam. I saw him making out with a dude. Yay." In a disgusting turn of events, Ravi, his 18 year old roommate, surreptitiously placed a camera in their shared dorm room and - unknown to Tyler - broadcast the entire video of Clementi's sexual encounter on the internet. Following this, on September 21, 2010, without the knowledge of his roommate, Ravi tried to recreate the stunt, tweeting out the following message: "Anyone with iChat, I dare you to video chat me between the hours of 9:30 and 12. Yes it's happening again." Sadly, hours after that tweet was sent - and ultimately discovered by his roommate - a disastrous turn of events unfolded. Tyler, grappling with emotions that few can relate to, committed suicide by jumping off the George Washington Bridge. As expected, the events have inspired a firestorm of rage and anger. Moreover, this situation has brought to the surface a number of critical questions surrounding social media, the internet, and privacy. What exactly were the intentions of Tyler's roommates? Were they conscious of the potential outcomes? Was this crime motivated by hate? And what, if anything, can be done to regulate such dangerous online behaviors, particularly when users have few restrictions governing their behavior?

As the investigation unfolds, numerous facts have come to light that have incited rage, frustration, and disbelief. In a sad turn of events, shortly before Tyler jumped, he sent the final message of his life - a mobile status update - to his Facebook page, announcing that he was "jumping off the gw bridge sorry." Additionally, while details regarding Clementi's sexual orientation remain unclear, Rutgers University student Danielle Birnbohm, who lived next door to Clementi's and Ravi's room in the dorm, recently told reporters that Clementi was gay, stating simply that, "It was obvious." What is even more shocking is that the perpetrators of the crime seemed to know that that Tyler was gay. This fact was highlighted by a tweet Ravi sent out on his Twitter on August 22 - nine days before classes began at Rutgers. If Ravi indeed knew that Tyler was gay, many continue to wonder whether this was a genuine, premeditated hate crime? For their part, Rutgers leadership has refused to comment. A recent statement released from the University's leadership noted that they had "spoken with Tyler's parents to extend their own, as well as the university's deepest sympathies, and will continue to respect the family's request for privacy." Sadly, while condolences continue to flow, nothing can bring back the life of a man that many argue was brilliant, talented and kind. Following the incident, Ravi and his friend Molly Wei, who is also 18, and who also sent out the link to the webcast, were each charged with two counts of invasion of privacy for the September 19 broadcast. Two additional counts of invasion of privacy were leveled against Ravi for the September 21 attempt to videotape another encounter involving Clementi. If convicted, the two students could face up to five years in prison. In addition to this, if Ravi and Wei's broadcast of Clementi's encounter can be proven to be fueled by a hatred of gay people, more charges could be leveled. For many, the issue of prosecution, as well as intent, continues to stimulate debate. While some have argued that both the accused were "great people", many remain angry, particularly after it was suggested that Tyler's room-mates may have viewed the creation of the video as a sport. Moreover, it is hard to believe that these two young adults could not forsee that their actions would have negative consequences. At the minimum, even if they did not believe that their actions would have deathly consequences, they must have been aware that the event would inflict pain. Sadly, as the dust continues to settle, this case has left many with more questions than answers. What can we, collectively do in future to prevent this type of online behavior in the future? How much responsibility do social networking platforms have for the behavior of their members. And finally, how can we collectively address the hatred that continues to bubble underneath societies skin; hatred, that continues to put at risk the lives of many marginalized and vulnerable individuals in our society?