Nothing The Batavian has ever published has elicited quite the response as an item we published this morning on cyberbullying.
Whether by comments here, by private email, by Facebook comments or by Twitter, there's been a lot of discussion of the piece.
The feedback has been both favorable and harshly negative, and the negative messages have been fueled by misunderstanding the post, the nature of The Batavian, journalism in general and too much of it, sadly, expressing acceptance of bullying.
One point the critics got right is that a key element of the post was missing -- one of the people portrayed as victimized by bullies has a history -- at least judging from the screen shots sent to us -- of bullying others.
The author admits (remember, as some people seem to have missed, I didn't write the piece), that he didn't see the person's status updates and comments that apparently prompted other people to lash out at her. She deleted them before he saw what he saw on Facebook.
We've both seen those status updates now, and they're pretty ugly.
But the fact those updates were not included in the original post, according to some, made "the story" one-sided.
But it wasn't a story. It was an opinion piece, an op-ed, as I referred to it in the post. As much as anything, it was a public service announcement against bullying. It keyed off screen grabs taken from recent posts by local kids and referred to a recent case, but it wasn't about those incidents. It was about dealing with cyberbullying.
That point was missed by some, appreciated by others.
The reactions I found most troubling:
-
She did it first, therefore my bullying her is OK.
-
Everybody gets bullied, so what's the big deal?
-
It's just a little Facebook argument and now the media is making it into a big drama.
-
The person getting bullied shares the blame because he or she could make it stop if he or she wanted.
My position: bullying is wrong, in all cases. There's no justification for it. It's not something you can excuse away or just expect a victim to deal with it. It's morally reprehensible on its face.
And it doesn't matter if the other person was a jerk first. Anybody that would bully under those circumstances would bully under many other circumstances.
One person quoted to me, "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me." My response: that's a lie. It's a lie told by parents at a time when their kids are hurting. It's not a life philosophy. The fact is, words leave marks. Words can hurt. Words matter.
But it seems there's a group of young people in Genesee County who don't understand that, or don't want to understand it.
And that's the real issue, not who bullied who first, and that point seems to have been lost.
People say the "story" was one-sided, but it was in fact "no-sided." No names were used.
The names weren't used because who the actual participants were, and the actual sequence of events, were immaterial to the real issue that needed to be discussed. If you weren't directly involved -- and most of our readers were not, I'm sure -- you wouldn't know who any of the participants were.
The issue was bullying, not who did what to whom. The examples used were exactly that: real life examples, current examples.
The more readily people grasp the fact that bullying is a serious issue, the easier it will be to deal with it. The best thing that came out of the posting today is it got a lot of people talking about a very important issue, even if some of them didn't see the real issue in their fog of confusion while defending their own actions.