A discussion about controversial videos on the interweb.

[Raggit]

It's rather old, but I see it around all the time:Ã, 

(FOR CLARITY, THIS IS A NEWS SEGMENT ABOUT THE EVENT, AND DOES NOT SHOW THE EVENT ITSELF.)

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/2006/04/liferuinedbyteabagging.html

(If the video won't play for you: it's a news segment about a teenager who was forced to the ground by some other kids who proceeded to teabag him, and then attempted to insert a banana into his rectum.)Ã, 

I don't really have a comment one way or the other about the video, but it is the way this video is PRESENTED on the net that is rather interesting.Ã,  It is always presented in a mocking manner, as if to say, "OMFG!!! THIS KID WAS SEXUALLY ASSUALTED AND THAT'S SO F*CKING HILARIOUS!!!11!1!!"

Of course I don't expect any other attitude from websites that proudly feature all kinds of videos of people getting hurt, beatup, and in some instances, killed.Ã, 

I am, however, wondering what your attitude to the above clip is.Ã,  Do you think it's upsetting?Ã,  Hilarious?Ã,  Don't care?Ã,  What if the victim had been a little kid, or a girl?

(THIS IS WHERE THE ARGUMENT SEPARATES INTO A BROADER ISSUE)

What about the myriad of other videos circulating the entertainment sites?Ã,  People breaking bones in stupid stunts, tearing each other up, lighting themselves on fire, and just generally behaving badly.

This is become a potential issue in society, as certain news channels and news sites have written articles about these kinds of videos, and how they might be influencing other kids to do the same, thus ushering in discussion of legislation and regulation.Ã,  (It was awhile back, but I'll see if I can dig up a URL.Ã,  I'm thinking of one news story in particular about some kids who mounted a motorcycle on a playground merry-go-round and got flung off of it.)

So what do you think?Ã,  Should these extreme videos be banned?Ã,  Does the public have a right to access them?Ã,  Still don't care?

[Domino]

Ebaums world is mild compared to other sites i used to visit. There were certain sites i visited that showed people being murdered, dismembered, run over by trains, stuff like that. But after viewing a few times i got very disturbed and haven't gone back to them.

If you see a really sick vid online or even on TV, it may just stick in your mind forever.

I saw a video of a live cat getting set on fire, that is when i realized this shit is not for me, so i just stick to funny vids on various sites.

If people want to view them, let them enjoy. But some people are copycats and when they see a sick animal killing vid, they will do the same. But i hope most people have enough common sense not to.

[MrColossal]

The first question is "Were kids doing stupid things before the internet?" then the next question is "Are kids doing more stupid things now a days?" and the final question is "Did the kids learn the stupid things from the internet?"

I don't think anyone should really discuss this until they learn the answers to these questions... Though politicians and random internet people still will.

[Domino]

I think alot of people who post these crazy videos are just looking to have some kind of fame, and then they can say hey look at my video online, i did something stupid, but isn't it cool.

Then the word will spread, and it is on every site. Then that person will feel like they did something worthwhile, but instead very stupid.

I guess that is the media power of the Internet.

[deadsuperhero]

I saw a video of a live cat getting set on fire, that is when i realized this shit is not for me, so i just stick to funny vids on various sites.

Ah, yes. This video is refferred to quite often as NEDM. There's some YTMND stuff about how wrong it is (and one involves the cat coming back and killing the kid)

[Gord10]

I had seen a parody Flash animation cartoon of this video in deviantArt.
While I was just searching for something interesting to see, I found that parody cartoon that was one of the most favourited Flash animations in the dA. The comments that deviation got was usually making fun of a boy who was "teabagged" (I didn't know the 2nd meaning of this word), just a few were saying it was wrong to have fun with something like this.

I wondered what that cartoon was about, and watched it.

After learning what really happened; I was really shocked how people would make fun of such a sexual assault.

I think the rape victim females will be shown on TV's just for "OMG SHE WAS ASSAULTED LOL" in the future.

We live in a world where cruel is awarded and the victim is blamed.

[deadsuperhero]

Yeah. Some terrible stuff out there.
A certain website has videos with terrorists beheading guys, pigs getting slaughtered, and all sorts of sick stuff.
Of course, the burning cat video is probably the most contraversial video out there. It's nearly impossible to find....(not that I support cat burning, it's just that I've heard a lot about that video and tend to get curious)

[Gord10]

I think it is all the reason of Blame The Victim psychology ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victim_blaming ). People want to blame, or at least make fun of someone who was victimised the same way they 'could' be.
When a woman gets kidnapped by a car of men, we want to blame the woman just because she was walking carelessly. We try to forget we usually walk in the streets less careful and pretty open to any threats.

That "humorous" videos are the same thing, IMO.   

[Sylvr]

I think it's all pretty sickening. I don't see anything funny about anyone getting hurt, really, unless it's something incredibly major like your friend stumbles a bit while walking, and somehow it's hilarious. The extremeness should be banned, because of the possibility of young kids accidentally coming across it and being scarred.

[MrColossal]

As I predicted!

[Raggit]

As I predicted!

What did you predict? 

[Khris]

I don't think anyone should really discuss this [...] Though [...] random internet people still will.

[MrColossal]

Mostly SilverTrumpet's post... There appears to be no real though behind it and it's just a kneejerk reaction.

Anyway, Alliance, a burning cat video is more controversial than people being beheaded? Most be some video!

The whole idea of banning anything "shocking" is of course a slippery slope. "Take these videos off the internet!" "Don't show anything that could scare a child on the news!" "These books are shocking! Destroy them!" A little dramatic yes but letting the individual choose what to expose one's self to is usually a better option.

By individual I also mean companies and such. A web service provider says "No porn" and that's totally fine. The government says "No porn" and you've entered dangerous ground. In my opinion.

[EagerMind]

I'm in agreement with Gord10's post on victim blaming. I think people tend to empathize with the perpetrator/bully instead of the victim, because it's uncomfortable to put yourself in the shoes of the victim, especially if the victim isn't popular to begin with. So you get a reaction like "that's terrible ... but isn't it funny!"

MrColossal, even if the answer is "yes" to all of your questions, I still don't think that's an argument that videos like this should be banned, for the following reasons:
1. How would you even go about banning something on the internet? Plus, individual households/families already have the capability to filter content of their choosing.
2. Who decides what's inappropriate, and how do they decide what's inappropriate? I don't think anybody would disagree on videos like the ones we're specifically talking about, but what about when you get into gray areas like, for example, the classic Tom and Jerry cartoons? Would those also be banned?
3. Removing the videos doesn't solve the root of the problem: a lack of morals in the people perpetrating the acts. The only solution for that is parents taking some part in raising their kids.

--Oh, I just saw your new post. Seems like we're mostly in agreement.

[Timosity]

I'm not game to watch the video as the content has been explained and I don't think I need to see it.

It's terrible what some people will post on the internet and hopefully they are just making it easier for themselves to be put in Gaol (jail for the US people)

There was a story this week in the news about a Bunch of kids from a town in Victoria, Australia that were selling a video they made, on the internet where they went around terrorising people and sexually assaulted a teenage girl, urinating on her etc and some have been expelled from school and I'm sure it wont be the last we'll hear about it. I'm not sure what will happen to the boys, but I'm sure there will be court cases.

The innocent victim is the one that will suffer the most, especially as it is probably going around the internet as we speak, so appart from the trauma she went through, she will probably be reminded about it for years to come.



None of this type of filth is funny, it's criminal activity that should be punished.

[SSH]

I think there's a general problem that people somehow see stuff that's done on/for the internet as not "real" somehow. Flirting and cybar online can still ruin a marriage/realtionship just as much as flirting IRL. And committing acts of animal cruelty is no less cruel if you post the video on YouTube. Probably most people can agree with me so far. But here's the contraversial thing... stealing is just as bad if you use a computer to do it as if you broke into someone's house and took their money. Just becuase its easier doesn't make it less wrong. So uninstall eMule, delete those downloaded MP3s and don't be a hypocrite complaining about this stuff if you've got any stolen music on yoru hard drive.

[[Cameron]]

Timosity, I actually know the girl that that happened to, and my girlfriend has been friends with her since they were six. She's mentally impaired which makes it even more messed up. She was always really nice. I saw some of the kids myspace pages and they think what they did wasnt wrong, they also think the media blew it out of proprotion and there will be no consequences. I hope they do head to court. Also, I've heard that many sites are getting that video taken off. This will never completely get rid of it but hopefulyl it means the video will get around less.

[jetxl]

NEDM

Oh yeah, there was a grounp of dutch kids that set a building on fire and were smart enough to film it and put it on myspace. They were caught withing 6 weeks.

Sometimes controversial video's make people think

[Nacho]

As I predicted!

You didn' t... You saw it in the future and came back to tell it to us.

Sexual rape is illegal. Doing it for with the goal of putting it in the web is automatically as illegal as the previous... This is not "controversial", this is a crime.

Another thing is to put "gross" images filmed unintentially, IMO. I am not sure if it is illegal, but what really is is morbid and... ugly. The other day I saw a video about "Famous death pilots in F1". I thought it was going to be a nice homage with the image of their best performances in races, with the song "can't life" in the background, but it was really about pilots dying... I felt really bad and the disclaimer was not accurate. But I saw the video till the end... I guess that the human being (or at least me, I shouldn' t generalise...) likes to have a good "eeeek" each certain period of time.

I am not proud of me... And I don' t really know which position have I choosed in this debate...Ã,  But that' s what happened to me. My two cents.

[DGMacphee]

Raggit, I think you've misrepresented a lot of the issues here in your initial post. I think also we're discussing some very seperate issues here in relation to the video you posted. Somehow they've all been mixed together and confused.

First of all, the video posted was a news segment regarding the incident, not an actual video showing the kid held down while teabagged and banana-raped. And it's like you're asking if we should ban the video you posted for fear of encouraging more stupid kids doing the same thing. Okay, but then you've got to ban the original news program the video was from. It doesn't make sense to ban it. There's no reason to. It doesn't encourage kids to go out and teabag.

What's my opinion of the clip? It's from a news program. It doesn't show what actually happened to the kid. It only discusses it.

But, Raggit, you've brought another issue brought into this debate; where users are submitting their own content on the internet of crazy stunts. This is NOT the same thing as the video you posted.

Let's not confuse the two issues. Raggit, the clip you provided is NOT an example of an extreme video that you want us to discuss. It's from a news program. It's not a user-created video of the kid getting teabagged and having a banana put in his rear. Somehow you've linked the video you've posted to user-created explotive video content. They're two different things.

Let's examine this further:

1. The clip you posted is from a legitimate news program and presented by a website that steals content from other people and adds captions like "CLASSIC: Kids life ruined by being tea bagged." (although Mr Bauman labels the video with a "not cool" tag, which shows his perception -- I don't think it's fair in this instance to say eBaum is presenting the video in a mocking manner, Raggit. ). In this instance, you can't ban a video like that. There's nothing that warrants such a banning. It's a clip from a news show. It's legitimately presented.

Is it exploitive? Partially. All news programs (and TV/video in general) are exploitive to some degree. But I'm sure they had permission from the kid and parents to film, otherwise they wouldn't be interviewing them all. This backs up the video's legitimacy.

2. The scenario that you suggest, Raggit -- where websites do present videos in a mocking manner -- isn't a cause to ban the video, nor is it a cause to ban the way the video is presented. Sadly, this is one of the facets of freedom of speech. Unless the video is implictly encouraging such acts against people (say a more extreme example where the KKK has made a video with the implict purpose of encouraging more people to beat up black people), then you can't ban the way they present such a video, even if in mocking. If a site said "BANANA UR FRIENDS' ASSES TODAY" and meant it in a serious manner, then yes, that's inciting rape. But that would be a cause for banning not so much the material but the commentary. But the comment has to have malicious intent. (at least, according to Australian Law, it does)

But I just want to make clear: even if they're only mocking the kid, they're still arseholes for getting off on other people's exploitation.

3. Now let's consider an actual video where the kid is getting teabagged and banana-raped. Yes, that is exploitive and absolutely abhorrent in my view. And if I know my media law correctly, it's also illegal to publish such a video without authorisation from the people involved (unless it's in the public interest to do so, which such a video isn't). The reason is because it unfair exploits someone who is pretty much innocent and undeserving of such actions. This includes everything from the tame, like someone publishing a audio file of a secret conversation where someone else discusses their favourite sexual position, to more extreme examples, like publishing a film of your friends raping someone else.

Here's the grey area: The rape is a crime. Video recording it isn't a crime. Publishing it on the internet is a crime. (Just to note, video-taping it is stupid since it can be introduced as evidence in a court trial for the actual rape).

But in such a case, yes, ban those types of videos on the internet. And I think most content-sharing websites like YouTube have policies on such things and do take steps to delete such content for violating such policies.

4. As for video content of kids doing stupid things, like stupid stunts, to themselves, I say there should be more of them. Anyone dumb enough to do a stupid stunt they see in a video on the internet deserves what they get. If they kill themselves in a stupid skateboarding stunt, good, they're idiots, the world has become lighter. Sucddenly the worldwide IQ has gone up because we lost a moron trying to skate down a hundred stairs. Just Darwinism at work.

I've sepearted what's being discussed here and tried to make things clearer about what we're actually discussing here. That was my main intent with this post. I think it is wrong to misrepresent the video in Raggit's initial post. This is a more complex issue than people are making out.

The video that Timosity talks about -- that's an example of point 3 from my diatribe above. That's the kind of content that should NOT be published. And there are already laws against such non-consentual exploitative media. Like I said, it's an abhorrent exploitation of people.

There are other issues that could be involed too, like defamation laws, but I think this post is long enough. Like I said, this is a very complex issue that I think has been twisted around and confused a little. Let's aim for some clarity.