ie8 fix

Does cyberbullying exist, and is technology to blame?

By | October 15, 2010, 12:38pm PDT

Summary: Does ‘cyberbullying’ actually exist? Is Facebook or text messaging to blame, or just a conduit to the inevitable: people taking advantage of a neutral technology?

The Generation Y could be remembered for great people and trendsetting things; from Zuckerberg and Facebook, to a wave of new thinking and communication habits, to an entire culture where technology becomes a centrepiece of the lives we live.

We, as well as our younger siblings the Generation Z, should also be remembered for ‘cyberbullying, where people are abused, taunted and pushed to suicide through the means of technology that offers instant and multiple points of contact and anonymity.

But a recent blog post by Anil Dash critically analyses whether ‘cyberbullying’ exists, and whether technology is the root cause or just a conduit to inevitability.

High profile cases of cyberbullying have been reported in the media over the last few weeks. More recently with the suicide of Tyler Clementi, a student at Rutgers University who had a very personal and private moment broadcast by his fellow roommate on the web.

One of the most prolific cases of cyberbullying was the suicide of 13 year old Megan Meier who was teased and taunted by an adult neighbour posing as a teenage boy of a similar age on MySpace. This led to a conviction of Lori Drew but was subsequently overturned, because US law in this area is sketchy at best.

The two students involved in the Clementi case have since been charged with invasion of privacy which could result in a 5 year prison sentence.

Different states have varied laws in regards to cyberbullying. Massachusettes state legislation was passed in light of one student suicide caused by online bullying, but many areas of the United States and indeed the world do not have laws in place which specifically target online harassment. Many of those involved in perpetrating acts of bullying online have been caught out by various different laws instead, though these are often in relation to the cause as opposed to being a direct influencer of the fact.

But cyberbullying continues and is endemic in the modern online culture. Anonymity has caused great difficulty around bringing those responsible to justice, and those who suffer in relatively controlled environments such as Facebook or Twitter can feel as though they are screaming into the wind.

Dash argues that cyberbullying does not exist, in that bullying of any kind is still bullying. Whether you use a pen to write a hateful note, a phone call to call someone horrible names, or a computer to send hurtful messages, it is all the same thing. Technology is being misused for the convenience of essentially lazy bullies.

He concludes:

“The truth of it is, calling the cruelty that kids show to one another, based on race or gender identity or class or any other imaginary difference, by a name like ‘cyberbullying’ is a cop-out. It’s a group of parents, school administrators and lazy reporters working together to shirk their own responsibility for the meanspirited, hateful, incomprehensible things their own kids do.”

Technology is a neutral concept, and it is the people who decide the means and uses for it. Technology isn’t the enemy here, and neither is Facebook or text messaging. It’s the people behind them which send the messages.

I am inclined to very much agree with him, but what do you think?

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Zack Whittaker, a criminologist who studied at the University of Kent, Canterbury, is a journalist, writer and broadcaster.

Disclosure

Zack Whittaker

I worked briefly with Microsoft UK in 2006 but no longer have any connection with the company. Regardless, I remain impartial and unbiased in my views.

I don't hold any stock or shares, investments or industrial secrets in any company, but have signed confidentiality agreements with a number of UK and U.S. organisations, whose names I am not at liberty to disclose.

I was involved with Kent Union, the University of Kent's student union, undertaking voluntary, non-salaried, elected positions between early 2009 and mid-2010.

No other company, body, government department, non-governmental organisation or third sector organisation employs me or pays me a salary in any capacity whatsoever.

As a freelance journalist, whenever expenses are given and taken by a company that is not CBS Interactive, these will be disclosed in each relevant post to ensure transparency.

I currently work with a UK law enforcement unit, but this is an entirely separate position which bears no connection to other work.

(Updated: 23rd October 2011)

Biography

Zack Whittaker

Zack Whittaker, criminologist who studied at the University of Kent, UK, is a journalist, writer and broadcaster.

After studying criminology at university, though still in his early-20's, he has already had a series unconventional work and voluntary positions. He has worked with researchers studying neurological illnesses like Tourette's syndrome (which he suffers from), has given lectures on the nature of disabilities in the public community, and occasionally ends up speaking on television and radio discussing the events of the day.

He first had academic work published at the age of 22, then still an undergraduate, and has been cited by a wide range of publications: from the Huffington Post, Business Insider, AllThingsDigital, The Atlantic Wire and CBS News.

173
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

Humans doing what Humans do best . . .
dexlinx 27th Oct 2010
As the subject says; I believe it's simply humans doing what humans do best - blaming someone or something else for the problems they create. Why would a parent or teacher take a blow to their ego by taking responsibility for the little monsters their creating? Why - for that matter - would a parent or a teacher take the time to solve the problem?

Of course cyber-bullying exists. So does phone-bullying or in-person-bullying. Just like Dash says - it's all the same thing and the "how" they do it is not to blame. That's like saying we should get rid of pens because someone stabbed another person with one - ludicrous.

Welcome to a world with imperfect people. Its not changing anytime soon. So, you parents with bullies -find a way to punish them that will teach them the lesson through and through. To you parents with those being bullied - teach them to have a thicker skin and move on with there life. We have way to many victims in this world and we really don't need more.

But wait; all of that would just be way to much work wouldn't it. Well fine, if you really think that way let's just string up Al Gore - I mean he did invent that evil internet; right?

BTW: For all of you wondering; yes - I have an 18yo son. So, I'm speaking from experience.
0 Votes
+ -
Technology does however make it possible for people to expand their sphere of influence further then every before. The downside of an anonymous Internet is a lack of accountability. When mean spirited people use the technology to do evil things (such as bullying) or illegal things (such as theft) it is easier to blame the technology than it is to do somethign about it!
@mwagner@...
How is this any different than posting a nasty paper or picture on a public bulletin board in the middle of town? The Internet provides a wider audience, nothing more.
@arminw

Good point there, and that isn't illegal in the slightest, unless you are defaming someone.
0 Votes
+ -
really?
josephmartins 18th Oct 2010
@arminw

You've answered your own question have you not? Although you seem dismissive as if a "wider audience" is no big deal.

The Internet provides a 24/7 global audience and an archive for bad memories many people would rather put behind them. It's the difference between being bullied one afternoon in front of an audience of your peers, and being bullied in perpetuity online in front of a global audience of unknown size.

Anil's post is pointless.
If I post a picture in the middle of town, It can be torn up and/or removed. If I post the same picture on the internet, it will last forever...
@arminw

I agree.

@josephmartins True, the audience is larger, but who do you really care about knowing? 36,000 strangers saw the video, but he was probably devastated by the exposure before his friends and family.

Either harassment is illegal or it's not. Whether it's done on the internet at best makes it a function of scale.
@arminw
The difference is the pervasive nature of electronic bullying. It does not matter where you go, you cannot get away from the bully. The wider audience is also a dimension of the pervasive nature. It is not like putting a notice on a public bulletin board - it is like air dropping a billion copies of that notice across the world.

Bullying is always an act (and a symptom) cowardice. When it was in the school ground the bully had to develop a network of support and it was witnessed. The anonymous nature of cyber bullying allows any sniveling coward to work in a dark room.

The responses to bullying have only ever been to walk away and ignore it or confront the bully. Cyber bullying allows neither response - you can not get away, not can you necessarily find the person behind it. We have seen suicides because of it - we will eventually see violence against a whole group because the bullying is hiding somewhere within.

It is serious and requires a sensible and concerted response of education and support for victims.
0 Votes
+ -
@pmk007 Absolutely true!! This could be the reason that bullying is maybe more common now (I don't have stats, so I don't know) since many more dumbass cowards are now able to hide behind keyboards to do their bullying... as for "a" picture being hung on a bulletin board in the middle of town, bullies don't hang "a" picture up- they'll make hundreds of copies of it before hanging that one up, then hand out all the others all over town, office, school, etc...
Of course the internet has a much wider audience, but 100,000 viewers won't even remember the video in a day or two, whereas hundreds of people inthe victims hometown will remember it forever.
I think that's the biggest difference.
0 Votes
+ -
@tkejlboom

I'm not talking about the legality of it. I agree that harassment is harassment regardless the medium. The legality is something typically discussed after the fact, once the damage has been done.

What's most important is perception. Some teenagers (and adults) do take the scale of exposure to heart. Sometimes life's low points on display to strangers is thought to be significantly worse and much less forgiving than the same among family and friends. Significant enough that quite a few kids have taken their lives over it.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Does cyberbullying exist, and is technology to blame?
knowledgeQuoteOnMadisonBldg 19th Oct 2010
@arminw The wider audience is the point. It's true that guns by themselves don't kill people; it takes a person to shoot the gun. It's people... nasty people with little ability for empathy... who are the problem, but the medium is able to make public in a way not possible before. This is not an issue of "is technology to blame". It's an issue of "technology has allowed this to become bigger". No on will be taking the technology away, but there might be laws to regulate... as there are with phishing, etc.
0 Votes
+ -
I disagree. The technology is enabling the behavior.
www.stephenpaulwest.com 18th Oct 2010
@mwagner@... I am 6'1" 228 muscular with bald head and wolverine beard. I am never insulted in person. Inspite of my appearance I am insulted consistantly on my YouTube Channel.

It is the technology that turns even meek kids into angry-bullies. The Net's anominity is the Mr. Hyde potion to everyday Dr. Jeckylls.
0 Votes
+ -
@www.stephenpaulwest.com

I think the big guy here has a point and it can go a bit further. While people pull the trigger making the gun (or internet or whatever form is used to deliver the blow) an extension of the fist, that WE GIVE those tools to people needs to be accounted for as well.

A loaded gun in a child's hand is innocent, the young child is innocent, if the child shoots someone or themselves who needs to account for that are those that allowed that gun into those hands. That's an easy example to track. Accessing the internet along with all the various environmental exposures young people get given all the hands involved is far far far more difficult to track a clear line of cause and effect (if only it were as simple as a straight forward chain of cause and effect, there's the occurrence of emergence and other ways things can be related other than a cause/effect relationship!)

Are parents 100% responsible for their children's actions until the age of 18 then at that instant, no more?

The question of "blame" or said differently the question of responsibility is one of those questions the pondering of which and really taking on what you come up with may be of greater value then an arrival at an "answer" as coming up with "the answer" usually ends the inquiry and it's the continual work of engagement (in the inquiry in this case) that may be of greatest value.
@www.stephenpaulwest.com
I truely disagree with this, I was bullied in HS not only face to face but through notes placed in my locker with no name - the anominity factor you are talking about exists without the net from my point of view. The issue is behavioral and parents not taking responsibility for their children's action. We have a society where absentee parenting is the norm - where we give the schools, camps, even the TELEVISION and the NET the job of raising our children, with no consistancy of actual values being taught in the home.
@www.stephenpaulwest.com

You mean people never dropped flaming bags of poo on people's porches and ran off? People don't knock other people's garbage into the street? Vandalize houses, break windows, and TP yards? Or perhaps they truthfully registered with the city before engaging in such activities? The Klan achieved anonymity with the technological advance of the white sheet, and proceeded to lynch people and burn crosses in people's yards.

To suggest that it is the internet which conveys anonymity which in turn emboldens the cowardly is absurd, and I'll say that to your face. I would go further, and argue that the internet is LESS anonymous for most users. Yes, you can hide behind proxy servers and different mechanisms to remain concealed, but to do this effectively relies more upon the sophistication of the harasser than the system.
I understand, because it has happened to me. I am over six feet in height, two hundred pounds, and never get insulted in person. Maybe the muscles help. But anyways, I have been insulted many times on BBS systems and the like. One dude posted a few very insulting things, made comments about me and men with Vaseline and aluminum ball bats...he sure liked to play the game until I posted a few very nasty things back, including links a website put up by a retarded fellow that looked very bat. Childish, yes,, but I just get sick of twits like that with insults and other nonsense. I'm a peaceful man, but if someone started this crap in person I would deck him.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
@www.stephenpaulwest.com I agree. I'm constantly slated on here - it's an occupational hazard, but you'd be surprised how many people brick it when they happen to see me in person at an event and cower away.
@www.stephenpaulwest.com And anonymity is a bigger benefit to bullies, yes. But if you want on the football team and they're all 6'3 and hang out together, it only takes the more popular quarterback to make you feel 5'8/150. No tech needed.
@mwagner@... Sometimes the Internet isn't as anonymous as you think. Where three kids can claim plausible deniability to sticking someone with a "kick me" sign, online it can--but isn't always--be more traceable with less plausible deniability.
@mwagner@... I gotta agree. Technology is just a means to further hatred. Laws should cover any type of bullying weather it is online or not.
@mwagner@... We need, for the sake of this debate, to agree on a description of *technology*.

But while I agree that the offenders are to blame, it is unfortunate the technology is a very efficient tool-for far more purposes than we ever really expected. I guess that I have been naive about human nature all my life. That seems odd to me, given my experience. But those who would take unfair advantage of others, be it through cheating or bullying, always seem to find what will work to their advantage. The internet, text messaging, digital cameras, are just modern tools for a major problem. It really needs to be addressed by society at large, and, perhaps, as right here, the internet will be an aid in that endeavor.
0 Votes
+ -
Technology does however make it possible for people to expand their sphere of influence further then ever before. The downside of an anonymous Internet is a lack of accountability. When mean spirited people use the technology to do evil things (such as bullying) or illegal things (such as theft) it is easier to blame the technology than it is to do something about it.
I agree totally. Is not the computer, but a dumbass behind it that send messages. The same is true for weapons: the revolver does not shoot by itself; there are always a small brained holding it and deciding to pull the trigger as if the act was a simple joke.
0 Votes
+ -
@galach

OK, but there are some major differences between cyber and other bullying:

I can write a post saying Zack is a (insert expletive) and get widespread distribution of that comment, although I don't have the stones to say it to his face. Bullying in person takes more nerve and has higher risk than online bullying, because in person, Zack can break my nose.

I can write a post saying Zack is a (insert expletive) anonymously and in 15 seconds. In the old days, I would have had to write it in a letter, go to the post office to mail it, and then Zack's editor would have declined to print it. Zack probably would have been unware of my stupid letter, and the rest of the world definitely would never have seen it.

In face-to-face bullying, the only audience are the jerks who stand around watching. In cyber bulling, word spreads, so the whole school or community are in on the victim's shame. And when the community does not defend the victim, it has the effect of validating the bully's actions.
@DaveN_MVP

Uh, no, in the past/now you would just spraypaint "Zack is a (insert expletive)" on the wall of the school or church. You would probably put something shorter and more banal, of course, because you probably would only able to afford so much spray paint, the wall is only so big, and let's face it, most kids, especially those in the audience for bullies, are stupid.
0 Votes
+ -
FINALLY
OneTwoc21 15th Oct 2010
i have been preaching this to my friends, family, and misc forums/blogs when this topic arises. It is nice to see it actually make some head way.

It really is not the technology, granted the technology is an enabler but it is not the root cause of the issue.

Its the same thing as blaming video games for a kid shooting up a school. Look, the kid had a sawed off shot gun in his room, if his parents took the initiative to be parents and check up on their child, it would have been extremely apparent as to what was going on.

This next statement may be offensive but quite frankly i don't care.

If your upset about a problem, stop blaming the symptoms and blame the cause, if your kid is killing people, maybe you should have been a better parent. If your child is being bullied, maybe as a parent you should know these things because its your job to ask your child questions and pay attention to their online activities. You don't have to be a stalker. In fact i dont have the link to the article but there was a post on ZDNet with a great way to participate in your child's online activities without completely invading their trust all while building trust.

I'm sick and tired of people blaming all the wrong things and suing people for operator errors.

K I'm done, sorry for ranting happy
0 Votes
+ -
Could not technology be a cause?
Mister Spock 15th Oct 2010
As someone noted above "How is this any different than posting a nasty paper or picture on a public bulletin board in the middle of town"

The difference is that you can be seen in public doing so, that you must go to that bulletin board to do so, that your face can and may be reconized by someone, so many may not want to take that risk.

With technology, it can be done anonymously, from the safety of a person's own bedroom, never having to face that risk of being "caught in the act", and therfore more willing to do so.

I am not saying that the technology creates the mean spirited person, just that it allows the person to act.

Understand, if a mean spirited person does nothing out of fear for being caught, then no one else can gets hurt.
plain
0 Votes
+ -
your right
OneTwoc21 18th Oct 2010
@Mister Spock, you do make some very valid points sir happy I think there are always going to be a "grass is always greener" issue on this debate. Because it deals with human interaction.
@Mister Spock
they find people by their IP's etc... finding doesn?t stop them from doing it in the first place. people commit crimes and some get caught (a lot get caught) they still commit crimes.

The technology should only be a factor in that if they do something illegal they can be caught and prosecuted. You can?t prevent people without enslaving people. For all you religious types it that ?free will thing?
@Mister Spock

I think your argument is on the face of it wrong and that such ideas about privacy should not be propagated. It's probably very easy for facebook to identify the IP address of the poster, and the ISP could doubtlessly identify the person leasing that IP address unless the individual took deliberate efforts to hide their tracks, namely and most obviously, by not posting from their own bedroom.

Finally, I'll say just as prostitutes, homosexuals, and minorities are disproportionately the victims of violence, anonymity of the perpetrator isn't the gating factor. It's the lack of sympathy for the victim. The four gang members didn't beat that kid to death because they thought no one would be able to identify them, they did it because they didn't think anyone would be sufficiently motivated to capture and punish them.
@Mister Spock I see a great difference in scale. Bullying is bullying, but do you choose to be embarrassed in the hall, or on national TV? (OK, TV might actually pay you. Is "reality TV" part of the problem or an indicator?)
@OneTwoc21

I agree. But it is always easier to blame other people or use something as a scapegoat than to recognize that WE are part of the problem, and the potential solution. Is easier to play the three monkeys, than to take an atitude.
@galach That is exactly how i feel sir.
0 Votes
+ -
It's not a rant when you have a good point
becabill Updated - 24th Oct 2010
@OneTwoc21 And I wholly agree that we need to quit blaming the tool. It's just a modern version of a whisper campaign, or anonymous phone calls. I blame parents who don't seem to be able to influence their kids' attitudes better that. I blame school systems for indifference. I even blame kids who witness it and do nothing. It seems kids are taught these days to "just stay out of it". And as for physical bullying? Well, as a highly practiced recipient, I am authorized to say that it was virtually encourage by some men who said I ought to stand up and fight like a man. In the Navy, I learned to, but not in grammar/high school. I was often blamed for my own predicament as the smallest, skinniest kid in school (now my doc says I'm fat).
What blows my mind is the girl on girl violence we see on TV news now. Just an extension, inevitable in our new society, I guess. But I worry about our future.
0 Votes
+ -
Its a dumb argument. Its one of those stupid arguments a person makes who suddenly realizes a certain reality about life that everyone else already got, and they insist on telling an already informed world in such a way that over simplifies the issue because thats how the "revelation" about the situation came to them.

Sure; bullying is bullying and homicide is homicide. The added descriptors exist to instantly add important information about the particular nature of the thing. Yes, it exists.
0 Votes
+ -
I concur...
zkiwi 16th Oct 2010
Weird indeed that I agree with you on anything. I agree completely with you on this though.
0 Votes
+ -
Well said.
Pete "athynz" Athens 17th Oct 2010
@Cayble Well said indeed.
Online crap.
Ignore it if it bothers you.
Some people are just too sensitive and take online to heart far too much.
Online is not real life it is only online, there is an off button.
@MoeFugger
Online IS real life if the same people bullying you at school and on the bus are also bullying you at home while you're trying to research a paper and chat with a (rare) friend.

Even if you could just turn the computer off and go read a book, you still have to walk into that school the next day.

And, "too sensitive"? What does that mean? That someone doesn't react to a situation in the way that someone else expects? Who gets to say how sensitive is too sensitive? Did we appoint someone? Elect someone? What are his/her qualifications?

No, "too sensitive" usually means that someone has seen the real meaning behind something someone said. That being the case, the problem lies not with the "too sensitive" person but with the other.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
@MoeFugger That is absolute rubbish and you know it. Just because it doesn't happen physically in your location, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I agree with @clfitz
0 Votes
+ -
@zwhittaker or me and my buddies will whip your a**!
@MoeFugger

Really? So you'd be okay is someone published a video of you having sex?
0 Votes
+ -
At my age
becabill 25th Oct 2010
@aep528 Nobody would watch. Darn it.
@MoeFugger one could argue that "Real Life" isn't real, or that sanity isn't sane. In truth it is a matter of a person's perspective. Let me give you an example - lets say you fell for one of those Phishing emails .. and someone got your credentials for your online banking...

By your logic because it is on line it isn't real ... remember that when your bank account is cleared out by that type of "Bully" (when you break it down those phishing scam emails are just a more sophisticated bully in the bathroom getting your lunch money)

You can only ignore so much - take this scenario - someone who is very skilled in photo shop posts an interesting pick of you - fake ofcourse - in a very compromising position.

There are many out there that would buy the 1000 words that that pic is selling - even among your friends. This could cost you a friendship, job, even a marriage if the pic is convincing enough.

The line between "online" and "In Real Life"(IRL) has truely become blured and bullying is bullying no matter where it is done.
@MoeFugger Well, that's stupid. You live virtual city?
Of course the victim can log off or whatever. Point is, he is probably correct in assuming that nobody else will. He is aware of the snickering that will go on behind his backs, and eventually to his face. He wants to fit in, but he feels like a laughing stock. Off button indeed. MoeFugger, you're a joke. You'll never be accepted by anyone. Get lost and die.
Get it?
0 Votes
+ -
Dash is an Idiot
His_Shadow 16th Oct 2010
Dash's frantic defense of social media regardless of the situation leads him to issue proclamations that are so far removed from the topic it's a wonder anyone but tweens and hipsters give Dash any credence whatsoever.

Dash simply refuses to understand the dynamic at work here. None of the police, parents, school administrators or children I have seen interviewed concerning cyberbullying are unclear about what cyberbullying entails. Only Dash is confused about this issue.

Cyberbullying is not regular bullying at school or work. Cyberbullying is capable of allowing a perpetrator to harass an individual literally anywhere that the target might be, and the perpetrator can bully the target from anywhere in the world thru multiple fronts, be it email, Facebook, Twitter, SMS/MMS, in addition to instantaneously establishing a concerted effort from known and unknown associates of the target. None of the stories I have read or watched even bother to complain or point the finger at technology. They all implicitly understand that cyberbullying is a form of harassment defined by the extent of it's reach, and not an explicit indictment of technology and social networks themselves. This is why Dash ******* are (again) in a twist. His precious, precious social media, which is the only thing he apparently cares about in the world (besides himself) are under attack and he must therefore rise to the defense of social media by declaring that cyberbullying is not real. But his understanding of cyberbullying is so narrowly focused as to be irrelevant to the situation.

And as usual, Dash, like every New Media *********, makes the story about himself, while dismissing out of hand the idea of cyberbullying thru the use of a strawman of Dash's own creation.

Stop reading Dash's articles. He is incapable of understanding.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
@His_Shadow I personally would.
0 Votes
+ -
Waaaaah
His_Shadow 17th Oct 2010
@zwhittaker Waaaaah.
@His_Shadow

Boy Look in the mirror! If you do no like it don't read it! Did he hit a nerve? Must have! Simple ask if it was technology? Your Rant is way off base.
It's still a people problem.
However, technology may enable the problem to a certain extent by providing the anonymity weak people need to tell someone something they wouldn't have the nerve to say to their face.
@Userama I not convinced anonymity is the root of the problem. Most victims of bullying can pretty easily figure out who is the source, and realizing that may hurt more than anything.
0 Votes
+ -
As the subject says; I believe it's simply humans doing what humans do best - blaming someone or something else for the problems they create. Why would a parent or teacher take a blow to their ego by taking responsibility for the little monsters their creating? Why - for that matter - would a parent or a teacher take the time to solve the problem?

Of course cyber-bullying exists. So does phone-bullying or in-person-bullying. Just like Dash says - it's all the same thing and the "how" they do it is not to blame. That's like saying we should get rid of pens because someone stabbed another person with one - ludicrous.

Welcome to a world with imperfect people. Its not changing anytime soon. So, you parents with bullies -find a way to punish them that will teach them the lesson through and through. To you parents with those being bullied - teach them to have a thicker skin and move on with there life. We have way to many victims in this world and we really don't need more.

But wait; all of that would just be way to much work wouldn't it. Well fine, if you really think that way let's just string up Al Gore - I mean he did invent that evil internet; right?

BTW: For all of you wondering; yes - I have an 18yo son. So, I'm speaking from experience.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix