Megan Meier and MySpace
here’s been a case in the news about a teen-aged girl who killed herself over a fake MySpace boyfriend dumping her. Megan Meier was the girl. She was a 13-year-old girl suffering from some depression issues. She made a MySpace friend named Josh Evans, who dumped her after about a month — quite brutally. After the dumping, there were further rotten comments made about Megan to her MySpace page, and the girl ended up hanging herself over the whole mess.
Well, it turns out that “Josh Evans” was actually the parent of another girl that Megan had gone to school with, and had an argument of some sort. Megan’s parents tried to prosecute the parent, Lori Drew, but there aren’t any laws covering what the woman did, so there’s nothing to prosecute her on. (Seems like you should be able to sue in civil court, but I’m not sure of the laws there, either.)
As it happens, the Internet community doesn’t take kindly to the sort of vile behavior this “adult”, Lori Drew, showcased, and is engaging in some vigilante punishment against the woman: A Suicide Victim and the Town that Turned on her Cyber-Bully.
But now, bloggers have taken on Megan’s cause, with an outburst of virtual vigilantism. The Los Angeles Times reported yesterday that dozens of people have apparently been calling local businesses that work with the Drew family’s company, which prints advertising. The Drews’ home address, phone numbers, email addresses and photographs have also been posted on blogs such as RottenNeighbor.com and hitsusa.com. And there are reports that people are driving through the once tranquil neighbourhood in the middle of the night, screaming, “Murderer!”
A grown woman, who, in theory, should know better, fucked with a young girl’s mind to the point where the girl killed herself. I’m sure that wasn’t Drew’s intention, and I’d like to take the high ground and say that punishing this woman through the use of vigilante tactics is wrong, but I just can’t. What Drew did was heinous to the extreme. If it were my kid . . . I’d probably be in jail for savagely beating Drew within an inch of her life. I don’t think I’d be able to stop myself. So, considering that, kudos to Megan’s parents for handling things so civilly, and kudos to the Internet for taking up the cause.
(Picture credit: SantaClaraCountyLib.org.)
November 25th, 2007 at 6:39 pm
I feel really bad for that young girls family. I would also probably do quite a bit of bodily harm to Mrs. Drew. But maybe this is a good time to point out to parents that it is time to get back to some old fashioned basics. Thirteen!! and worried about a boyfriend!! When I was 13 I was still playing with my girlfriends and sometimes Barbie dolls. It just seems to me that kids are getting younger and younger and having boyfriend/girlfriend relationships and moms think this is okay or that it’s cute. It clearly is not! So, 13 and dating is certainly going to lead to 14 and sex…most likely unprotected. Young girls and boys need to be more informed and monitored. What a shame that a young life was wasted. And depressed at 13? WTF?
JavaElemental Reply:
November 30th, 2007 at 1:06 pm
I got a “WTF” from my mom. Ha!
I sort of understand the depressed angle, because teens’ hormones are going nuts, and that can cause problems, but still . . .
November 27th, 2007 at 10:55 pm
couple of thoughts to throw out here: first, its not the first time this sort of thing has happened–remember the famous cheerleader mom murders, etc? the internet is just a different medium for the same kind of craziness.
and, secondly, although i personally think that this is heinous behaviour, and probably would have gone psycho on ms drew had it been my child, i would like to be devils advocate and point out that the whole” freedom of speech” —translating loosley as saying anything you damn well please—issue which was so VIGOROUSLY defended this summer re the whole pedophile with a blog headline, still applies here. Sick, and Wrong, but its still part of the concept.
No good answers from my corner–but it brings up a lot of hot buttonissues as far as parental supervision, appropriate use of the internet by children, the epidemic of depression that faces out teens and preteens, what are the conseqences of this crime? And what do we do when the Law fails to meet the needs of justice
December 2nd, 2007 at 8:44 pm
The naming of Lori Drew has sparked quite a debate indeed. Some major news outlets have chosen to name the perpetrator(s) behind this story such as the New York Times. Some have chosen not to. The mainstream media however has concluded that the blogging community should shoulder the responsibility of first naming the perpetrator behind this story.
The first question I have in this debate is simple. What is new here? Since before the French Revolution, the media has been used to ‘out’ individuals who’s actions seem to bear public relevancy in some way.
Although Lori Drew has not yet been charged in the case of Megan Meier, the media has never required formal charges to be made before running a story. In the case of some journalist like Dan Rather, some media outlets run with stories before even confirming that they’re true.
In this particular case, media outlets that have chosen to withhold Lori Drew’s identity have done so in consideration of other Drew family members.
I’m wondering if by doing this, the media plans to always withhold the names of interesting persons who outrage the community, if those persons have children. This would certainly be quite a ground-breaking event
Right at this moment, there is a story of a cop who is under investigation in the strange death of one wife and the disappearance of another. The cop in the story has a family, yet the media huddles outside his home relentlessly.
I could go back and list thousands of stories where the media wasted no time in delivering the names and occupations of individuals that were later cleared of any wrong-doing. I’ve never heard of another instance where the media apologized for naming names.
Don Henley’s ‘Dirty Laundry’ certainly applies well to conduct of most major news outlets.
Lori Drew is a primary subject of the story, she is not a rape victim, and is not a minor. Identifying her breaks no new ground, nor does it deviate from what news outlets do on a daily basis.
I also remind readers that her name and her role in the Megan Meier tragedy were documented as public record. A public record that Lori filed on her own accord. This is a critically important fact in this debate.
News outlets, bloggers and the general public were handed Lori’s name and Lori’s own self admissions when she herself filed that police report and sought to elevate the entire situation into the public domain.
Had Lori Drew simply acknowledged what she did was wrong, and apologized - the police report that identified her may have never been filed, and the entire situation may have well been kept at the lowest profile.
Will we see the media write about this? Not likely.
Danny Vice
http://weeklyvice.blogspot.com
JavaElemental Reply:
December 8th, 2007 at 1:47 pm
Thanks for the thoughtful and well-written comment. You make some good points about the public record of Lori Drew’s name, and the precedent of naming non-minors, etc, in news reports.
My biggest gripe about the entire issue is that, apparently, there isn’t a law to file a case against Lori Drew, over this issue. I have an extremely difficult time believing that an intelligent prosecutor couldn’t find something to use to press charges. Manslaughter? Child endangerment? Some kind of fraud? I mean, a child killed herself over this. There must be something that can be done.