The Influence Of Modern Technology Could Shape A Person Into Bystander                 

Twenty-eight-year-old Catherine 'Kitty' Genovese was murdered and raped on the street in Kew Gardens, New York, in the early morning hours of March 13, 1964. Initially, the incident received little attention until two weeks later, in the New York Times, Martin Gansberg's infamous article, 'Thirty-Eight Who Saw Murder, Didn't Call the Police,' was published. In fact, the incident was witnessed by only twelve people, yet each did nothing to help Genovese significantly until it was too late. The given crime scene has become the ultimate example of the “bystander effect” meaning regularly alludes in connection to a situation where a greater number of individuals are present, watching the person in trouble or in distress, yet they will be simply watching the person suffer rather than to help and call the authorities. 

People are more likely to help a person in distress or make a move against the situation if there are no witnesses present, it is the dread of being assessed and getting involved. The reason there is consistently scattering of duty is that individuals feel less responsible or mindful of assistance in a situation where there are more witnesses around. The bystander effect arises from the misinterpretation of an undefined emergency situation as a non-emergency based on their own past experiences or other social signals. In the face of ambiguous situations, people initially look for reference clues of past experiences.

The bystander effect is also due to a diffusion of responsibility, since each witness can rationalize his or her lack of action. On the other hand, Today’s technology and social media has influenced our worldwide surroundings in various manners. Modern technology has made a further developed society and economy. We use technology such as cellphones, cameras, radios etc in each part of life today. New advancements and innovation help make a more stable environment and lessens the crime rates. The utilization of technology and the social media in the criminal equity framework isn't new however progressively obvious today.

However, the usage of technology make us feel a human chain in the social media but it’s actually turning us into bystanders. News stories have included people who live-videoing or Periscoping horrendous crime, the defendants have asserted the video was to be utilized as proof, or that they couldn't mediate or else they also would succumb to the wrongdoing. Many people use to post live events instead of indulging in real life experiences. Is this the fact when people are witnessing a crime? More and more shocking events are being shown graphically because of witnesses and spectators filming catastrophic events or the aftermath.

February 27’th in the year of 2016 a young woman was charged with kidnapping, assault,

and sexual abuse involving a minor for Periscoping the rape of her 29-year-old male partner, a teenager. She captured a live video of the sexual assault instead of helping her friend or attempting to interfere in the abuse and uploaded it to her Periscope. The attorney for the prosecution stated “Ms Lonina had apparently hoped that live-streaming the attack would help to stop it, but that she became enthralled by positive feedback online. It is disturbing that as her defense the only main thing that she could do is to take her phone up and to take a video against what is happening during that time. 

A psychology professor named Dara Greenwood states, “The thrill of documenting something that might elicit attention from one’s peers and lead to a feeling of ‘optimal distinctiveness’ may also underlie motivations for posting sensational or unethical behaviors. She also added, “Young adults in particular may be vulnerable to this kind of behavior because of the central role that peer approval plays in their life stage.” The need for acceptance ultimately determines whether to gain attention and validation a bystander should interfere or report the assault on social media. Adolescents, when they rely heavily on peer control, are even more vulnerable to the bystander effect. Peer pressure also prevents them from interfering if none of their peers interfere, because they fear that friends will disapprove. 

Therefore, the witnesses are more likely to keep watching and not to interfere if reporting a crime earns positive feedback, as they did in this case of sexual assault. Users also wonder if the sites are to blame at all, as they are the ones that should be blocked for publishing content. Such social media platforms, however, at any given time receive far too much content to be able to successfully censor content submitted. A recent example of this has been twitter banning certain images and videos commonly associated with illegal content, or generating excessive sensitive information where twitter can not censor content.