Does the nature of the humiliating material posted online by offenders of cyber crime contribute to the prosecution of those offenders and the amount of public sympathy received by the victims?
-
Recent Posts
-
Archives
-
Meta
Does the nature of the humiliating material posted online by offenders of cyber crime contribute to the prosecution of those offenders and the amount of public sympathy received by the victims?
It is very good that you specify your question to connecting the nature of online explicit content to the aftermath of publication of such material. However, you may want to consider shifting your focus on either the “prosecution” part or the “public sympathy” part, because one is to evaluate the punishments that the offenders deserve, and the other is to serve as a reason why the offenders deserve their punishments.
The comment above is not an expert opinion and may be subjected to mistake. Please consider it with your own judgment. Thank you.
Kyra, I think you’ve got two research questions there. One is about the effectiveness of prosecution and the other is about public sympathy for the victims. I’d suggest focusing on one or the other. Also, the wording of the issue itself seems vague. If we hadn’t talked about your topic a bit before you posted your question here, I wouldn’t have much of an idea about what you’re talking about. For example, “humiliating material posted online” means what exactly? “Material” itself is a very vague word that could be replaced with something more specific. “Posted online” where exactly? What is an “offender of “cyber crime?” Why focus on the “nature’ of the content? Is there a spectrum of humiliating material, from vaguely humiliating to extremely humiliating that is objective?
You’ve got a good topic but the question is going to need to be considerably reworded,