The "Just Watching" Classroom Cultivates Online Bullying—The Growing Debate on "Internet Licenses" in Germany

Shouldn't children learn how to use the internet before being given smartphones?
In Germany, such a debate is once again gaining attention.

The catalyst is reports of cyberbullying becoming a serious issue among children and young people. The German local newspaper HNA reported that the anti-cyberbullying organization "Bündnis gegen Cybermobbing" is calling for the mandatory introduction of "Internetführerschein," or "internet licenses," in schools.

Of course, this license is not a qualification to drive on the road like a driver's license. It is a concept to teach children basic digital citizenship education before they start using smartphones and social media in earnest. This includes rules for interacting with others online, the responsibility of handling others' photos and personal information, how to act when someone is attacked in a class chat, and how to identify and stop fake images created by AI.

The background is the reality that cyberbullying is no longer a special issue for a few. The HNA article mentions that "one in four students in Germany has experienced cyberbullying." Surveys by anti-cyberbullying organizations also show an increasing trend in victimization among children and young people. The "Cyberlife V" survey in 2024 states that approximately 2 million children and students in Germany have been victims of cyberbullying at least once.

The horror of cyberbullying lies in the fact that what happens in the classroom does not end after school. In the past, bullying could be physically distanced from once outside of school. However, today's children carry school in their pockets. Class chats, social media, video sharing services, and voice chats in games—malice follows them with just one notification sound, no matter where they are.

The case of a girl introduced in the HNA article is also symbolic. Bullying that started in the classroom spread to class chats, with rumors and photos disseminating around. Although she had friends and was not the isolated type, she could not withstand the repeated attacks and eventually had to change schools.

This case shows that victims of cyberbullying are not limited to "weak" or "inconspicuous" children. Anyone can become a target. A photo taken by chance, a comment sent as a joke, a baseless rumor created by someone, an image processed by AI—if these spread to the entire class, grade, or even outside the school, it can feel like a public execution with no escape for the person involved.

More serious is the fact that the perpetrators are not always anonymous strangers. The term "cyberbullying" might lead one to imagine attacks by anonymous users somewhere on the internet. However, in children's cyberbullying, the perpetrators are often from the same school, class, or club activities. In other words, online violence is deeply connected to offline relationships.

The anti-cyberbullying organization points out that much of cyberbullying is rooted in schools. This is an important perspective. The issue is not just within smartphones. Smartphones have become devices that spread the power dynamics of the classroom, peer pressure, the hierarchy of popular and unpopular people, and the blurred lines between jokes and attacks more quickly, widely, and cruelly.

This raises the question of the school's responsibility.

In the HNA article, the representative of Bündnis gegen Cybermobbing argues that schools should protect victims and impose clear sanctions on perpetrators. If the perpetrator remains at school as if nothing happened, while only the victim transfers, it becomes a double pain for the victim and a learning experience for the perpetrator that "it's okay to do it."

Of course, it is not easy to place all the responsibility on the school. Teachers already have many duties, and smartphone and social media troubles occur outside of school hours. Parents do not constantly monitor their children's smartphones. Even if platform operators have reporting and removal systems, they cannot change the atmosphere of class chats.

This is why the idea of an "internet license" has a certain persuasive power.

Before driving a car, one learns traffic rules: stop at red lights, protect pedestrians, and take responsibility if an accident occurs. These cannot be excused by "I didn't know." The same way, there is a need for opportunities to learn minimum rules for online communication.

For example, children need to systematically learn the following:

Do not share others' photos without permission.
Even if intended as a joke, if it hurts someone, it can become bullying.
When someone is attacked in a class chat, laughing, just marking it as read, or joining in with a sticker can be seen as part of the aggression by the victim.
Images and false information created by AI can easily destroy someone's honor or life.
When victimized, take screenshots, consult a trusted adult, and do not hesitate to report or block.
When witnessing aggression, actions like saying "stop," individually reaching out to the victim, or informing an adult are necessary.

Particularly important is the presence of bystanders.

In cyberbullying, the problem is not only the person who wrote the attacking message. The presence of those watching, laughing, spreading, or doing nothing empowers the perpetrator. The HNA article also introduces a case where some students in a class chat raised their voices to say "stop," but ultimately, the surrounding people treated it as "just a joke."

On social media, this issue of "just watching" tends to attract attention. Searching public posts reveals educational accounts treating cyberbullying as a critical issue for schools and families, organizations guiding children to consultation services, and posts calling for internet safety education. On the other hand, words like "license" and "mandatory education" can easily draw mixed reactions. Supporters believe it is dangerous to let children onto the internet without teaching them rules as the age for owning smartphones decreases. The cautious side worries that if the format of exams and licenses leads, it could widen the gap between family environments and schools, resulting in ineffective "checklist education."

Additionally, the axis of "ban or educate" is prominent on social media. There is a strong voice for restricting children's use of social media and smartphones until a certain age. Given the severity of the harm, the idea is to first reduce contact opportunities. However, there is also a counterargument that a complete ban would leave children unable to protect themselves when they eventually encounter the internet. In reality, even if social media is banned, online connections among children remain through messaging apps, games, video services, and shared tools within schools. Therefore, it is necessary to combine age-appropriate restrictions with continuous media literacy education, rather than choosing between banning and educating.

Germany already has an initiative called "Surfschein" where children learn internet knowledge. This "internet license" type of educational material provided by Internet-ABC teaches the workings of the internet, online participation, how to protect oneself from dangers, and how to use media. Children can earn a certificate by achieving a certain score. Such existing materials can provide hints in the current debate.

However, what is currently needed goes beyond the mere dissemination of quiz materials. The issue is not just whether children can choose the "correct answer."

In actual class chats, the atmosphere of the moment often prevails over correct knowledge. Even if one thinks "this is not good" when someone is being teased, they might stay silent out of fear of losing friendships. To avoid becoming the next target, they might join the side that laughs. Therefore, countering cyberbullying requires education not only in knowledge but also in group psychology.

A moral explanation of "do not write bad things on the internet" is not enough.
"Why do people tend to become cruel in groups?"
"Why does leaving messages unread isolate the victim?"
"Why is spreading part of the aggression?"
"Why is a 'joke' not a joke to the victim?"
These questions need to be addressed as concrete cases within schools.

Furthermore, the emergence of generative AI in recent years has complicated the issue. Fake images created by AI, manipulated photos, fabricated statements not made by the person, and deepfake-like harassment can cause more significant harm than traditional insults or rumors. Even if it is a prank among children, once an image spreads, it is challenging to retrieve. It can affect not only the victim's heart but also their education, employment, and relationships.

Therefore, the content of the "internet license" should also include risk education in the AI era.
Images and videos are not always genuine.
Fake images made for fun can lead to defamation or invasion of privacy.
Forwarding something just because "everyone is sending it" makes you part of the aggression.
These rules need to be taught in scenarios children are likely to encounter, rather than in abstract terms.

On the other hand, there are calls for legal arrangements. The HNA article points out that in Germany, cyberbullying itself is not sufficiently treated as a separate criminal category. Of course, existing laws can address cases of defamation, threats, insults, unauthorized disclosure of personal information, and unauthorized dissemination of images. However, from the perspective of victims, schools, and parents, it is unclear "where the illegality begins," "where to consult," and "to what extent schools can intervene."

Law is not omnipotent. Caution is needed in immediately turning children's troubles into criminal issues. However, without clear standards, schools are likely to postpone responses. Perpetrators' parents may perceive it as "children's quarrels," "jokes," or "lack of evidence," leaving only the victims exhausted. Therefore, it is essential to establish preventive education, intervention standards for schools, methods for keeping records, consultation windows, and phased responses to aggressive acts.

Looking at reactions on social media, among those interested in cyberbullying measures, issues like "schools alone can't handle it," "parents need knowledge too," and "more awareness of consultation services for children" are prominent. There are already existing support and learning resources, such as online consultations for young people like JUUUPORT, internet safety education like klicksafe, and educational materials like Internet-ABC. However, they are meaningless if they do not reach those in need.

Here, education for parents becomes crucial.

When giving children smartphones, many families pay attention to the rate plans, device costs, usage time, and app restrictions. However, how many families discuss class chat troubles, photo sharing, the scope of social media publication, reporting methods, and how to preserve evidence with their children? Even if a child is victimized, there are many reasons they might not talk to their parents. They fear being scolded, having their smartphone taken away, or the situation worsening if the school is informed.

Therefore, the first attitude parents should show is "thank you for telling me," rather than "why did you do that." For a child who has been victimized, the reaction of the first adult they consult is decisive. If they are blamed here, they will never consult again. Conversely, if the adult calmly accepts, preserves evidence, and collaborates with the school or specialized institutions, the possibility of stopping the spread of harm increases.

Schools are also required to adopt the same stance.

The response of "it's not related because it happened on social media outside of school" no longer fits reality. If an attack in a classmate chat destroys the human relationships in the classroom the next day, it is a problem directly linked to school life. It is difficult to draw a line of responsibility based solely on whether it happened during class or after school.

However, this does not mean schools should monitor everything. What is needed is not surveillance but a reliable consultation route and clear procedures when an incident occurs. Who to consult, at what stage to contact parents, how to handle evidence, how to guide perpetrators, how to ensure the safety of victims, and how to engage with the bystander class—deciding these in advance is the first step to preventing victim isolation.

The term "internet license" has a somewhat rigid connotation. Some may feel it binds children with exams. However, the essence of this concept is not to punish children but to ensure they are not sent unarmed into the lawless territory of the internet.

For children, smartphones are tools to connect with friends, tools for learning, and tools for play. On the other hand, they can also become tools for harming others. This is why it is necessary to learn how to use them together before giving them. Just as traffic rules are taught before riding a bicycle on the road, rules of dignity and responsibility should be taught before interacting with people online.

The issue of cyberbullying is not unique to Germany. In Japan as well, troubles staged on school group LINE, Instagram, TikTok, game chats, etc., are not uncommon. The spread of AI images and anonymous posts will likely become an even bigger issue in the future. Therefore, the debate happening in Germany is not irrelevant to Japan.

What is important is not just telling children "don't have a smartphone."
If they have one, how to use it.
When someone is being hurt, how to stop it.
When they are hurt, where to seek help.
When they mistakenly become part of the aggression, how to take responsibility.

It is time to consider these not as responsibilities left to families, schools, or platforms, but as common education for society as a whole.

What torments victims of cyberbullying the most is not just the insults themselves. It is the fact that even though others are watching, they do not help, that no one seriously stops it, and that they feel as if they are the only ones facing the problem.

To protect children online, what is needed is not just the latest app restrictions.
Increasing the number of people who do not just "watch."
And teaching that there is a real person on the other side of the screen before handing over a smartphone.

The proposal of an "internet license" might be one entry point for this.

Source URL

HNA: Articles on cyberbullying damage in Germany, the demand for an "internet license" by Bündnis gegen Cybermobbing, and views on schools, bystanders, and SNS bans
https://www.hna.de/politik/online-mobbing-trifft-millionen-buendnis-fordert-internet-fuehrerschein-zr-94380458.html

Bündnis gegen Cybermobbing "Cyberlife V" Survey: Background data on the number of cyberbullying victims among children and students in Germany, victimization rates, relationship with schools, and the impact of victimization
https://buendnis-gegen-cybermobbing.de/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Cyberlife_Studie_2024_Endversion.pdf

Internet-ABC "Surfschein": Existing example of "internet license" type learning material for children
https://www.internet-abc.de/surfschein/

Internet-ABC Parent "Surfschein": Content and system of learning materials for safe internet use for parents and children
https://www.internet-abc.de/eltern/familie-medien/surfschein/

klicksafe "Cyberbullying": Reference information on the definition, characteristics, consultation, and countermeasures of cyberbullying
https://www.klicksafe.eu/en/cybermobbing

Explanation of cyberbullying by the German Federal Ministry for Family Affairs, Senior Citizens, Women, and Youth: Reference information on the characteristics of online defamation spreading widely and being viewable at any time
##HTML_TAG