Advertisement

Israeli and US Gangs in the Virtual World: The Sociocultural Context of Gang Members’ Online Activity

  • Revital Sela-Shayovitz
  • David C. Pyrooz
  • Scott H. Decker
Chapter

Abstract

The Internet has opened up new opportunities for crime and deviance. Although there is growing interest in gang activity on the web, there is a lack of systematic and comparative evidence about online gang activities. This chapter examines the differences and similarities in online behavior and criminal activity between gang members in the USA and Israel. Drawing on routine activity theory, the study examines the role of online activities (e.g. hours spent online, YouTube use, social network use) and online gang-related activities (e.g., gangs have websites, organize and recruit online, view the web as important) in online offending and deviance. Data were collected through face-to-face interviews with 136 current gang members in the USA and 57 gang members in Israel. Findings indicate that there are differences in online activities of gang members and gangs across countries, although levels of offending are largely similar. Furthermore, the analyses reveal that online routines were positively related to online offending of gang members in the USA, while only technological ability was significantly related to offending in Israel. We discuss these findings in the context of existing research on gangs and the web, offer directions for future research, and suggest some response strategies.

Keywords

The Internet Gangs Routine activities theory Crime and deviance Israel United States 

References

  1. Arquilla, J., & Ronfeldt, D. (1997). In Athena’s camp: Preparing for conflict in the information age. Santa Monica, CA: Rand.Google Scholar
  2. Bersani, B. E. (2014). An examination of first and second generation immigrant offending trajectories. Justice Quarterly, 31(2), 315–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boniel-Nissim, M., & Latzer, Y. (2011). The characteristics of pro-ana community. In D. Stein & Y. Latzer (Eds.), Treatment and special issue of eating disorders (pp. 73–84). New York: Nova Science.Google Scholar
  4. Boonaert, T., & Vettenburg, N. (2011). Young people’s internet use: Divided or diversified? Childhood, 18(1), 554–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bouchard, M., & Spindler, A. (2010). Groups, gangs, and delinquency: Does organization matter? Journal of Criminal Justice, 38(5), 921–933.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chan, J., & Leung, L. (2005). Lifestyles, reliance on traditional news media and online news adoption. New Media & Society, 7(3), 357–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cohen, L. E., & Felson, M. (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Review, 44(4), 588–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Conway, M. (2010). Terrorism and the internet: A review of the history, issues, and responses. In P. Reich (Ed.), Cybercrime and security. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Corb, A. (2011). Into the minds of mayhem: White supremacy, recruitment, and the internet. Cambridge, England: Google Ideas.Google Scholar
  10. Davidson, J., & Martellozzo, E. (2013). Exploring young people’s use of social networking sites and digital media in the internet safety context. Information, Communication & Society, 16(9), 1456–1476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dawson, L. L., & Hennebry, J. (1999). New religions and the internet: Recruiting in a new public space. Journal of Contemporary Religion, 14(1), 17–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Decker, S. H. (1996). Collective and normative features of gang violence. Justice Quarterly, 13(2), 243–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Decker, S. H., Katz, C. M., & Webb, V. J. (2008). Understanding the black box of gang organization: Implications for involvement in violent crime, drug sales, and violent victimization. Crime & Delinquency, 54(1), 153–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Decker, S. H., & Pyrooz, D. C. (2010). Gang violence around the world: Context, culture and country. In G. McDonald (Ed.), Small arms survey (pp. 128–155). London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Decker, S. H., & Pyrooz, D. C. (2011). Gangs, terrorism, and radicalization. Journal of Strategic Security, 4(4), 151–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Decker, S. H., & Pyrooz, D. C. (2012). Gang offending and online behavior. JRSA Forum 30(3), 1–4.Google Scholar
  17. Decker, S. H., Pyrooz, D. C., Sweeten, G., & Moule, R. K. (2014). Validating self-nomination in gang research: Assessing differences in gang embeddedness across non-, current, and former gang members. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 30(4), 577–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Decker, S. H., Van Gemert, F., & Pyrooz, D. (2009). Gangs, migration and crime: The changing landscape in Europe and the United States. Journal of International Migration and Immigration, 10(1), 393–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Decker, S. H., & Van Winkle, B. (1996). Life in the gang: Family, friends and violence. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Densley, J. A. (2012). Street gang recruitment. Social Problems, 59(3), 301–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Densley, J. (2013). How gangs work: Ethnography of youth violence. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Esbensen, F.-A., & Carson, D. C. (2012). Who are the gangsters? An examination of the age, race/ethnicity, sex, and immigration status of self-reported gang members in a seven-city study of American youth. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 28(4), 465–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Esbensen, F.-A., & Maxson, C. L. (2012). Youth gangs in international perspective. Results from the Eurogang program of research. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Esbensen, F.-A., Winfree, L. T., He, N., & Taylor, T. J. (2001). Youth gangs and definitional issues: When is a gang a gang, and why does it matter? Crime & Delinquency, 47(1), 105–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Felson, M. (1995). Those who discourage crime. In J. E. Eck & D. Weisburd (Eds.), Crime and place (pp. 53–66). Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.Google Scholar
  26. Felson, M. (2002). Crime and everyday life (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  27. Felson, M. (2006). The street gang strategy. In M. Felson (Ed.), Crime and nature (pp. 305–324). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  28. Gerstenfeld, P. B., Grant, D. R., & Chiang, C. (2003). Hate online: A content analysis of extremist internet sites. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 3(1), 29–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gui, M., & Argentin, G. (2011). Digital skills of internet natives: Different forms of digital literacy in a random sample of northern Italian high school students. New Media & Society, 13(6), 963–980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hagedorn, J. (2008). A world of gangs: Armed young men and gangsta culture. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  31. Hanser, R. D. (2011). Gang-related cyber and computer crimes: Legal aspects and practical points of consideration in investigations. International Review of Law, Computers, and Technology, 25(1–2), 47–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Harel-Fisch, Y., Korn, I., Fogel-Grinvald, H., Ben- David, I., & Nave, S. (2009). Youth in Israel: Social welfare, mental health, and risk behavior. Ramat Gan, Israel: Bar Ilan University press (Hebrew).Google Scholar
  33. Hargittai, E. (2008). Whose space? Differences among users and non-users of social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 276–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Holt, T. J. (2007). Subcultural evolution? Examining the influence of on- and off-line experiences on deviant subcultures. Deviant Behavior, 28(2), 171–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Holt, T. J., & Bossler, A. M. (2008). Examining the applicability of lifestyle-routine activities theory for cybercrime victimization. Deviant Behavior, 30(1), 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Holt, T. J., & Bossler, A. M. (2013). Examining the relationship between routine activities and malware infection indicators. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 29(3), 420–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Holt, T. J., Bossler, A. M., & May, D. C. (2012). Low self-control, deviant peer associations, and juvenile cyber deviance. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 37(3), 378–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Horrigan, J. (2010). Broadband adoption and use in America OBI working paper series. Federal Communications Commission. Retrieved from http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/FCCSurvey.pdf.
  39. Hu, Q., Xu, Z., & Yayla, A. A. (2013). Why college students commit computer hacks: Insights from a cross culture analysis. Retrieved from http://beta.orionsshoulders.com/Resources/articles/26_22254_%20().pdf.
  40. Internet World Stats. (2014). World Internet users and population stats. Retrieved from http://www.internetlivestats.com/internet-users.
  41. Interpol. (2014). Cybercrime report. Retrieved from http://www.interpol.int/Crime-areas/Cybercrime/Cybercrime.
  42. Israel Internet Association. (2014). A survey of internet usage among Israeli youth. Retrieved from http://data.isoc.org.il/data/563.
  43. King, J. E., Walpole, C. E., & Lamon, K. (2007). Surf and turf wars online—Growing implications of internet gang violence. Journal of Adolescent Health, 4(6), 66–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Klein, M. W. (2005). The value of comparisons in street gang research. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 21(2), 135–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Klein, M. W., & Maxson, C. M. (2006). Street gang patterns and policies. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Livingstone, S., & Helsper, E. (2010). Balancing opportunities and risks in teenagers’ use of the internet: The role of online skills and internet self-efficacy. New Media & Society, 12(2), 309–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Lobe, B., Livingstone, S., Ólafsson, K., & Vodeb, H. (2011). Cross-national comparison of risks and safety on the Internet. London School of Economics and Political Science. Retrieved from http://www.lse.ac.uk/media@lse/research/EUKidsOnline.
  48. Madden, M., Lenhart, A., Duggan, M., Cortesi, S., & Gasser, U. (2013). Teens and technology. The Berkman Center for Internet & Society, Harvard University. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2013/03/13/teens-and-technology-2013.
  49. Maratea, R. J., & Kavanaugh, P. K. (2012). Deviant identity in online contexts: New directives in the study of a classic concept. Sociological Compass, 6(2), 102–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Matsuda, K. N., Esbensen, F.-A., & Carson, D. C. (2012). Putting the ‘gang’ in ‘Eurogang’: Characteristics of delinquent youth groups by different definitional approaches. In F.-A. Esbensen & C. L. Maxson (Eds.), Youth gangs in international perspective: Results from the Eurogang program of research (pp. 17–33). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. McCuddy, T., & Vogel, M. (2014). More than just friends: Online social networks and offending. Criminal Justice Review, 6(1), 1–21.Google Scholar
  52. Meldrum, R. C., & Clark, J. (2013). Adolescent virtual time spent socializing with peers, substance use, and delinquency. Crime & Delinquency, 20(1), 1–23.Google Scholar
  53. Mesch, G. S. (2009). The internet and youth culture. Hedgehog Review, 11(1), 50–60.Google Scholar
  54. Morselli, C., & De’Cary-Hetu, D. (2012). Crime facilitation purposes of social networking sites: A review and analysis of the “cyberbanging” phenomenon. Small Wars and Insurgencies, 24(1), 152–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Moule, R. K., Pyrooz, D. C., & Decker, S. H. (2013). From ‘What the F#@% is a Facebook?’ to ‘Who Doesn’t use Facebook?’: The role of criminal lifestyles in the adoption and use of the internet. Social Science Research, 42(6), 1411–1421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Moule, R. K., Pyrooz, D. C., & Decker, S. H. (2014). Internet adoption and online behavior among American gangs: Integrating gangs and organizational theory. British Journal of Criminology, 54(6), 1186–1206. doi: 10.1093/bjc/azu050.
  57. Osgood, D. W., Wilson, J. K., Bachman, J. G., O’Malley, P. M., & Johnston, L. D. (1996). Routine activities and individual deviant behavior. American Sociological Review, 61(4), 635–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Patton, D. U., Eschmann, R. D., & Butler, D. A. (2013). Internet banging: New trends in social media, gang violence, masculinity and hip-hop. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(5), 54–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Pratt, T. C., Holtfreter, K., & Reisig, M. D. (2010). Routine online activity and internet fraud targeting: Extending the generality of routine activity theory. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 47(3), 267–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants (part 1). On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Pyrooz, D. C. (2014). “From your first cigarette to your last dyin’ day”: The patterning of gang membership in the life-course. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 30(2), 349–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Pyrooz, D. C., Decker, S. H., & Moule, R. K. (2015). Criminal and routine activities in online settings: Gangs, offenders, and the internet. Justice Quarterly, 32(3), 471–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Pyrooz, D. C., Fox, A. M., Katz, C. M., & Decker, S. H. (2012). Gang organization, offending, and victimization: A cross-national analysis. In F.-A. Esbensen & C. L. Maxson (Eds.), Youth gangs in international perspective: Results from the Eurogang program of research (pp. 85–105). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Reid, E., & Chen, H. (2002). Internet-savvy U.S. and middle eastern extremist groups. Mobilization: An International Quarterly Review, 12(2), 177–192.Google Scholar
  65. Rogers, E. (2005). The diffusion of innovation (5th ed.). New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  66. Schradie, J. (2012). The trend of class, race, and ethnicity in social media inequality. Information, Communication and Society, 15(4), 555–571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Sela-Shayovitz, R. (2012a). Gangs and the web: Gang members’ online behavior. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 28(4), 389–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Sela-Shayovitz, R. (2012b). The impact of globalization, migration, and social group processes on neo-Nazi youth gangs. In F.-A. Esbensen & C. L. Maxson (Eds.), Youth gangs in international perspective: Results from the Eurogang program of research (pp. 295–310). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  69. Silverblatt, A. (2004). Media as social institution. American Behavioral Scientist, 48(1), 35–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Skinner, W. F., & Fream, A. M. (1997). A social learning theory analysis of computer crime among college students. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 34(4), 495–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Sweeten, G. A., Piquero, R., & Steinberg, L. (2013). Age and the explanation of crime, revisited. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42(6), 921–938.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Tcherni, M., Davies, A., Lopes, G., & Lizotte, A. (2015). The dark figure of online property crime: Is cyberspace hiding a crime wave? Justice Quarterly. doi: 10.1080/07418825.2014.994658.
  73. Thornberry, T. P., Krohn, M. D., Lizotte, A. J., Smith, C. A., & Tobin, K. (2003). Gangs and delinquency in developmental perspective. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  74. Thornberry, T. P., Krohn, M. D., Lizotte, A. J., & Chard-Wierschem, D. (1993). The role of juvenile gangs in facilitating delinquent behavior. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 30(1), 55–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Tyler, T. R. (2002). Is the internet changing social life? It seems the more things change, the more they stay the same. Journal of Social Issues, 58(1), 195–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Van Deursen, A., & Van Dijk, J. (2010). Internet skills and the digital divide. New Media & Society, 11(1), 1–19.Google Scholar
  77. Van Dijk, J., & Hacker, K. (2003). The digital divide as a complex and dynamic phenomenon. The Information Society, 19(4), 315–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Van Hellemont, E. (2012). Gangland online: Performing the real world of gangstas and ghettos in Brussels. European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, 20(1), 159–173.Google Scholar
  79. Weerman, F. M., Bernasco, W., Bruinsma, G. J., & Pauwels, L. J. (2013). When is spending time with peers related to delinquency? The importance of where, what, and with whom. Crime & Delinquency. doi:  10.1177/0011128713478129.
  80. Weerman, F., Maxson, C., Esbensen, F.-A., Aldridge, J., Medina, J., & van Gemert, F. (2009). Eurogang program manual. Eurogang Network. Retrieved from http://www.umsl.edu/ccj/eurogang/EurogangManual.pdf.
  81. Weimann, G. (2004). Www.terror.net : How modern terrorism uses the Internet (Special report 116). Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace.
  82. Weimann, G. (2006). Virtual disputes: The use of the internet for terrorist debates. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 29(7), 623–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Wolfe, S. E., Higgins, G. E., & Marcum, C. D. (2008). Deterrence and digital piracy: A preliminary examination of the role of viruses. Social Science Computer Review, 26(3), 317–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Wolfe, S. E., Marcum, C. D., Higgins, G. E., & Ricketts, M. L. (2014). Routine cell phone activity and exposure to sex messages: Extending the generality of routine activity theory and exploring the etiology of a risky teenage behavior. Crime & Delinquency. doi:  10.1177/0011128714541192.
  85. Womer, S., & Bunker, R. J. (2010). Surenos gangs and Mexican cartel use of social networking sites. Small Wars and Insurgencies, 21(1), 81–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Yar, M. (2005). Computer hacking: Just another case of juvenile delinquency? The Howard Journal, 44(4), 387–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Revital Sela-Shayovitz
    • 1
  • David C. Pyrooz
    • 2
  • Scott H. Decker
    • 3
  1. 1.David Yellin Academic College and Institute of Criminology, The Hebrew University of JerusalemJerusalemIsrael
  2. 2.Department of SociologyUniversity of Colorado—BoulderBoulderUSA
  3. 3.School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Arizona State UniversityTempeUSA

Personalised recommendations