Gangs and the Web

Introduction

Over the last two decades, the Internet has become a vital and integral component in one’s daily life, especially among young people, with gang members being no exception (King, Walpole, & Lamon, 2007). However, the Internet appears to be a most significant decentralized medium, providing a growing unmonitored and uncensored forum, and thus serving as an easy and accessible arena for delinquency (King et al., 2007). Furthermore, youths are more likely to have superior knowledge of computer technology skills, and therefore become capable of performing various types of computer crimes (Moon, McCluskey, & McCluskey, 2010).

There has been a growing corpus of literature on computer crime, but there is no consensus as to its definition. Consequently, several terms have been used interchangeably, such as computer-related crime, cybercrime, digital crime, and Internet crime. The common theme among these definitions is the aspect of using the computer illegally (McQuade, 2006). Accordingly, computer-related crime includes illegal copying and trading of commercial computer software, illegal access to another’s computer system, the creation and/or dissemination of a computer virus, cyberstalking, and cyber-hacking (Bossler & Holt, 2009; McQuade, 2006; Moon et al., 2010). Computer crime has become a global phenomenon and rates continue to rise rapidly; its extent is unknown and varies across studies (Foster, 2004; Higgins, Wilson, & Fell, 2009; Taylor, 1999; Wall, 2005; Wilson, Patterson, Powell, & Hembury, 2006). However, financial damages caused by cybercrime are substantial and may indicate the extent of this online illegal activity. For example, the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) in the United States indicates that 67% of businesses reported financial losses from cybercrimes, which amount to US$867 million (Rantala, 2008).

To date, research on gang members’ online behavior has been largely neglected. This article attempts to fill the gap by examining gang members’ online behavior. By means of an analysis of gang member reports, the study also focuses on group activity on the web. Furthermore, the article aims to explore the role of traditional social processes theories in social processes among gang members while accounting for other established theories of crime for illuminating gang members’ online behavior and delinquency.

Social Processes and Gangs—Theoretical Framework

Traditional theories of microlevel processes focus on three key components in the attempt to explain the etiology of gang member involvement in crime and delinquency: definitions and values, behavioral models for imitation, and moral justifications that facilitate involvement in delinquency (Akers, 1998; Sutherland, 1947; Sykes & Matza, 1957; Warr, 2002). Accordingly, socializing processes include both techniques for carrying out the delinquent behavior, and attitudes and values that support this behavior (Sutherland & Cressey, 1974). Furthermore, the probability that an individual will engage in a criminal offense increases when they differentially associate with others who commit delinquency (Akers, 1985, 1994, 1998; Sutherland, 1947).Another important aspect relates to the socializing of techniques of neutralization (e.g., denial of responsibility, injury or victims, condemnation of condemners, etc.) that provide the individual with exoneration from moral constraints and allow him to engage in delinquency without harm to his self-image (Minor, 1981; Sykes & Matza, 1957).

More recently, microlevel theories have focused on explaining the impact of gang membership in the facilitation of criminal behavior. Several influential factors have been identified, such as low self-esteem, engaging in delinquent behavior before joining a gang, risk seeking, a lack of structure (which leads to more free time), moral disengagement, anti-authority attitudes, group pressure, and rivalry between gangs (Decker, 1996; Esbensen, Huizinga, & Weiher, 1993; Esbensen & Weerman, 2005; Haynie & Osgood, 2005; Klein & Maxson, 1989; Thornberry, Krohn, Lizotte, Smith, & Tobin, 2003).

Youth Online Deviance

Internet use is increasingly rising and has become a dominant medium among youths. Studies show that 87% of the adolescents in the United States surf the Internet and a majority of them surf on the average 3 hr per day (Lenhart, 2005), whereas youths in Israel surf on average 13 hr per week (Israel Knesset Report, 2010). At the same time, youth online deviance has also increased in recent years. Nevertheless, scholars researching juvenile delinquency have devoted little attention to these issues (Moon et al., 2010; Yar, 2005).

The motivation behind youth online deviance is wide ranging and similar to traditional criminal behavior, such as a desire for social respect, revenge, resistance, ideological protest, thrill seeking, theft, burglary, vandalism, and hooliganism (Muncie, 1999; Taylor, 1999; Verton, 2002). In addition, youth engagement in online delinquency is associated with heavy computer use (i.e., many hours a day), membership in cyber clubs, and involvement with delinquent peers (Longshore, Chang, Hsieh, & Messina, 2004; Lee & Ha, 2004; Lee, 2005; Moon et al., 2010).

The term “hacking” relates to “unauthorized access and subsequent use of other people’s computer systems” (Taylor, 1999, p. xi). Hacking behavior is widely accepted in the sense of “computer break-ins” and closely associated with teenager deviance (DeMarco, 2001; Verton, 2002; Yar, 2005). Additional terminology refers to different forms of hacking, such as “cracking” (security breaking), and hacker subgroups, such as “black hat” and “white hat” hackers (Morris, 2010; Williams, 2002).

Yar (2005) examined the ways in which hacking is socially constructed as a process of labeling teenage delinquency in public and academic discourses. In the popular cultural sphere, the media contributes to social construction by highly publicizing some cases of youths who engage in hacking. Furthermore, movies, such as Wargames (1983) and Hackers (1995), have also contributed to the social construction of hacking as youth delinquency (Levi, 2001; Yar, 2005). In the academic domain, research on hacking has mainly focused on interviewing young hackers about their activities (for instance, Taylor, 1999; Verton, 2002). Thus, the perception of teenager deviance has been shaped both in the public and in the academic discourse.

At the individual level, hacking can be viewed as an “Internet addiction disorder” in which the hacker loses the capacity to exercise restraint over his own desire to use the computer (Young, 1998). In this context, it has been argued that Internet addiction disorder is similar to other types of addictions, such as alcoholism or drug addiction (Verton, 2002; Young, 1998). Other factors associated with involvement in hacking are problematic family backgrounds, such as experiences of parental neglect, parental conflicts, parental alcoholism, and physical abuse (Loeber & Stouthamer-Loeber, 1986; Verton, 2002). However, research on the backgrounds of hackers is limited (Morris, 2010).

At the group level, hacking behavior takes place in a distinctive sociocultural context and group structure, and can be seen through perspectives of subcultural and differential association delinquency (Fitch, 2004; Taylor, 1999). These associations mainly occur over the Internet: Peer groups of hackers are formed and sustained via the Internet and interaction is primarily conducted in chat rooms and on bulletin boards. However, they may also associate in the “real world” and have group meetings and organized conferences, primarily in the United States. These groups provide youths with a sense of belonging, social identity, and a way of keeping abreast of technological developments (Rogers, 2000). Interactions can be seen as mechanisms of socialization for novice hackers who are introduced into hacker subcultures. These include ideology and values that legitimize hacking and a hacking lifestyle (codes of dress, speech, and leisure activities). Moreover, engagement in hacker subcultures can also be seen as a social learning process, which provides opportunities for novice hackers to learn tricks and tools from their more experienced counterparts (Fitch, 2004; Taylor, 1999).

The Internet and the Gang

Research attention regarding the effect of the Internet on gangs has been conducted mainly at the macrolevel, namely, the influence of the Internet on spreading gang culture. Indeed, the Internet has had a powerful impact on diffusing the culture, symbols, and lifestyle of gangs (Decker & Pyrooz, 2011; Esbensen & Weerman, 2005; Hagedorn, 2005; Klein et al., 2001). For example, “gangsta rap” music, which is mass-marketed via the Internet, plays a key role in the diffusion of gang culture (Morales, 2003). Similarly, the existence of gangs with American roots in European nations, such as the Crips in the Netherlands and the A and B gangs in Oslo, can be viewed as part of the global diffusion of gang culture (Lien, 2001; Van Gemert, 2001). Furthermore, gangs also utilize the Internet in order to promote their group prestige or transfer messages to rival gangs. For example, YouTube has become a popular channel among Mexican gangs for uploading assassination videos as a form of intimidation (Drezner, 2010).

However, only very few studies have focused on the microlevel of gang members’ online behavior. Findings indicate that 82% of gang members in the United States report that they have access to the Internet and 71% of them use a social networking site, such as Facebook or MySpace (Decker & Pyrooz, 2011). In this context, it is important to note that in recent years access to the Internet has become very easy. Thus, even if gang members do not have access to the Internet at home, they can surf the web at Internet cafes or public institutions that provide online access. Importantly, these public places have an advantage for online delinquency, since they provide unidentified use for those who are involved in illegal online activity.

In general, gang members use the Internet in a manner similar to those youths who are non-gang, namely for social interaction, games, music, and videos (Decker & Pyrooz, 2011). However, the Internet plays a role in sustaining gang members’ prestige: Those who frequently used the Internet report that they had a website to “show or gain” respect for their posse (King et al., 2007). Furthermore, the web provides support for gang activities through bragging, posting gang fights on YouTube, and making threats. Yet, the majority of gang members are still far from taking advantage of the Internet’s full capacity in order to promote and organize their gang activities (Decker & Pyrooz, 2011).

In contrast, among white supremacist and neo-Nazi gangs, the Internet has become a leveraged tool for online recruitment, and these groups have adapted several strategies with the aim of using the power of the Internet to unite and incite (Corb, 2011). Furthermore, the Internet serves as a socialization vehicle for white supremacist movements: The existence of websites dedicated to the neo-Nazi movement allows gang members to discuss the ideology and globalize their illegal activity with the intention of gaining group prestige. Thus, transnational interactions between neo-Nazi gangs play a role in the amplification of delinquent behavior in order to establish social status within the global field of the gangs (Sela-Shayovitz, 2012).

The Current Study

The literature review presented above indicates that computer crime is constantly growing in recent years, although research on juvenile delinquency has given little attention to these issues. Moreover, the effect of the Internet on gangs has been examined mainly at the macrolevel, namely the influence of the Internet on spreading gang culture and lifestyle. At the same time, microlevel research of gangs on the web has been largely neglected. The present study contributes to the existing literature through an analysis of gang members’ online behavior. Furthermore, based on the reports of gang members, the analysis also focuses on their group activity on the web.

Results

Gang Formation and Social Processes

Results show that the Internet does not play a role in the formation of gangs or in gang structure. It seems that gang formation is mainly rooted in the neighborhoods of members and begins in the early years of adolescence (ages 11 to 15 years). About one third of gang members reported that the Internet is a vital part of the group’s activity: They play computer games together, gamble, listen to music, and watch movies and pornographic material:

We have entire meetings of online games. We watch standup, funny YouTube videos or play poker. We gamble on the computer and on the table. I like to gamble, and don’t mind losing money. (R-8, gang member)

Another interesting aspect is related to the social processes of learning computer skills and online delinquency. Almost half of the gang members reported that they had learned technological skills from other friends in their group:

One of the guys is a real computer freak; he knows software and can write programs. He teaches us stuff: how to download games without paying, tricks like sending viruses. (R-26, gang member)

One of us really knows the computer, so we consult him. We download whatever we like. Why pay? So we downloaded a few things, so what? Everybody downloads without giving a damn. Those companies have loads of money anyway, so if you succeed—great! (R-12, gang member)

Thus, the association among members of the gang can be seen as a social learning process of online delinquency: Those who have a high level of computer skills guide the others. These findings are compatible with the differential association theory (Sutherland & Cressey, 1974) and the social learning theory (Akers, 1985, 1994). Accordingly, processes of learning online deviance among gang members comprises differential association and interaction with those who have a high level of computer skills and are already engaged in online deviance through imitation or modeling techniques and learning attitudes that support this behavior. Moreover, it seems that gang members apply techniques of neutralization and justification by denying the harm caused to others and condemning the condemners, namely the hi-tech companies.

Online Interaction and Illegal Activities

Based on the reports of gang members, it appears that the group’s online delinquency is related to members’ technological skills and, accordingly, this group can be divided into three types of subgroups:

Surfing and abstaining: The majority of gang members do not commit cybercrimes, and most of them have a low level of technological skill (63.4%). They engage only in traditional delinquency, for example theft, burglary, violent attacks, and drugs. These youths do not trust the Internet, and their surfing is distinguished by abstention from taking online risks due to their concern about the police. Moreover, they prefer “face-to-face” interaction; they still utilize the Internet for their pleasure and as a source of information about rival gangs:

You never know who will see what you write; you have to consider where and how to talk about drugs and beatings. Important things are discussed only face to face, not on the computer or the phone. But for other stuff, like girls or parties, Facebook is fine. (R-10, gang member)

There was once a fight with a group we didn’t know. There was some pushing and shoving outside a club, and we were drunk. So my friend stabbed one of them, nothing serious, and we fled. But honestly, we were nervous, because we didn’t know what would happen. So we tracked them on a friend’s Facebook to see what happened to the guy that was stabbed. (R-18, gang member)

It seems that the role of posts in generating conflicts is important to gangs, and represents a new variation of gang threats. Furthermore, the concerns of gang members regarding interaction via the Internet and preferring “face-to-face” talk may be understood in light of the fact that over the last year the Israeli police have exposed several cases of illicit drug trafficking conducted via the Internet, and these were given a great deal of publicity by the media.

Surfing and causing harm: Gang members who have a mid-range level of computer skills perform online delinquency in the form of copying software, movies and games, gambling, and spreading viruses (23.3%). Their motivation is wide ranging and includes personal profit, thrill seeking, hooliganism, and revenge, as described in the following:

We insert all sorts of viruses. For instance, we plant them in pictures on Facebook, so if someone opens the picture, the virus penetrates his computer. It’s fun. We love it. We enjoy doing these things. (R-27, gang member)

The interactions of gang members on the Internet feature the use of caution strategies, such as codes, different usernames, and computers in public places. Yet, only two gang members reported that the Internet played a role in their traditional delinquency:

We have an Internet connection with some out-of-town dealers; not on our home computer, but in a coffee shop or community center. We sit in the community center library and correspond. We use a different username and there are codes, so it isn’t a problem. They only work via the computer and the stuff is delivered. We only deal in pills like hagigat, ocean, ecstasy, not the heavy stuff. (R-19, gang member)

Thus, it may be suggested that there is a gap between gang online delinquency and traditional juvenile delinquency. The majority of gang members do not utilize the advantage of the Internet to promote gang offenses.

Surfing and hacking: Gang members who have a high level of technical skills and computer knowledge reported engaging in frequent hacking (13.3%). They are motivated mainly by thrill seeking and curiosity; however, they are also driven by a struggle for recognition, prestige, and revenge. Their hacking behavior has an essential place in the group’s activity with certain attitudes and even hacking “ethics,” such as not vandalizing websites, attacking only rival groups, and not hacking for theft. Here is an example:

We hack into all sorts of websites, for fun, it’s cool. We sit around and try out methods of hacking. We also try to hack into other hackers, but [we] don’t destroy, just hack. If someone tries to destroy a website, he can be caught by the CMD. We can do it, but it’s stupid. We have no interest. It’s enough that we managed to hack into an official site. (R-1, gang member)

These attitudes toward hacking are compatible with prior studies on the subculture of hackers (Taylor, 1999; Thomas, 2002). However, no evidence was found of resistance to authority or ideological protest in the gang members’ hacking.

The current findings are consistent with the “routine activities theory” (Eck & Weisburd, 1995; Felson, 2002). Accordingly, it may be suggested that in those gangs that include youths with computer skills, hacking becomes a routine part of the gang lifestyle, together with surfing and engaging in other types of delinquency. Yet, it seems that the Internet has a key role in the group’s interactions:

Facebook is one of the sites that the police monitor closely. I don’t talk to my friends there. We have our own communications network, so no one can really know what we do and no one can catch us . . . we use the GAIM software, it’s safe; we can simply encode important messages. We upgrade it with some changes, so it’s easy and useful. (R-3, gang member).

However, the Internet also provides a forum for interaction and discussion with other gangs around the globe (in the United States and former USSR) in order to learn about hacker subcultures and strategies of hacking:

Thus, interactions with other groups of hackers can be seen as mechanisms of socialization and the social learning of hacker subculture. Furthermore, the online dynamics that took place between these gangs may be understood in line with the “social facilitation model” (Thornberry, Krohn, Lizotte, & Chard-Wierschem, 1993; Thornberry et al., 2003) within the macrolevel context. According to this model, it may be suggested that hacker gangs tend to interact with youth groups who are already engaged in hacking in order to recruit them to this subculture (selection), and the affiliation to a hacker subculture facilitates their involvement in online delinquency (social facilitation). In addition, these youths have a virtual territory or “turf” (private web) and are involved in online skirmishes with other gangs in the attempt to protect their territory:

We had a problem with another group online; they tried to hack into our network. It was really bad, so we stung them with viruses and made a mess. It didn’t come to physical violence; it stayed online. (R-5, gang member)

These findings are in line with the perceived threat hypothesis (see also Barlow & Decker, 2010), and clearly reflect the social dynamic that took place within the gang. Accordingly, the presence of a perceived threat to the virtual territory of the gang (private web) energized the conflict with other gangs, which in turn led to an escalation of the online delinquency. In addition, gang members reported that their groups used to mark their online activity with symbols:

We have all sorts of codes and symbols, like the fingers [], that we insert after we dealt with a website. But usually it’s just to communicate among ourselves. (R-1, gang member)

We use a red billiard ball. It means ‘we were here, we did this.’ It’s like leaving a signature. (R-4, gang member)

Hence, the level of computer skills is linked to patterns of “show or gain”: In gangs in which youths have a high level of computer skills, they are motivated to gain respect in order to establish their social status within the virtual field of gangs. Yet, most youths are not motivated by showing off:

We don’t need the Internet or Facebook so that people know who we are. Whoever knows us, knows, and believe me, people know who we are and know not to mess with us. (R-19, gang member)

It would seem that some gang members believe that social respect is based on interaction with others in the “real” world, while others prefer to avoid showing off due to their concerns about the police.

The findings below add insight into gang member patterns of online delinquency. The analysis shows that the extent of their involvement in online illegal activity is as follows: gambling (46.6%), music piracy (36.6%), video piracy (36.6%), software piracy (26.6%), dissemination of a computer virus (23.3%), illegal access to another’s computer system (10%), cyber hacking (13.3%), and trading in drugs via the Internet (6.6%). Thus, gang online illegal activity is varied and to some extent similar to that of youths who are not associated with gangs. Moreover, it seems that there is almost no link between their street activity and online delinquency. However, the Internet plays a key role in the social dynamic within the group and in the interaction between gangs, as noted above.

Discussion

This article presents the findings of an exploratory study on gang members’ online behavior. Furthermore, the study attempts to shed light on the processes and illegal activities of these groups on the web by means of an analysis of the reports of gang members. Several findings were particularly noteworthy.

First, gang members spend more time surfing in comparison to the general adolescent population. Thus, it may be suggested that surfing the Internet has become an alternative activity to “hanging out” or becoming involved in street delinquency.

Second, this study’s findings indicate that the Internet does not play a role in the formation of gangs, rather the latter is a process that is mainly rooted in the neighborhoods of gang members and commences in early adolescence. However, the Internet does play a part in gang activities, particularly among those groups in which youths have high level of computer knowledge. Yet, among gangs consisting of youths with low-level computer skills, the Internet takes a marginal place in the group’s activity, which basically manifests itself in not taking online risks.

Third, socializing processes of gang members are also related to learning online delinquency: Those who have high level of computer knowledge guide the others. These processes also include providing moral cover by employing techniques of justification and neutralization for engaging in online delinquency (Akers, 1998; Sutherland, 1947; Sykes & Matza, 1957; Warr, 2002). The findings contribute to the existing corpus of knowledge by broadening the concept of traditional theories, which focus on socializing processes among gang members, to group processes of delinquency in the virtual sphere.

Fourth, the analysis provides evidence indicating that the level of computer skills is a key factor in gang patterns of online delinquency and interaction. Gang members who have low level of computer skills engage in Internet interaction to a small extent and prefer “face-to-face” interaction. However, for those possessing computer skills and abilities, the Internet opens a window of opportunities in the virtual medium for cybercrimes. Their engagement in hacking and other types of computer crimes addresses varied motivations that are compatible with traditional gang delinquency, such as aggressiveness, excitement, desire for social respect, and revenge. Moreover, in gangs that consist of youths who have computer skills, online delinquency becomes a routine part of the gang’s lifestyle. Thus, conceptualized within the framework of the “routine activities theory” (Cohen & Felson, 1979; Felson, 2002), it may be suggested that gang online delinquency occurs when suitable targets on the Internet who lack capable guardianship encounter motivated and skilled youths.

Within the macrolevel context, the current findings highlight the influence of online interaction between gangs on social facilitation processes. In line with the facilitation model (Thornberry et al., 1993, 2003), it may be suggested that social facilitation processes do not take place only within the gang, but also between gangs. Thus, gangs of hackers tend to contact youths who are already engaged in hacking in order to guide them toward a hacker subculture (selection), and affiliation with this subculture facilitates their involvement in online delinquency (social facilitation).

Conclusions

Overall, the Internet does not promote considerable changes in gangs’ traditional juvenile delinquency, which is still situated at the local level. Moreover, it seems that the involvement of gang members in online delinquency is generally similar to the activities of youths who are non-gang members (e.g., gambling, music piracy, video piracy, dissemination of computer viruses). This raises the question of whether gang members’ online delinquency should be considered in the same vein as that of other youths’ misbehavior on the web. However, given the interesting finding that the level of a gang member’s computer skills is a key factor in the potential for engagement in serious cybercrimes, it can be assumed that it is only a matter of time before gang members will obtain further skills and learn to exploit the advantages of the Internet for their group activities. Findings regarding social facilitation processes between gangs in the virtual sphere also suggest that gang involvement in online delinquency has the potential to extend to more serious crimes.

Still, the fact that most gang members express concern about police monitoring on the Internet provides an interesting insight in regard to policy implications. Thus, even though gang involvement in cybercrime is less threatening than traditional delinquent gang behavior, it seems that the publicity of police exposure of illegal online activity has a deterring effect on gang members’ involvement in online delinquency. Yet, further strategies are required in order to address the challenges of gangs in which members have high levels of computer skills.

The current research, of course, is not without its limitations. This study restricted the analysis to gang members in one city. It can be assumed that gang members’ online behavior may not be similar to that of other cities or countries. Therefore, comparative research is required in order to investigate the similarities and differences that exist between gangs in various societies. Furthermore, the use in the present study of a convenience sample and the small number of participants also limits the generalizability of the findings. In addition, the study relied on gang members’ self-reported information, which rises concern about the validity of the data and potential response bias. Thus, even though qualitative analysis provides important insights into this topic, the use of different methodological approaches will enhance existing knowledge in the field. Finally, expanding the analysis to the interactions within the gang and between gangs will provide a better understanding of gangs’ online behavior.