I'd hoped that the nonsense about the 'Blue whale' suicide game had been a flash in the pan, but it's continuing to be spread. The Daily Mail ran another story on it on May 10th and it's about the 'mastermind' behind it; Philipp Budeikin, who I mentioned in my previous blog post; Blue Whale suicide game or hoax? I don't think there's any doubt that this guy is one very sick individual, and it does look as though he created at least 8 social media groups on the Russian version of Facebook, VKontackte with the express purpose of preying on children. However, that doesn't mean that he invented a game at all, but it's far easier to hook a story on that concept than to have to explain how social media groups work.
The Daily Mail article is full of inaccuracies, vague accounts and hysteria. There is a reference to Angelina Davydova, 12, who fell to her death from the 14th floor of an apartment block on Christmas Day 2015. Now, there are plenty of people with that name, but I couldn't find any mention of one who killed herself, other than in newspaper reports that quoted the Daily Mail article. What's interesting however is that almost a year previously, on 26th May 2016 the same picture of the girl Angelina is used, but in that story she's referred to as 'Elya Davydova' and the story is all about Russian suicide sites, with NO mention of the Blue Whale 'game'. Either the Mail is guilty of sloppy journalism, or perhaps it thinks we'll be more sympathetic towards a girl with a more Westernised name?
There's reference to a girl only referred to as 'Anna K' who according to the Mail hung herself after becoming obsessed with 'the game'. However, Russian newspapers (I've just linked to one) make no reference to how she died, or to any game at all. The inference is that she was just a very confused young woman. The Mail also talks about a girl called Vilena Piven, but again, newspaper reports refer to her being involved with an online suicide group, but there's no reference again to the 'Blue Whale game'.
The Mail also shows a screenshot of a girl and says "A harrowing photo showing a young girl some seconds before jumping down from a roof". I've searched for this image and the only place I can see it is as a thumbnail for 7 YouTube videos, but she doesn't appear in any of the videos. The Mail also uses typically vague phrases such as "A disturbing video purports to show one Russian girl jumping to her death" and "it is feared in Russia that dozens have done so at the bidding of Budeikin or other 'mentors". So - no facts, just sensational scaremongering. However, there's plenty more. They say that Budeikin is also known as "Philipp Lis (meaning Fox)". It's true, that surname does mean Fox - but only in Polish. There's no indication that he is Polish, so the reference is pointless, except to further their sensationalism. The Mail also goes on to say that he's getting dozens of love letters from girls, and the Russian authorities are powerless to stop him receiving them. Really? (At this point I should say that I've not had the opportunity of checking out Russian law on what prisoners are allowed to receive, but let's just say that I'm very skeptical.)
Now - to be clear, I'm not suggesting that this guy hasn't done what is claimed - that he has been culpable in the deaths of young Russian woman. However, what I am saying is that there is no reference at all to the 'Blue Whale game' until newspapers started to provide sensationalist coverage of it. Certainly the Mail didn't reference it last year with the piece that they wrote. As a 'game' it's an invention. It's easier to scare parents by using a game concept - but it's also dangerous, because parents will assume that a game can be downloaded as an app, or played online. If they discuss things with their children, it's going in the wrong direction to talk about a game, and a child can very easily deflect attention to their mental health by saying they haven't played any such game or downloaded it. Far from protecting children it's going the other way entirely.
Moving away from the current scare, I also have an update on conversations that I had previously. I had little luck speaking to the Essex Safeguarding Children Board, so I wrote to them, and got a reply from the Independent Chair. He told me that the board has NOT issued any information about it, which appears to completely contradict what one Deputy Head teacher told me, so someone is getting very confused. he also said 'I am not critical of any local organisations which have sent out such bulletins or tried to raise awareness'. He goes on; 'busy managers do not have the opportunity to verify all of the information that comes to their attention, particularly when it is already widely available'. This I find astonishing; apparently children's safety isn't worth the time it takes to run a quick check on Google to at least raise a question of authenticity, which could then be raised with another appropriate member of staff, such as the librarian, who could check it in detail. The fact that enough people are spreading fake news and false accounts makes it perfectly acceptable for other people to do so as well.
Now, does this really matter? I contend that it does. Not only for the reason that I previously mentioned; it allows deflection in a discussion with a child, but it also illustrates to children that adults are not capable of independently checking and verifying information for themselves. Rather than setting themselves up as good examples of information literate internet users they're doing the opposite. Children are not stupid, and they can quickly work out things for themselves, and this will just help confirm that fake news is an acceptable part of life today, because after all, if their teachers are spreading it, it can't be that bad, surely? (My opinion, backed up with discussions that I've had with young people so feel free to ignore!)
If we want children to grown up with good levels of information literacy, an understanding of how to access and verify information we don't achieve this by demonstrating knee jerk reactions to sensationalist stories in the press which are written to get readers, not be accurate.
Comments