O
F
V
IRUSES AND
V
ICTIMS
: F
RAMING THE
I
NTERNET
, 1988-1990 12
Morris and other would-be hackers about the consequences of sending viruses, Morris’s
sentence was relatively light by most accounts: a $10,000 fine and 400 hours of
community service.
Conclusions
The initial framing of the Internet as a system vulnerable to the prank of a “bored
graduate student” conflicts with some of the more self-congratulatory rhetoric of
traditional Internet histories (Hafner & Lyon, 1996; Gates, 1996; Hauben & Hauben,
1997; Segaller, 1998). The media’s construction of the Internet as a crime scene
subordinated the alphabet-soup of federal agencies and universities that helped build the
information superhighway. The specter of technology out of control overwhelmed the
progress frame, placing the victimized individual at opposite poles with the autonomous
technology. Although these frames did not prevent people by the millions from
eventually taking mouse in hand and logging onto the Internet, it may explain some of the
public’s lingering suspicion of the new medium, particularly the public’s resistance to
Internet commerce and its concern over other kinds of deviance such as pornography. It
may be that the “Internet as threat” frame so powerful and so resonated with the media
and public that a more progressive frame could not take hold until three years after
Morris’ sentencing, when media coverage of the Internet suddenly took off (see Table 2).
Beyond the technology issues, the Morris incident reflects on some larger social
issues, such as crime and punishment. One of the key frames tests the social value of
punishment. In the Morris case, the punishment levied – whether heavy or light -- was
seen as a message. It could be taken by prospective criminal hackers as a deterrent or as
Convention