Virtual Outreach

Virtual Outreach: The It Gets Better Project and Experiences of LGBTQ Youth and Allies Garrett M. Sawyer Grand Valley State University

Virtual Outreach Abstract An array of empirical studies have shown lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning (LGBTQ) youth face increased risk of encountering bulling, having suicidal ideation, and

committing suicide. As this area gained popularity within the last three years, solutions to alter this trend have emerged. One solution was the development of the It Gets Better Project (IGBP) that tells bullied youth that life improves beyond school. This study looks at the stories of It Gets Better Project videos and examines themes and messages through content analysis. Further, another question this study will answer is how LGBTQ video contributors differ from allies. To answer both these questions a multitude of audio and visual factors will be examined. These factors include diction, rhetorical structure, storytelling, and provided demographic information. This research project seeks to build a foundation for further inquiry into the reach and effectiveness of the IGBP. Keywords: LGBTQ youth, technology, bullying, It Gets Better Project, YouTube, social media, schools

Virtual Outreach Virtual Outreach: The It Gets Better Project and Experiences of LGBTQ Youth and Allies

There is a changing landscape in schools for LGBTQ identifying students. Sexual minority students are coming out earlier then previous generations and face rejection by family members and peers, stigmatization, bullying, verbal, physical, and emotional abuse, and discrimination in school (Mehra 2011, 403). Exposure to unwelcoming environments can bring about feelings of shame and lower self esteem. Peer homophobia and internalization of negative messages create feelings of shame and lower self esteem. These factors are large contributors to why LGBTQ youth are more likely than heterosexual, non-transgendered youth to report suicidal ideation (Almeida 2009, 1001). Nowhere was this more tragically evident than with the suicides of twelve teenage students that occurred between September 2010 and October 2010. Ranging from middle school to college, the victims had endured experiences of harassment because of their actual or perceived sexual orientation (Bates 2011, 82). This epidemic garnered national and international media attention to sexual orientation based bullying and distressed youth victims. Examining systems in place and creating new policies at the local and state level emerged. State laws requiring districts to have bullying policies were passed, leaving only three states, Michigan, Montana, and South Dakota, without any laws (www.bullypolice.org). Attention to cyber bullying, online harassment through social media, was one significant issue addressed in reformed state legislation. Cyber-bullying poses unique circumstances not present in traditional bullying, including the ability to remain anonymous and accessibility outside the educational environment. Victims of cyber-bullying are typically reluctant to report for fear of losing technology privileges or are unsure of who to tell (http://olweus.org/public/cyber_bullying.page). Aside from policy changes at the state and local level, non-policy methods to reach out to sexual minority youth emerged with suicidal ideations also emerged.

Virtual Outreach The most recognizable example became the It Gets Better Project begun by syndicated relationship columnist Dan Savage and his partner Terry in September 2010. The IGBP allows participants to share experiences of being bullied and coming out via the video-sharing site YouTube. There are now over 12,000 videos submitted by a diverse array of LGBTQ identifying individuals and allies from politics, media, and sports. The intent of the project is to show young LGBT people the levels of happiness, potential, and positivity their lives will reach if they can just get through their teen years (http://www.itgetsbetter.org). Substantial inquiry directly related to the IGBP has not been produced. However, examining past research on traditional and cyber bullying, LGBTQ youths experiences of harassment in school, and methods for aiding bullying victims and negating harmful effects will provide ample background for this research project. Literature Review There is a plethora of research addressing adolescent bullying in schools and the experiences and feelings of LGBTQ students. Overall, studies have attributed school bullying to lower academic achievement and self-esteem. Self-destructive behavior and suicidal ideation

related to perpetual bullying has been reported (Jankauskiene, Kardelis, Sukys & Kardeliene 2008, 146; Almeida 2009, 1001). Studies have found that while bullying can happen to any student, those who identify as LGBTQ or are perceived to be by peers are disproportionately harassment victims (Wallace 2011, 736). Further, LGBTQ youth are at a greater risk of suicidal ideation then their heterosexual peers and more likely to view their school as a hostile environment (Almeida 2009, 1001; Wall 2009, 310). Contributing factors to this negative view of school setting include rejection by family members and peers, stigmatization, bullying, verbal, physical, and emotional abuse, and discrimination in school (Mehra 2011, 403). This rejection is compounded with feeling other students and teachers are apathetic to their situation (Hong 2011, 888). Research has

Virtual Outreach found LGBTQ students perceive educators to be complacent to homophobic comments through either silence or active participation (Alfano, Mannheim & Zack 2010, 99). Institutional

adjustments to alter the homophobic and heteronormative environment have been enacted in many states and localities based on findings of empirical social science research. One of the first steps that can be taken is eliminating the tendency for adults to overlook children and adolescents calling others derogatory names (Espelage & Swearer 2008, 156). This alters LGBTQ students feeling that faculty members are complacent contributors to the hostile school environment. Listening to students when they ask for help has been found to be the best method of warming the school climate for sexual minorities. Finally, creating safe spaces through Gay-Straight Alliances and partnering with parents have shown positive effects on decreasing depression rates among LGBTQ students (Bishop, Casida 2011, 137). Numerous findings about helping victims indicate various coping strategies that perhaps contradict the underpinnings of the IGBP. Bullying reform studies have indicated that it is important that students understand that there is always hope to stop the situation (Gould 2011). The extent that the IGBP achieves this goal is debatable. It is possible that contributors will mention methods of confronting bullying and give them confidence to seek help from administrators or guardian. Conversely, telling a teenager to wait five or more years before life improves may worsen the situation. Gould recognizes that without adaptive coping skills and hope for change students may feel powerless and hopeless, which increases their risk of suicide (2011). _____. Research that may indicate a possibility of being more harmful than helpful has not diminished praised for its outreach method.

Virtual Outreach There have been some researchers who see potential for change through the IGBP. The project show[s] the power of the internet to reach out to individuals facing social isolation and adversity (Boyce 2010, 1889). Internet and social media sites such as YouTube have connected people from across the nation and world as never before. The same social networks employed to cyber-bully are utilized constructively to give hope to those victims. Being able to hear stories from those who have experienced similar situations can be a form of therapy for some. Knowing that they are not alone provides hope instead of suicidal ideation. It has been recognized that it may be premature to determine the true impact of the IGBP; but, the project may affect causal

trends between LGBTQ youth and suicide (Robinson & Espelage 328, 2011). Under this scenario, the IGBP would result in decreased rates of LGBTQ suicide victims and schools being less hostile for sexual minority students. While this This research project will examine both the overall theme of IGBP videos and differences based on contributors sexual orientation. The first question is, What are the predominant themes emerging from the IGBP videos? This addresses the projects overall message and analyzes how communicating the mission is undertaken by participants. The second question is, What are the differences between LGBTQ & heterosexual allys videos. The focus here is whether, and how, the contributors sexual orientation affects the content of the IGBP video. There are several hypotheses that this test will likely find. In answering the first question, I expect to find numerous themes to emerge including, the sharing of bullying experiences, hope for change, advice on how to change the situation. There will likely be differences of experiences based on a number of factors including family religious beliefs, organizations belonging to, and geographic location of upbringing. Feeling of shame about being a victim or LGBTQ will be a common theme in many videos.

Virtual Outreach The second question will likely discover that there are significant differences based on the contributors sexual orientation. Retelling instances of experienced harassment will be more prevalent in LGBTQ individuals. Using derogatory epithets in videos will be more common among sexual minority participants. This could be an attempt to be more relatable to LGBTQ viewers and share a common experience between participant and viewer. Allies may recount a story of bullying experienced by a gay friend or a witnessed bullying event. Those produced by allies may discuss school bullying in general terms and not specific to LGBTQ bullying. Heterosexual contributors to the IGBP may not from a diversity of background as LGBTQ contributors. I anticipate many allies to be celebrities and not common citizens. This may make finding themes in their video more challenging but the It gets better message will be consistent regardless of any variables. While these are preliminary expectations, the following is how I plan on conducting this research. Method Sample A random sample of approximately 250 IGBP videos will be collected by searching YouTube for It Gets Better Project. Achieving a random sample through YouTube is one challenge because there is no method of getting all related videos. Only 1,000 videos appear at a

time through the filters of upload date, relevance, view count, and rating. It would take an inordinate amount of time to locate all videos and place them into a pool for randomization. Selecting videos randomly from each filter group produces a more rounded sample than using one filter exclusively. Selecting every 16th video under each of the four filters will make a sample size of 250 videos. If there is a duplicate, the next available and unused video will be selected. Next, a

Virtual Outreach

preliminary viewing will be conducted to ensure content relevance, that the video is intended to be a contribution to the IGBP and not, for example, a parody. The next step will ensure that all videos are available for the duration of the research, though it is not expected that videos will be removed from the site. Once a video has been selected it will be saved and copied as follows. The video will be converted from YouTube to MP4 format using Download Helper, a free add-on on Mozilla Firefox. The downloaded video file will be saved on an external memory device and cloud memory service Dropbox. Along with making sure all data is backed up, it allows for easier sharing with other reviewers. Finally, selected videos will be inserted into a spreadsheet. The final step before analyzing the videos is addressing concerns of privacy and ethics for this research. Ensuring the concerns of ethics and participant confidentiality are a task of the researcher and cannot be ignored in this instance, even given the public nature of the IGBP. Participant consent in this study is implied because all the videos are public. There is no need to receive Institutional Review Board approval because there will be no interaction with human subjects. To ensure privacy of selected videos, no identifying information will be used in the final report. This will be achieved by using nicknames when attributing quotes and not including YouTube usernames anywhere. The video URL will be associated with a number on the official sample spreadsheet only. All personal information gathered will be kept confidential between the two researchers. A co-researcher and I will be conducting content analysis of the video using deductive and grounded theory. Two researchers, including myself, will be conducting the coding to ensure inter-observer reliability. Training of the co-researcher will occur in a three hour session about analyzing the

Virtual Outreach videos. If there are any disputes about coding, they will be resolved through consulting the codebook and discussion. Any changes to the codebook will be reached through discussion and consensus as videos are watched. The codebook will be written in Google Documents so sharing revised editions can occur electronically. The form found in Appendix B will be completed by each researcher for each video. This will ensure that all deductive approach components are addressed by researchers. The form also allows for note taking of emerging themes. It will be easier to compare results with another researcher using the standard form. The following represents working codes based on visual and auditory factors including emotional response, demographic information, and rhetorical structure. Anticipated Thematic Content Emotion: I expect emotional responses will be the most detectable visual sign in IGBP videos. Retelling instances of enduring harassment can conjure further negative memories and feelings of depression. It is also possible that those who wish to spread the It Gets Better message will be

happy to further convey how much their life improved. It is possible that more than one emotional response will be present in the same video and in those instances all emotions displayed will be recorded. This will be measured through choosing if an emotional response is given and then deciding whether it displays happiness, anger/resentment, or sadness. Demographic information: Demographic information can be shared by both visual and auditory means. Primary visual indicators include sex, race, and age. Information such as geographic location, sexual orientation would be shared verbally. It is important not to avoid making assumptions about participants sexual orientation if this information is not directly stated because

Virtual Outreach 10 it would skew results. It is not expected that all demographic information will be included in all videos but it would help get a better sense of who produces these videos. Rhetorical structure: The most important part of the IGBP videos content will come in how the projects message is shared. Ways that contributors undertake this include offering advice, reassurance, and sharing stories. Advice will simply be noted as being given, yes or no, and then writing what the advice was. Examples of advice include talking to friends or adults and seeking outside help from counseling services or the Trevor Project, a LGBTQ suicide hotline. Reassurance involves telling youth that the harassment is not their fault and removing shame associated with being a victim. Phrases such as, Its not your fault indicate a reassuring approach to offer affirmation to distressed individuals. Storytelling: I anticipate the largest portion of content analysis will happen by listening to the stories of participants. This will be conducted using both deductive and grounded theory approach. Stories told may range from secondhand accounts to personal experiences and will provide the most content to examine. There will be coding for the number of incidents reported and being LGBTQ bullying related. How the contributor dealt with being bullied, if addressed, will be noted. A list of terms that are likely to appear in the video, especially derogatory terms aimed at sexual orientation in particular, will be included in the codebook. See Appendix A. Other IGBP themes will be included as they emerge using grounded theory. Those videos already examined will be reviewed with particular attention towards inclusion of the newly discovered theme. Quotes that appear frequently across videos will be noted and attributed a nickname to ensure confidentiality of video and participant.

Virtual Outreach 11 Once all videos have been viewed and information compiled, the raw data will be put into a spread sheet for quantitative statistical analysis. Dividing the data between LGBTQ participants and heterosexual allies to answer the second question will occur at this point. Quotes will be organized into a word document based upon topic for incorporation into the projects qualitative analysis. Analysis There will be a number of statistical tests performed to gather information about the makeup of IGBP contributors, interpret themes in the videos, and calculate if significant differences exist between LGBTQ contributors and heterosexual allies. First, percentages will be calculated to break down some basic demographic information about IGBP video contributors and the sample selected. Analyses to answer the two research questions include t-tests for independence and chisquared test. To determine the prevalence of homophobic bullying, a series of t-test will be conducted on different variables. The first analysis will study the prevalence of mentioning bullying in IGBP videos. Incidents of homophobic bullying, compared to other targeted groups, will be studied using a t-test. These basic findings can determine if issues such as homophobic bullying and stories of bulling are common among most IGBP submissions. When the large sample pool is broken down by sexual orientation further results can emerge as we compare the groups against one another. To analyze the second question about differences between allies and LGBTQ contributors videos, data will be segregated based on the sexual orientation component of the video viewer factsheet. The test performed to see if there are differences between LGBTQ contributors experiences and allys is a chi-squared test. The frequency of direct homophobic bullying

Virtual Outreach 12 expressed by participants within either group will be tested. The null will indicate there is no difference between the groups being targeted for homophobic bullying. The alternative will be that LGBTQ individuals will experience more direct homophobic bulling. Expected Outcomes I expect to find a similar basic theme throughout all the videos and little difference between the themes and messages of allies and LGBTQ contributors. To the area of example specificity, I expect that LGBTQ individuals will share personal experiences of bullying more than allies. This is because of having a feeling of shared experiences with the targeted audience, at risk bullied youth, particularly LGBTQ identifying. There is also a possibility that allies, who experienced bullying because of the general school climate or other factors such as disability, will also share examples. There is also the possibility that allies could retell examples they witnessed growing up. I do not foresee this affecting the comparison between the two groups too much because the codes will be specific to address whether it is a personal story or anothers experience. There is a high likelihood that differences will emerge between allies and LGBTQ identifying videos. I expect LGBTQ stories to be more detailed and use specific recollected situations. Allies alternatively will offer general statements that pertain to the general subject of bullying but not particularly LGBT victims. Because of the feeling of having a shared experience, LGBTQ students and adults will be more open about their experiences. Also, I do not expect either population bloc to offer suggestions on how to correct the situation occurring in the present. Challenges & Limitations

Virtual Outreach 13 There are a few challenges in carrying out this research proposal including random video selection, collecting a large enough sample of allys videos, and the ever expanding pool of videos. There is no way to truly randomize video selection process. The method chosen, picking a sample of videos under each filter, is the best way of getting videos that captures the essence of the IGBP contributions. Another challenge is the limited number of ally videos. Allies may refrain from participating in the IGBP in as great of numbers as LGBTQ participants because they do not feel they have anything worthwhile to contribute. Those allies who are featured may not represent a full spectrum of diverse individuals. Many will likely be celebrity figures with already large followings and influence. The final challenge of this experiment is the ever growing number of IGBP contributions. If the sample of allies is too small, making generalizations about the entire population will not be accurate. This can be resolved by sampling more videos at random until a sample size of approximately 30 allies has been identified. This project will not capture changes in message framing over the longitude of the project. While some themes may stay constant over time, there is also room for addition or subtraction of popular thematic content. Messages and advice given by younger IGBP participants will be altered as the landscape in schools change for LGBTQ youth. Along with these challenges are issues of limitations. The limitations of this project deal primarily with selection of participants and how IGBP all voices and experiences of LGBTQ individuals are not reflected in the project. There exists the issue of self selection bias present because only those willing to put their private life experiences online in a public forum are being studied. Therefore, it would be problematic to say that these videos accurately reflect the realities of all LGBTQ individuals. Those who did not face bullying

Virtual Outreach 14 or rejection by family or peers would not be less likely to contribute. There is a possibility that for those whose life did not get better, as the project proclaims, will be hesitant to tell others that it does. This is applicable to both LGBTQ and ally individuals. Finally, because contributing requires technology not readily available to all, the voices of underprivileged LGBTQ and allies are going to be left out. Despite this projects challenges and limitations it is a vital first examination into the lived experiences of todays LGBTQ youth and the IGBP in general. References Alfano, M., Mannheim, A., Zack, J. (2010). I didnt know what to say: Four Archetypal Responses to Homophobic Rhetoric in the Classroom. High School Journal, 93(3), 98-110. Almeida, J., Johnson, R. M., Corliss, H. L., Molnar, B. E., Azrael, D. (2009). Emotional distress among LGBT youth: the influence of perceived discrimination based on sexual orientation. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 38(7), 1001- 1014. Bates, D. D. (2011). Lets not get it twisted: bullying is the result, not the problem. Annals of the American Psychotherapy, 14(1), 82-83. Bishop, H.N., Casida, H. (2011). Preventing Bullying and Harassment of Sexual Minority Students in Schools. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 84(4), 134-138. Boyce, N. (2010). Pilots of the future: suicide prevention and internet. The Lancet (British edition), 376(9756), 1889-1890. Bully Police USA. (2011). Retrieved December 4, 2011, from http://www.bullypolice.org.

Virtual Outreach 15 Espeladge, D. L., Swearer, S. M. (2008) Addressing Research Gaps in the Intersection Between Homophobia and Bullying. School Psychology Review, 37(2), 155-159. **Gould, M. S., Klomek, A. B., Sounder, A. (2011). Bullying and suicide: detection and intervention. Psychiatric Times, 28(2), 27. Hay, C., Meldrum, R. (2010). Bullying Victimization and Adolescent Self-Harm Hypotheses from General Strain Theory. Journal of Youth Adolescence, 39, 446-459. Hong, J.S., Espelage, D.L., Kral, M.J. (2011). Understanding suicide among sexual minority youth in America: An ecological systems analysis. Journal of Adolescence, 34, 885-894. Jankauskiene, R., Kardelis, K., Sukys, S., Kardeliene, L. (2008) Associations between school bullying and Psychosocial Factors. Social Behavior & Personality: An International Journal, 36(2), 145-162. Mehra, B., Braquet, D. (2011). Progressive LGBTQ reference: coming out in the 21st century. Refernce Services Review, 39(3), 401-422. Remafedi, G. (2011). Sexual Orientation and Youth Suicide. The Journal of the American Medical Association, 282(13), 1291. Robinson, J.P., Espelage, D.L. (2011). Inequalities in Education and Psycological Outcomes Between LGBTQ and Straight Students in Middle and High School. Educational Researcher, 40(7), 315-330. Wallace, J. A. (2011). Bullycide in American Schools: Forging a Comprehensive Legislative Solution. Indiana Law Journal, 86(2), 735-761.

Virtual Outreach 16 Walls, N.E., Kane, S.B., Wisneski, H. (2010). Gay-Straight Alliances and School Experiences of Sexual Minority Youth. Youth & Society, 41(3), 307-332. What is Cyber Bullying? Definition, Formes, & Information about Cyber Bullying. (2011). Retrieved December 5, 2011, from http://olweus.org/public/cyber_bullying.page. What is the It Gets Better Project? (2011). Retrieved November 18, 2011, from http://www.itgetsbetter.org. YouTube to MP3. (2011). Retrieved December 7, 2011, from www.flvto.com.

This study builds upon the foundation set in school climate studies for LGBTQ students and methods of addressing bullying. Besides fleeting references, little research has gone into the content and effect the IGBP has had. The aim of this study is to gain a holistic picture of the messages told by It Gets Better Project participants and pave the way for further research into the projects effectiveness. For funding I would be fine donating my time as a researcher but may appeal to the IGBP for funds in hiring a research assistance and possible compensation. This study will take into account differences in message by those who identify as LGBTQ versus allies. The chosen method for this project is content analysis as I wish to find themes from the videos. The inductive method will be chosen to allow flexibility in choosing relevant keywords or themes as

Virtual Outreach 17 research progresses. There are two main questions I seek to address by conducting this study. The first question is, What are the predominant themes emerging from the IGBP videos? This addresses overall message of the project and how communicating the mission is taken on by the participants. Another area I will examine is differences between LGBTQ identifying individuals and allies. This will be answered through the question What are the differences between LGBTQ videos & allies videos? This narrows the scope to include a breakdown the large group data into an area where I believe there will be differences. I will not bloc to obtain an equal number of allies and LGBTQ participant videos. This is because of the high possibility that most allies videos will be from celebrities. However, the way celebrities get across the IGBP message, perhaps to a larger audience than LGBTQ ones may, could also demonstrate differences inherent in allies videos. There is a risk that the sample size drawn will not produce enough allies videos to make accurate generalizations to the allies community contribution as a whole. To achieve a random sample, I will search It Gets Better Project and pick every fiftieth. It is important to make the listing as random as possible because the YouTube uses algorithms to place popular, and highly watched, videos on the first few pages. Picking every 50th will make a sample size of approximately 250 videos and each video will be watched, unless a saturation point has been reached first. While it is not expected that some IGBP video submissions will be deleted before the completion of the study, the selected sample will be converted to MP4 using a free online conversion site, downloaded and saved to a project file on a flash drive or SD memory card, and backed up on internet storage cloud site Dropbox. There are also other benefits to this centralization of data, particularly when collaborating with another researcher. For this study a research assistant will be used to ensure inter-observer reliability and will view the same videos and take notes and code variables. There will be assurance that there is mutual understanding of each code by adhering to a code book and

Virtual Outreach 18 proper training. Further, ensuring that the code-book maintains relevant to the area we are studying, codes being added will be run by other researchers in the field to ensure validity. Codeings will directly relate to the two questions and the working hypotheses. While there are a number of possible outcomes in examining IGBP videos, the number of probable, rational, results will be somewhat limited. The first hypothesis is that there will be themes pertaining to change and hope from all videos. This is because of the inherent name of the project and contributors understanding the purpose of it. A code will be developed to measure the prevalence of positive reinforcement that life will improve. A set list statements will determine what constitutes positive message. This includes statements such as you are beautiful, life does get better, and other variations. Emotions displayed in the videos demonstrate how these incidents affected them and should be noted accordingly. The coding for emotions would be 0- sad, 1neutral, and 2-happy. It is predicted that the overall video emotion will be somewhere between neutral and happy because of the message attempting to be conveyed. To the second question, I feel LGBTQ videos will include more personal stories than allies. Sharing to a group of similarly situated youth will make them be more open about their personal experiences. Allies may not have the firsthand experiences, so they may speak generally about how bullying is harmful. To this point, there is also a possibility that allies would share stories of witnessing LGBTQ bullying in school or bullying of another targeted group such as those with disabilities. Measuring this would use a scale of the number of personal stories told, as well as the relative details divulged.

This study is not without limitations, even given its vast sample size and national scope. First, using the It Gets Better Project for participants does not include those who are unable to make a

Virtual Outreach 19 video due to a variety of factors. There is s a critique of the IGBP for not being diverse enough and encompassing the experiences of those without access to internet or video equipment. These are valid concerns for making generalizations about the stories of all LGBTQ youths experiences. Those who self identify as LGBTQ who are not out to their parents are another group not likely to make a video. The public nature of the IGBP would not entice some who faces harassment by peers to make a statement that it DOES get better. Also, there is a possibility that those who grew up in an affirming environment may not contribute. While the inevitable question of Who does it really get better for? emerges, the diversity in age, gender, race, geographical, location, makes the project an easily accessible resource for hearing experiences. Further, this studys intent is also to assist in future research into the effects the IGBP has. This can also lead to solutions on outreaching in aims of making the project more inclusive. There are very few limitations present in such a narrowly tailored study topic. One problem with studying the It Gets Better Project is that it is, intentionally, a work in progress. Therefore, even when the study concludes, video submissions continue and there is a minute possibility that the themes and experiences shared in videos thus far may not continue on such a trend. Such events that may alter the messages sent could be another teen suicide that brings attention to the issue or questions raised about the IGBPs message. Also, if the diversity of participants represented changes the overall message may change too. One way to analyze this is to study the time stamps of each video analyzed to note any longitudinal differences. Also, one study noted, longitudinal studies are needed to examine the evolving risk of suicide across the lifespan of homosexual persons (Remafedi 1999, 1291). This pertains to the study because there is a possibility that an individual creating an IGBP video will not later be overcome with negative experiences to take their own life, as was the case with 14 year old Jamey

Virtual Outreach 20 Rodemeyer. Since there will not be follow ups with the participants, getting a sense of how teenagers feel after posting something personal and revealing cannot be measured. These are the limitations that cannot be address through this study, but can give preliminary analysis to a top that will likely yield more inquiry. There are several limitations presented by engaging in content analysis. First, we are limited to However, given the narrow scope of this research, will not affect results, but rather pave the way for further inquiry into this area. Encounter The question was raised about how to remedy the problem of LGBTQ students feeling isolated and dealing with bullying both in school and online cyber-bullying. Research in this area, though thin, stresses the importance As far back as 1999, research on the subject was incomplete with one study declaring, Rooted in this notion was the creation of the It Gets Better Project (IGBP) by relationship advice columnist Dan Savage. In an effort to reach out to middle and high school students suffering verbal and physical harassment the social media site YouTube was utilized. The main message of the video detailed Savage and his partner Terrys experiences being bullied in school and how their life improved after As the original video went viral thousands answered the plea to submit their own stories of growing up and encountering harassment in school. Tied to the main message is that life does improve after school and being around to see it.

Virtual Outreach 21 Studies on bulling policies have concluded a whole-school approach rather than targeting only those accused of bullying appear to work most effectively because they alter the school culture such that bullying is no longer tolerated (Hay 2010, 456). This approach received both positive and critical response and empirical research on this methods effectiveness has been mixed. Since many sexual minority students experience schools as hostile environments, an emphasis was placed on the lack of response from other students and teachers to homophobic remarks (Walls 2009, 310; Hong 2011, 888). Creating and reforming bullying policies was undertaken by many state legislatures and school boards. Bills mandating school districts enact strict anti-bullying policies were passed in many states and some included provisions dealing with recently popularized web based harassment or cyber-bullying. At the local level, changes included adding sexual orientation and gender identity to enumerate non-discrimination policies and reexamining the effectiveness of zero tolerance policies. Requiring teachers to deal with incidents of witnessed and reported harassment were drafted in an effort to ensure proper action is taken. Non-legislative methods to reach out to LGBTQ youth with suicidal ideations also emerged. Because of the high quantity and diverse backgrounds of contributors, an analysis of videos should be undertaken to find holistic themes and messages presented by IGBP contributors. This research will be one of the first studies of the IGBP and pave the way for further research into the projects effectiveness. There are a variety of possible outcomes in allys videos that will make them distinguishable. This is because they may not have experienced the types and magnitude of harassment

Virtual Outreach 22 The IGBP, due to is digital creation, has the ability to reach LGBTQ students facing harassment and family rejection. Those teenagers can hear stories from peers and aged people who have been in similar situations and hear how they coped. Furthermore, the nationwide scope allows for more diversity of opinion and illustrates the beneficial nature of social networks. From this established knowledge about bullying and suicide, LGBTQ youth, and the It Gets Better Project, this project combines these areas to further the understanding of themes, messages, and lived experiences of IGBP participants videos.

At the foundation of the project is the idea that life will improve after graduating high school. Studies Research indicates it is important that students understand that there is always hope to stop the situation (Gould 2011). However, some argue that telling a teen to wait five or more years for life to improve is not what a teen, whose only concern may be safety in the moment, would like to hear. The IGBP fails to directly address methods to make the reoccurring situation stop. *____ When adaptive coping skills and hope for change are not presented, students may feel powerless and hopeless, which increases their risk of suicide (Gould 2011). WHILE THE IGBP DOES APPEAR TO FOCUS ON THE FIRST POINT, AGAIN This creates an imperfect solution because it does not alter the hostile school environment encountered by LGBTQ youth, only administrators can do that. Other research that studied LGBTQ students learning experiences indicates that the IGBP may affect secular trends in LGBTQ risk differentials (for descriptive research) as well as the causal-effect estimates of longitudinal interventions (Robinson 2011, 328). This means that there is a possibility that the project may affect learning experiences of sexual minority students, but it is too early to determine. One thing may be generally agreed upon though

Virtual Outreach 23 There will also be a greater prevalence of verbal harassment than physical. This is because verbal is more prevalent and (shame in being a victim of physical). LGBTQ contributors will share their coming out stories, but it will not be as much a central part of the video as bullying experiences. On the latter question, I hypothesize the stories of allies will indeed be noticeably different. It will be more challenging to find a clear theme in the allies videos than the LGBTQ contributors. This is because the experiences shared may not be specific to LGBTQ targeted bullying. It is also possible that the bullying was not targeted at them, but rather the retelling of a witnessed incident involving a friend or peer. Facing rejection by family and peers will not be as central to the video compared to LGBTQ individuals. The It Gets Better message will be presented the same way, regardless of sexual orientation I hypothesis. The analysis of the videos will occur as the videos are watched, and reviewed as more code labels are added. A list of working variables will be kept in a Google Document for easy sharing with other coders as it is amended. The components analyzed will take advantage of the full visual and audio benefits of the IGBP and include codes for both aspects. The visual indicators will be behaviors, emotions, and appearance based. Emotions will be coded if there is a display of sadness or joy. Appearance will take the form of general age, stated or inferred from appearance, race, and other characteristics to be made as research continues. Behavior is another part of visual factors, simply wish to examine if using body language, such as deliberate hand motions, to demonstrate experiences. While visual indicators will be helpful in further understanding the individual, the majority of information will be transmitted verbally. Listening to the words of IGBP contributors will offer the most detailed accounts of personal information and experiences. Demographical information is sometimes given and many

Virtual Outreach 24 begin with a description of the environment they grew up in. Codes for this area will include family religious beliefs, organizations belonging to, urban or rural upbringing. If the person shares experiences of coming out, attention will be paid to the reactions of various groups. A large component of this part is diction because some words may be specific to a specific population or region. An example of this would be the prevalence of the term down low among AfricanAmericans. If the person is an ally, the words chosen to articulate the It Gets Better message would be examined. There are a number of ways to present the data gathered and this study will utilize both quantitative and qualitative analysis. Taking quotes of phrases that appear frequently will provide a qualitative interpretation of the accumulated messages of IGBP messages. While I do not expect qualitative data to be a large part of the results, it will serve to make them more personable then simple quantitative statistical analysis. Looking at the number of keywords present between LGBTQ and ally submissions will determine if there are significant differences between the two subgroups. Would also create a pool of all videos watched together to make broad statements about overall messages and keywords. The statistical tests performed would be a two sample t-test to determine if there are significant differences in diction, experiences, and specificity, or generalities, of statements between the LGBTQ and allies.