online safety 3.0
DESCRIPTION
A talk I gave at the 2010 National School Boards Assoc. conference. The tagline for Online Safety 3.0: Empowering and Protecting YouthTRANSCRIPT
Online Safety 3.0Empowering and Protecting
Youth
Anne CollierFall 2010
Executive Director,Net Family News, Inc.
Co-directorConnectSafely.org
Net safety as we know it
is obsolete• One-size-fits-all; fear-based• 1.0 focused largely on crime & adult content• 2.0 added peer-related harm• Both: Youth only as potential victims• Technology focus: both problem & solution• Social media highly suspect• Not relevant to its “beneficiaries”!!
Web 1.0…
On Web 2.0...
--Michael Kinsley, Slate.com, 11/27/06
“...everybody knows you’re a dog.”
A triple media revolution
Media shifts of past 500 years:
• Printing press => 1 to many, 1 direction
• Telegraph/phone => 1 to 1, 2-way, realtime
• Recorded media (photos/sound/film) => 1 to many, 1 direction, asynchronous
• Recorded thru the air (radio/TV) => 1 to many, 1 direction, asynchronous then realtime
• Internet => 1 to 1, 1 to many, many to many (all directions); realtime; user-produced; social; pipeline for all other media
Students’ perspective
‘Joe’s Non-Netbook’Science Leadership Academy
Philadelphia
A living Internet• Content is behavioral and...• Updated in real time by users• Internet everywhere• Net mirrors real life • Net embedded in “real life”• Risk spectrum same as offline’s
What is Online Safety 3.0?
• Research-based, not fear-based, so relevant• Flexible, layered – not one-size-fits-all• Respectful of youth agency – stakeholders in
positive experience, not just potential victims• Positive, empowering: Not just safety from (bad
outcomes) but safety for...
• Full, constructive engagement in participatory society (context!)
What we now know from...
What are they doing in there?
Good or normative… Hanging out “Social producing” Learning social rules Designing profiles (self-
expression) Exploring identity
Writing software code Sharing/producing music Producing & editing videos Discussing interests Social/political activism Keeping in touch with
friends long-term Risk assessment
What else are they doing in there?
Neutral or negative…Seeking validationCompeting in a
popularity contestVenting Showing offEmbarrassing self
Damaging reputation
Pulling pranksGetting evenThreateningHarassingBullying
Online socializing reflects ‘real life’
• 82% of teens 14-17 use social sites now, 55% of 12-to-13-year-olds–Pew, 9/09
• 91% use social sites to stay in touch with friends they see frequently (usually school-related)–Pew, 9/07.
• 82% to socialize with friends they rarely see in person (friends & relatives out of state).
• 72% to make plans with friends.• 49% to make new friends.• 17% to flirt.
Source: Pew Internet & American Life survey9/09 & 1/07
2 types of social networking
• Friendship-driven (84% of 15-25 YOs in a
qualitative study at Harvard School of Education) • Interest-driven (80% involved in “at least
one such online community”)
Source:Digital Youth Project, November 2008
...on all devices, fixed and mobile:
Social networking’s progression
• Hanging out – casual socializing• Messing around – collaborative
tinkering with info, ideas, media• Geeking out – using media the
way artists use their media; more “professional”
Interest-driven communities
“We're growing a bunch of [young] people who see what they do as social and collaborative and as part of joining communities...
“They function quite naturally in ‘teams,’ where everybody is an expert in something but they know how to integrate their expertise with everybody else’s; they know how to understand the other person’s expertise so they can pull off an action together in a complicated world.” – author and professor James Paul Gee
Source:Digital Youth Project, November 2008
Virtual worlds too• Global VW population: over 1 billion and
half are under 16 – Kzero/10
• 10-15-year-olds the biggest sector (468m)
• 15-25-year-olds are No. 2 (288m)
• 12/09 FTC report: Little explicit content in child VWs, moderate-to-heavy in teen & adult worlds
Worlds for ages 10-15
Cellphones are mobile computers with...
• Mobile social networking • Photo- & video-sharing• Web browsing• 24/7 texting• Even less adult supervision• GPS & social mapping
Mobile phones will be the “world’s primary tool for connecting to the Net” by 2020–Pew.
Mobile social tools
Teens prefer texting• Texting: 54% of all teens text daily
• Social networking: 26% daily
• 87% use texting in gen’l (72% of adults)
• 1/2 send 50+ texts/day (1,500/mo.)
• 1/3 send 100+/day (3,000/mo.)
• Most prolific: Girls 14-17 (100/day)
• Least prolific: Youngest teen boys (20/day)
In other words...
© 2010 Columbus Dispatch
The best filter ever• Comes universally pre-installed, free of charge• Has no socio-economic barriers to "adoption”• Works at operating-system level• Supports and enhances all other "applications”• Is automatically customized to owner’s needs
in micro detail in realtime• Improves with use• Completely portable – goes wherever kid goes
What we now know
...from youth-risk research:Harassment & cyberbullying =
most common riskNot all youth are equally at risk A child’s psychosocial makeup & environment
are better predictors of online risk than the technology he or she uses
No single technological development can solve youth online risk
OS 3.0: A layered approach
Primary: new media literacy & citizenship – all students, grade levels, appropriate subjects
Secondary: more focused preventione.g., bullying, sexting; taught by experts as needed (situational) & developmentally appropriate
Tertiary: prevention and interventionfor youth already at risk; done by social workers, mental health professionals, etc.
Types of online safety
• Physical safety – freedom from physical harm• Psychological safety – freedom from cruelty,
harassment, and exposure to potentially disturbing material
• Reputational and legal safety – freedom from unwanted social, academic, professional, and legal consequences that could affect you for a lifetime
• Identity, property, and community safety – freedom from theft of identity & property
Broader expertise needed
Young people Parents Educators School counselors,
administrators, tech experts
Psychologists Pediatricians
Social-service workers
Bullying specialists
NGOs Law
enforcement Policymakers
The ‘Net effect’ How the Internet changes the equation...
• Persistence & searchability: Net as permanent searchable archive
• Replicability: ability to copy and paste from anywhere, to anywhere
• Scalability: high potential visibility• Invisible audiences: you never know who’s watching• Blurring of public and private: boundaries not clear
AND• Disinhibition: Lack of visual cues reduces empathy
Source: danah boyd: Taken out of Context, 2008
What else we know
...from youth-risk research:
“Youth who engage in online aggressive behavior by making rude or
nasty comments or frequently embarrassing others are more than twice as likely to report online interpersonal victimization."
3.4X
“Posting personal information does not by itself increase risk.” --Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 2/07
Teens’ response to strangers
"For all Internet problems, the vast majority of MySpace teens either had appropriate reactions or ignored the behavior.”
– Prof. Larry Rosen• 92% responded appropriately to sexual
solicitation• 90% to harassment • 94% to unwanted exposure to sexual materials
As for predators in social network sites...
“There is no evidence predators are stalking or abducting unsuspecting victims based on information they posted in social sites.”
– Crimes Against Children Research Center, March ’09
Question
Has the growth in young people’s use of the Internet
correlated with a rise in sexual abuse against children?
Rate
per
10,
000
Child
ren
(<18
)
Source: NCANDS / Finkelhor & Jones, 2006
51% Decline (during the period of the Web’s existence)
Answer: No
Confirmed cases of child sexual abuse
Source: FBI & CACRC, 2009 & ‘10
The trend continues• “Substantiated cases of child sexual abuse declined 58% from 1992-2008.”
• Latest data: Child sexual abuse in 2008 was down 6% from the previous year.
• The 2008 figures “add to an already substantial positive long-term trend, especially for sexual and physical abuse.”
As for other risk factors...
“Youth violence is way down, as is teen pregnancy, smoking, alcohol and drug use, suicides, and high school drop-out rates – whereas civic engagement has improved along with youth taking more AP classes in high school. Standardized educational achievement scores have either remained steady or improved slightly. Aside from obesity, perhaps, most trends in youth behavior are moving in a positive direction.”
– Prof. Christopher Ferguson, Texas A&M
Cyberbullying
Daniel NichollsMelbourne 2004
Toward defining cyberbullying
1. Willful repeated aggression2. Associated with real life3. Power imbalance (sometimes
anonymity)4. Not just harassment, conflict, or drama5. Bully & target often switch roles
Sources: UNH CACRC, ‘07; Agatston, Kowalski, Limber, ‘09; Burgess-Proctor, Hinduja, Patchin, ‘09
More cyberbullying facts
• Studies all over the map: from 5.9% of teens cyberbullied to 72% (most 15%-35%)
• Only 10% report to adults• Developmental more than technological• Fluid, fast, hard to ditch• Focus on environment: school, not technology• “Cyberbullying” is an adult term
Sources: UNH CACRC, ‘07; Agatston, Kowalski, Limber, ‘09; Burgess-Proctor, Hinduja, Patchin, ‘09
Whole school approach needed
“Because a bully’s success depends heavily on context, attempts to prevent bullying should concentrate primarily on changing the context rather than directly addressing the victim’s or the bully’s behavior.” This involves “the entire school community.”
– Yale psychology Prof. Alan Yazdin and Carlo Rotella at Boston College
Most kids don’t cyberbully
Source: Cox Communications Teen Online & Wireless Safety Survey
Perception vs. reality:The POWER of ‘social
norming’
Source: Craig & Perkins, Hobart and William Smith Colleges 2008
Reinforcing social norms
Source: Assessing Bullying in New Jersey Secondary Schools: Applying the Social Norms Model to Adolescent Violence: Craig, Perkins 2008
The ultimate in social normingIn 2006, two Nova Scotia boys started
what became a movement: Wearing Pink
‘Sexting’
‘Sexting’ defined• Nude or sexually explicit photo-sharing or
text messages• Usually via cellphones, but possible via other devices and Web• Illegal when involving minors• Overzealous prosecutors have charged teens with production, possession, distribution of child pornography–felonies
How common is sexting?
Earliest study reported that 20% of US teens had sent a sexting message. The latest study found 4% had.
Received:15-17%
Forwarded: 3%
Sources: Harris Interactive/Cox/NCMEC 5/09; AP/MTV 12/09; Pew 12/09
Sent:4-10%
Possible non-legal consequences
• Emotional or reputational damage• School discipline• Invisible viewership – can be
forwarded to anyone• Potentially searchable on the
Web, possibly forever
Why do some kids ‘sext’?• Teen “romance” – expression of shared
intimacy with partner• Flirting or relationship currency• “Truth or Dare” (normative game gone very
wrong)• Peer pressure• Revenge (“revenge porn”)• Bullying or intimidation (“pranks”)• Blackmail
2% – “Photo was forwarded to an authority figure and I got in trouble.”
1% – “Photo was posted online where many people could see it.”
4% – “The person I sent the photo to threatened to send it to someone else.”
2% – “I accidentally sent the photo to the wrong person.”
2% – “The person I sent the photo to made fun of me.”
2% – “The photo was forwarded to someone I didn't want to see it”
Did bad things happen after sexting messages
were sent?
Source: Cox Communications Teen Online & Wireless Safety Survey, 2009
“Promote digital citizenship and new media literacy in pre-K-12 education as a national priority.”
– Youth Safety on a Living Internet:Report of the Online Safety & Technology Working Group
Our report to Congress, June 2010...
The pillars of
citizenshiplearning
Photo by Julian Turner
• Infrastructure
• Practice
• Guidance
• It’s protective
• Fosters critical thinking
• Promotes agency, self-actualization
• It turns users into stakeholders – citizens
• Supports community well-being & goals
• Citizenship is a verb!
Why citizenship?
The most basic definition
“The central task of citizenship
is learning how to be good to one another.”
– A.J. Patrick Liszkiewicz
Digital citizenship
The rights and responsibilities of full, constructive engagement in participatory media
• Rights –freedoms discussed above• Responsibilities...
– Active critical thinking & ethical choices about– The content and impact of – Our media use on– Ourselves, others, and our community.
“ As a society, we have spent too much time focused on what media are doing to young people and not enough time asking what young people are doing with media. Rather, we need to embrace an approach based on media ethics, one that empowers young people to take greater responsibility for their own actions and holds them accountable for the choices they make as media producers and members of online communities.”
– Prof. Henry Jenkins, USC
‘With great power comes great
responsibility’
A V3.0 school board...
• Supports and promotes pre-K-12 instruction in citizenship and media literacy, online & offline
• Encourages social media learning in the classroom so students can practice digital citizenship
• Fosters a whole-school-community approach to anti-social behavior online and offline
• Supports the preparation of students for full, constructive engagement in participatory media, culture, democracy.
Thank you!
Anne [email protected]@connectsafely.org
http://os3.connectsafely.org