Shareworthy: the new newsworthy

Melinda's blog reflects on the topic of media literacies and social action raised by Mimi Ito in her 2009 NFAIS conference keynote address. 

The millenial generation have grown up surrounded by digital and virtual worlds. They are fascinated with new technology and are vocal and active when interacting with others in the digital world. Their desire to make and share their ideas digitally gives them an opportunity to create and interpret popular culture in new ways. Youth form an identity through their interactions with media and popular culture. Today's youth also gain an affinity with their peers by interacting in a digital environment. Being a part of a virtual community allows youth to not only become part of a peer culture but to define themselves. The new ways of interacting with media online enable youth to not only assess whether something is newsworthy, but more importantly surround themselves with things that are 'shareworthy' which defines and shapes their identity.

The integral nature of technology in the lives of the millenial generation is well summarised by John Seely-Brown: "Today's digital kids think of information and communications technology (ICT) as something akin to oxygen: they expect it, it's what they breathe, and it's how they live. They use ICT to meet, play, date, and learn. It's an integral part of their social life; it's how they acknowledge each other and form their personal identities." In her keynote address, Mimi Ito focuses on the aspect of identification where social media has the ability to connect and mobilize youth today. 

Online social communication takes place in a shared culture with shared social practices. The focus of this online social communication is the connection with others, not just the content that is being shared. There are many opportunities for self-expression and to create connections with like-minded peers. This self-expression is happening at the interpersonal level, not the commercial level, which means that teens get to share what's on their mind. What we see posted online is not necessarily newsworthy in a commercial sense but 'shareworthy' from an amateur or interpersonal point of view. 

Making and sharing media is a core facet of online social communication.  Ito suggests that making and sharing media has become fundamental to how we relate to others. It has become natural for youth to share media through a variety of online affiliations, expressions or circulations such as social networking sites, YouTube or blogs. "The practice of online social networking can be seen as empowering, as it is a way to voluntarily engage with other people and construct identities, and it can thus be described as participatory." (Albrechtslund 2008) These social practices have become ubiquitous and routine in youth online culture. When this happens, technology becomes an indispensible part of youth identity. 

Popular culture has always been an important part of the lives of youth in any modern generation. Today's youth actively participate with popular culture rather than passively absorb its features. Unlike previous generations, youth today have the ability to 'mashup' popular culture in ways that were not so readily available to previous generations. Previous generations predominately relied on key publishers to produce popular culture media, but the millenial generation are publishers of popular culture media themselves. 

Today's youth can be interpreters and producers of popular culture through their making of media that they share online. Interacting with social media has produced what is commonly known as the 'gift economy'. Youth 'gift' the digital content they create in a culture Henry Jenkins describes as a 'bottom-up media generated culture'. This shared media can then be modified by others which in turn creates more. The making and sharing of media in a participatory culture is awash with personalisation and remix (Ito 2009). This interactive digital media phenomenon is about engagement, communication and identification. 

The way youth use new media is empowering. The internet allows today's youth to connect with family, friends and those with whom there is a shared interest or identity. Ito states that the content they are communicating with others about is subordinate to the social connection and presence that experiences like social networking can provide. Kerry Mallan suggests that social networking technologies make life online "More interesting, more connected, more complex". There is an opportunity here for educators to harness the innovation youth today use in their interactions with each other and popular culture; and their enjoyment of self-expression and connecting with others online. A bridge built between the serious and the playful is where Ito suggests that energy and engagement can occur.

Today's youth depend on their connection to the cyber world for information, relationship building and entertainment. Educators should attempt to harness the ability of the internet to make connections by teaching new media literacies in the classroom. Jenkins recommends that classrooms see more sharing of visual and audio media to enhance social connections and cultural identity. Ways of socially interacting with online communities is a new 21st century literacy skill that needs to be recognised.

Once a sense of belonging is established via online interactions, social mobilisation or activism is a possible outcome. Ito focuses on gaming as an example of how media mobilises kids to do something with it. Belonging to the social gaming culture has social currency with peers; and a sense of belonging occurs when they are involved in the shared social vocabulary of gaming. Active participation in the online gaming community invites collection, strategising and trading activity between gamers. This collective intelligence between like-minded individuals creates meaning, skills and knowledge using the language of new media. Students should be encouraged to participate in knowledge seeking in collective online experiences such as online tutorials and forums. This takes place in a heterarchical structure, which enable students to participate in a collaborative democratised environment.

Today's youth are generators of media content, not just consumers. Educators must find opportunities for youth to contribute to or modify content rather than just use or absorb knowledge. Producing knowledge could be in the form of reviewing film, writing stories and reciprocal critique of each others' work. For this to occur, digital media production skills need to be taught alongside basic literacy skills.

As online producers of media, youth also need to be explicitly be taught the ethics of these experiences. Areas such as copyright, privacy, security, cyberbullying need to be taught alongside the multi-modal literacies required to participate fully in the digital world. Sharing media may be natural to youth today, but we as educators have the responsibility to teach social media like any other media. Students have the right to become media literate, and themselves become ethically responsible users and producers of new media.

Some may say that what teens consider as 'shareworthy' is trivial and insignificant. It is our duty as teachers to harness their engagement with the digital world and teaching media literacies to enhance their communication and mobilisation of ideas.

References

Albrechtslund, A. (2008). Online social networking as participatory surveillance. First Monday. 13 (3). Retrieved 26 September, 2010, from http://www.uic.edu/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2142/1949

Ito, M. (2009). Media Literacy and Social Action in a Post-Pokeman World. NFAIS conference keynote address. Retrieved September 26, 2010, from Queensland University of Technology Course Materials Database.

Jenkins, H. (2006). Confronting the challenge of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century. Chicago, Illinois: The MacArthur Foundation. Retrieved July 19, 2010, from Queensland University of Technology Course Materials Database.

Mallan, K. (2009). Look at me! Look at me! Self representation and self-exposure through online networks. Digital culture & education, 1 (1), pp. 51-65. Retrieved 27 September, 2010, from http://www.uic.edu/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2142/1949

Seely-Brown, J. (2004). Learning in the Digital Age, Retrieved 30 September, 2010, from http://www.johnseelybrown.com/learning_in_digital_age-aspen.pdf retrieved

Cyber-bullying and Schools

Michelle’s response to the news article “Don’t Hurt: Schools win $1m to fight cyber-bullying” written by Tim Jamieson, Leader Community Newspapers online, September 14, 2010.

In a move that will hopefully encourage not only educators, but parents and the community in general, to deal with issues of cyber-bullying, a new “eSmart” initiative funded by the Victorian State Government and national charity The Alannah and Madeleine Foundation  will be rolled out across Victorian Government schools in 2011.  With staff training programs, and student teams to help promote discussion of cyber safety between students and parents, it certainly sounds like a promising step towards dealing with issues of cyber bullying and online safety.

The simple fact is that although some may try to deny it exists, and some may have never heard of it, cyber bullying IS a problem (See Boyd, 2007, p.139, Campbell, 2005), and we not only need to put in place measures to prevent it, but we also need to teach our children and students what to do when it occurs.  Youths in both Australia and the United States have taken their own lives due to cyber bullying, and this is a situation we need to be doing everything in our power to prevent.  As educators, we are in a situation to teach our students the skills to stay safe and to deal appropriately with unpleasant situations when they occur, so it disturbs me when I hear reports of schools who would rather believe that because this bullying may be happening outside the school grounds, that it is not their concern.

           

            Among other digital media platforms, social networking sites have been identified as locations where online bullying may occur (Boyd, 2007, p.139; Jamieson, 2010), yet it is important that we do not simply ban the sites and call the problem done. After all, we do not remove playgrounds from school grounds to deal with lunch time bullying, so why remove access to social networking sites to deal with cyber-bullying? In this respect, the “eSmart” initiative must be congratulated even before it is rolled out, as far from suggesting that students be prevented from accessing social networking sites, its aim instead is to teach youths strategies and skills to avoid bullying.  It is my hope that as educators, we all make it our business to teach our students how to prevent, avoid and deal with bullying, no matter the format that it takes. 

_______________________________________

References:

Boyd, D. (2007). Why Youth ♥ (heart) Social Network Sites: The Role of Networked Publics in Teenage Social Life [Electronic Version]. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Learning – Youth, Identity, and Digital Media Volume (Ed. David Buckinham), Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Retrieved September 20, 2010 from http://www.danah.org/papers/WhyYouthHeart.pdf

Jamieson, T. (2010, September 14). Don’t Hurt: Schools win $10m to fight cyber-bullying [Electronic Version]. Leader Community Newspapers. Retrieved September 30, 2010 from http://leader-news.whereilive.com.au/news/story/dont-hurt-schools-win-10m-to-fight-cyber-bullying/

Why Youth ♥ Social Networks - and HOW we should respond…

Michelle’s Commentary on Danah Boyd’s 2007 article “Why Youth ♥ (heart) Social Network Sites: The Role of Networked Publics in Teen Social Life”

The rapid and widespread adoption of social networking sites such as Facebook, MySpace and Twitter (which are suggested to be among the Top 15 most popular sites) amongst high school age teenagers requires consideration from educators and parents.  Social networking sites have played an important part in teen life since their rapid adoption by teens[i] in 2005 (Boyd, 2007, p.119), and it is clear they aren’t going to disappear any time soon.  The biggest question facing us as educators then is, “How should we respond to this?” In contemplating this question, and Danah Boyd’s two year ethnographic study of US-based youth engagement with the popular social networking site MySpace (Why Youth (heart) Social Networks), it is my opinion that we must consider issues of youth identity construction and the social and ethical implications of this, along with educational issues including digital media literacies and regulation and access to these sites.

Boyd explores youth identity formation through engagement in social networks, and maintains that identity is a social process that is adaptable and dependent on situation and context, which on social networking sites is framed by a perceived or imagined audience (2007, p.131). In the situation and context of a social networking site, setting up a “slick profile”, involving viewing others’ profiles for a sense of what is socially appropriate and valued by their peers, acts to socialize teens into the social protocols of that network (Boyd, p.131).  In creating these online identities, teens must make the choices as to which aspects of their personality they wish to express for others to see and in doing so they are engaging in impression management and identity formation (Boyd, p.128 – 129).  While the formation of social identities might be a valued and important part of growing up, social and ethical implications and problems become more obvious when you consider the properties of the “networked publics” (Boyd, p.120) in which these teens are participating.

Teens might argue that their privacy should be respected and that their social networking spaces should be a place where they can be themselves (Boyd, 2007, p.132), but problems arise when their audience is not who they expected.  While there are multiple ways in which teens can create privacy on social networking sites (such as using false names or information, using privacy settings and creating mirror networks to hide material from parents and others), these same methods may interfere with their peers locating them also, which in turn can lead teens to either not making use of these settings, or to a willingness to accept friend requests randomly and promiscuously (Boyd, p.132).  These “networked publics”, of which social networking sites are a type, have properties of persistence, searchability, replicability and invisible audiences, all of which complicate social dynamics and interactions (Boyd, p.120), and these properties are, in my opinion, a basic part of what we should be teaching teens about social networking sites.  Peers and offline friends are not the only people interested in tracking teens online, although these groups come with complications (such as bullying) of their own; parents, teachers and officials have an interest in checking up on teens online, while marketers and predators look for teens who are open to their marketing of products or promises (Boyd, p.133).

So when a teen, who may not be as proficient in online literacies as popular opinion would have us think (Asselin & Doiron, 2008, p.3), begins interacting on a social networking site, there are a multitude of things they need to consider such as:

• Who can really see/read/share my profile and comments?
• What is appropriate for me to share with my audience?
• Do I know the person I am accepting as a ‘friend’?
•  Are the ‘friends’ on my social networking site really who I think they are?
• What will happen if someone copies something I have said/written/shared and spreads it around in the wrong context?
• Will this ‘identity’ come back to haunt me someday?

These teens are in many cases socializing and hanging out online, without considering the implications, both short and long term, of their actions.  These implications range from potentially life threatening, such as cyber-bullying by peers, often through fraudulent profiles, and malicious harassment or threats by adults, and the possibility of being targeted by sexual predators posing as peers, to consequences of outsiders or authority figures who may judge teens on what they have posted on their social networking sites.  Judgement by others, which may either misconstrue the information of a teen’s profile by taking it out of context, or which may dig up long forgotten online comments or actions, could have an effect on teen’s future success, with some US teens expelled, suspended, put on probation, grounded or potentially denied college admission all based on their online profiles and interactions through social networking (Boyd, 2007, p.133-134).

             Users of these sites must constantly keep in mind that unlike conversations and actions taken while hanging out in the face-to-face world, interactions online are not ephemeral; they persist, they can be searched for, they can be copied and stored any number of times and may be replicated out of context while still appearing to be original or genuine, and they are being shared with a potentially unknown public.  Is it any wonder then that schools and departments act to block social networking sites? I can imagine the thought processes behind the decision to block the potentially explosive minefield which these sites represent, however decisions and legislations to block access to social networking sites in schools and public libraries are not going to help our teens (Jenkins, Clinton, Purushotma, Robison & Weigel, 2006, p.13).

 Instead we should be working towards teaching teens to use social networking effectively, and giving them the digital media literacy skills to analyse, judge and reflect critically on the contexts and information they find online (Jenkins et al., 2006, p.51).  Indeed the social and ethical implications which teens face while interacting on social networking sites mirror almost identically the ethical implications recognized by Jenkins et al. as part of the ‘Ethics Challenge” identified in their White Paper: Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21^st Century (p.17); that is

• privacy issues and the potential for unwelcome attention from strangers
• deciding between what and what not to post
• interpreting unwritten norms for governing acceptable and unacceptable conduct
• masked identities and the reality that not everyone is who they claim to be

            I believe that the bottom line is this: teens require appropriate skills in order to safely, responsibly and effectively navigate the online ‘networked publics’ which they inhabit, and it is up to each of us as educators to make a choice – are we going to teach our youth the skills they need, or are we going to bury our heads in the sand and ignore the entire situation?

---

[i] Boyd uses the term ‘teens’ to refer to youth of high school age who are the target of her research.  To maintain consistency and clarity, this term has been used in the same way for this commentary.

References:

Asselin, M., & Doiron, R., (2008). Towards a Transformative Pedagogy for School Libraries 2.0. School Libraries Worldwide, 14(2), 1-18.  Retrieved August 21, 2010, from ProQuest Education Journals.

Boyd, D. (2007). Why Youth ♥ (heart) Social Network Sites: The Role of Networked Publics in Teenage Social Life [Electronic Version]. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Learning – Youth, Identity, and Digital Media Volume (Ed. David Buckinham), Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Retrieved September 20, 2010 from http://www.danah.org/papers/WhyYouthHeart.pdf

Jenkins, H., Clinton, K., Purushotma, R., Robison, A. J. & Weigel, M. (2006). Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21^st Century [Occasional paper]. Retrieved August 20, 2010 from http://digitallearning.macfound.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=enJLKQNlFiG&b=2108773&ct=3017973&notoc=1

Social networking: sinister or stimulating?

Susan Greenfield shows off Albert Einstein's preserved brain; she fears there will be fewer Einsteins in the future (The Weekend Australian 2010, September 18-19)

Melinda's blog on the news article "Why the internet demands vigilance" written by Tim Kitchen, The Age online, July 26 2010.

The debate whether the use of social networking is damaging to today's youth is often played out in the media.  A recent article in The Weekend Australian (Binning 2010, p10) examines the accusation by Oxford University Professor Susan Greenfield that the use of technology has a negative effect on the brain. She argues that social networking contributes to desocialisation and infantisation of the brain. However, the argument posed by her critics is more convincing with its evidence-based approach, such as the research done by professor Ian Hickie of Sydney University. His research has found that technology makes us happier by enabling stronger bonds between family and friends; and smarter by creating new neural pathways.

Social networking and the internet is a natural part of the lives of youth today. Whilst there are those in education who dismiss social networking as not 'serious' or 'valuable', it is an important part of youth social communication and cultural identity. Not many teenagers today would side with Professor Susan Greenfield.

In the article "Why the internet demands vigilance" by educator Tim Kitchen, there is an acceptance of the place of social networking in the lives of youth today. Kitchen has a pro-social attitude towards social networking but emphasises the need for educators to be vigilant to accentuate the positives and limit the negatives.

Issues such as security and ethics are some of the most problematic features of internet use. Kitchen states that interacting online is a life skill that teachers have a duty of care to support. Rather than banning online interactions like social networking, educators should be providing guidance to students on what is appropriate. 'Internet road rules' need to be taught to youth to protect and empower their online experiences.

The debate on whether the use of the internet is 'dumbing' us down, stands alongside the discussion on the responsibility of schools to teach the protocols and skills of social networking and internet use.

As Kitchen suggests, the banning of social networking in schools in a "Just say no" approach has its place, but ultimately teaching youth to manage their social networking is equally important. 

Greenfield argues that the overuse of technology will prevent the next Einstein from reaching their potential. Maybe Einstein would have a Facebook page if he were alive today.

Binning, D. (2010, September 18-19). Technology may be eating our minds. The Weekend Australian, Weekend Professional Health, p. 10.

Kitchen, T. (2010, July 26) Why the internet demands vigilance. Retrieved September 16, 2010, from http://www.theage.com.au/national/education/why-the-internet-demands-vigilance-20100716-10dya.html