Our recent discussions about young people who turn to violence made me consider what sort of behaviors should be considered alarming; behaviors which parents should pay attention to and perhaps seek counseling for their child when these behaviors are displayed. It's hard to think of obvious factors other than the severe ones, like a child's tendency to hurt animals or a history of physical or sexual abuse. When it comes down to it, a lot of normal teen behaviors, taken to an extreme degree, are negative and cause for alarm, but it can be hard for many adults to note the difference between extreme behavior and normal, average behavior.
For example, a teen listening to the Norwegian black metal band Mayhem is not necessarily cause for alarm, but if that teen started to empathize with then and proclaim a desire to burn churches, then it's time to step in.
Or another example. Take a look at my favorite person ever, Miley Cyrus. She's being attacked in the media for having pictures where she slightly exposes a green bra/undershirt, and others where she is laying in a boy's lap and exposing her midriff. Many people automatically jump compare these pictures to the infamous nude/scantily clad pictures of High School Musical star Vanessa Hudgens, and fear that they may imply that she is sleeping with the boy in the pictures.
Miley is 15. 15 year olds have boyfriends and girlfriends. They are developmentally and hormonally inclined to be sexually and physically attracted to those people. It might be cause for concern if a 15 year old girl was sleeping with someone or taking nude pictures of herself. However, pulling up one's shirt to bare their midriff is quite different from stripping and posing nude in front of a camera. And as far as allegations that her sitting in the boy's lap is tantamount to her being sexually active with him, I can only say that having sex with someone and coming in flirtatious physical contact with them is far from similar. To quote Jules Winnfield from Pulp Fuction, it "ain't the same fuckin' ballpark, it ain't the same league, it ain't even the same fuckin' sport." But this sort of conclusion jumping is not uncommon amongst adults who are examining the behaviors of young people.
Adults will often overinterpret a few perfectly normal teen behaviors and from there assume that the young person is at risk. There's a fine line between normal teen behavior and scary seek-help behavior.
And that made me remember a feature by one of my favorite comic writers, Lore Sjoberg:
Is Your Child on Drugs?
All that said, I still think I'd rather have a parent be too attentive and worry over small insignificant things than have a parent be completely absent and pay no attention to possible signs that their child might be at risk for negative behavior and violence, though there is plenty of middle ground between the two extremes.
On a different note, while looking for Sjoberg's old work, I came across some of his new work, a vlog project on YouTube called Alt Text, and I thought some of them were relevant to our class discussions:
Regarding the state of online communication, social networking sites, especially Twitter.
Also, some of his previous comic writing work involved taking a bunch of items in a certain category and giving them an A, B, C, D, F rating. He's apparantly revived his Ratings in his vlog.
This one is a rating of First Level Dungeons and Dragons Spells
Showing posts with label social networking. Show all posts
Showing posts with label social networking. Show all posts
Friday, April 25, 2008
Saturday, April 5, 2008
MyBarackObama.com - Grassroots Organizing Online
Note: I know national politics are not quite the thing to bring into a classroom discussion, but I do believe this is a unique situation and it definitely connects to our discussions about civic involvement. I especially wanted to bring it up in response to Kamilla's post questioning just how relevant the forms of civic engagment you see online really are. I hope y'all don't mind too much. :)
First and foremost, I highly recommend reading this article showing how all the pretty things on Obama's website (a NYT article compared it to the Mac/Apple website) are connected to the actual on-the-ground organizing in the primary campaign so far:
They also make it easy for anyone who wants to remix their media in their posts to do so, making videos available through YouTube and photos on Flickr and so forth. Then they're able to link back to those blog posts and videos and so forth to show how people's stories connect with their campaign or what their supporters are concerned about.
Moving from the primaries into the general election, they're continuing their training program and promoting it heavily right now through all their web tools:
Obama Organizing Fellows
I got an e-mail about that program at work and talked about it with my boss, who's been curious about all the hype about younger people following Obama and wondering how that connects to all this technology stuff. I told her the first time I noticed anything about Obama online was when my friends started joining groups on facebook - they were created by supporters, not the campaign, and were able to ratchet up support and actual fundraising very quickly because they could hook into the social features of the campaign website so smoothly.
This is exactly why Obama is marketing himself as someone who raises money through small donations: his campaign is drawing on the full range of people's commitment ability. This can include the die-hards who will apply for an intensive training program and commit to working 30 hours a week or people who are willing to let other volunteers from out of town stay with them for free while they attend those trainings. It also includes people who will call a friend in a primary state and persuade them to register to vote by a certain date or people who can only give $10 here and there when they're able. But they find a way to make any level of participation seem meaningful, which is exactly why it works so well.
Like the Jenkins paper we read on participatory culture, it's absolutely essential to the ethics/etiquette/mores/whatever of these social sites that you create a welcoming environment where novices can be mentored and everyone feels that they not only can contribute something but that whatever they can do will be valued by others.
I know the stereotype about millenials is that they need constant reinforcement - I don't know how true that is, but I do think it's an aspect of these online settings for a reason. Like using emoticons to adjust your tone in e-mail or on forum posts, giving feedback is essential to making participatory sites seem truly social. If people can tell that they're being listened to, they're much more likely to make an effort to speak their own words.
This is true offline, too, of course, but it isn't common in the political process. When I was a kid I remember helping my dad pass out flyers for a congressional candidate that he thought would make a big difference in Chicago - Michael Patrick Flanagan (who was running for Dan Rostenkowski's seat). It was raining and cold the day we passed them out, but we got a lot done and when we came back Flanagan was in his office and came out to thank us personally. That was probably my most direct participation in the electoral process that I can think of, but it isn't what I remember most.
After Flanagan was elected, my father read something about him in the paper he didn't like and sent him a paper chiding him for going back on his promises. A couple weeks later we got a call from the congressman, who wanted to talk to my dad personally and explain how the news story was distorting his actions. We were all kind of gobsmacked - it isn't the sort of thing you expect in Chicago if you aren't related to an alderman. :)
I do think it's great that Obama has been successful in getting a lot of people actively involved in the political process who haven't been interested before. But campaigns can do that - the real change that needs to happen, the change that Kamilla was wondering about, is in the second part of my story. We need people who will hold their elected officials accountable, and we need elected officials who take that kind of feedback seriously. Have any of you seen that happening online?
First and foremost, I highly recommend reading this article showing how all the pretty things on Obama's website (a NYT article compared it to the Mac/Apple website) are connected to the actual on-the-ground organizing in the primary campaign so far:
The Machinery of Hope: Inside the grass-roots field operation of Barack Obama, who is transforming the way political campaigns are runI found all the information about the training process they've been using very interesting, especially this part:
by TIM DICKINSON, Rolling Stone, March 20, 2008 (Issue 1048, p. 36-42 in the print)
"We decided that we didn't want to train volunteers [...] We want to train organizers - folks who can fend for themselves."To work out that ethic on their website, they've created the "My.BarackObama.Com" platform within the general campaign site, allowing people to blog and do event organizing and fundraising and all kinds of other social networking from their space.
They also make it easy for anyone who wants to remix their media in their posts to do so, making videos available through YouTube and photos on Flickr and so forth. Then they're able to link back to those blog posts and videos and so forth to show how people's stories connect with their campaign or what their supporters are concerned about.
Moving from the primaries into the general election, they're continuing their training program and promoting it heavily right now through all their web tools:
Obama Organizing Fellows
I got an e-mail about that program at work and talked about it with my boss, who's been curious about all the hype about younger people following Obama and wondering how that connects to all this technology stuff. I told her the first time I noticed anything about Obama online was when my friends started joining groups on facebook - they were created by supporters, not the campaign, and were able to ratchet up support and actual fundraising very quickly because they could hook into the social features of the campaign website so smoothly.
This is exactly why Obama is marketing himself as someone who raises money through small donations: his campaign is drawing on the full range of people's commitment ability. This can include the die-hards who will apply for an intensive training program and commit to working 30 hours a week or people who are willing to let other volunteers from out of town stay with them for free while they attend those trainings. It also includes people who will call a friend in a primary state and persuade them to register to vote by a certain date or people who can only give $10 here and there when they're able. But they find a way to make any level of participation seem meaningful, which is exactly why it works so well.
Like the Jenkins paper we read on participatory culture, it's absolutely essential to the ethics/etiquette/mores/whatever of these social sites that you create a welcoming environment where novices can be mentored and everyone feels that they not only can contribute something but that whatever they can do will be valued by others.
I know the stereotype about millenials is that they need constant reinforcement - I don't know how true that is, but I do think it's an aspect of these online settings for a reason. Like using emoticons to adjust your tone in e-mail or on forum posts, giving feedback is essential to making participatory sites seem truly social. If people can tell that they're being listened to, they're much more likely to make an effort to speak their own words.
This is true offline, too, of course, but it isn't common in the political process. When I was a kid I remember helping my dad pass out flyers for a congressional candidate that he thought would make a big difference in Chicago - Michael Patrick Flanagan (who was running for Dan Rostenkowski's seat). It was raining and cold the day we passed them out, but we got a lot done and when we came back Flanagan was in his office and came out to thank us personally. That was probably my most direct participation in the electoral process that I can think of, but it isn't what I remember most.
After Flanagan was elected, my father read something about him in the paper he didn't like and sent him a paper chiding him for going back on his promises. A couple weeks later we got a call from the congressman, who wanted to talk to my dad personally and explain how the news story was distorting his actions. We were all kind of gobsmacked - it isn't the sort of thing you expect in Chicago if you aren't related to an alderman. :)
I do think it's great that Obama has been successful in getting a lot of people actively involved in the political process who haven't been interested before. But campaigns can do that - the real change that needs to happen, the change that Kamilla was wondering about, is in the second part of my story. We need people who will hold their elected officials accountable, and we need elected officials who take that kind of feedback seriously. Have any of you seen that happening online?
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Another Irregular News Roundup
Howard Gardner on "The End of Literacy? Don't Stop Reading."
NPR story on Asian stereotypes in the media (starting with Long Duck Dong in Sixteen Candles)
WWE and new marketing push for kids from Variety. There's more here at AdWeek.
Crunchyroll, a website targeted at Asian youth
New York Times article on the Facebook application, The Honesty Box
Interesting experiment in interactive fiction sponsored by Penguin UK
New York Times article on Nickelodeon's massive games launch
Keep up with teen news with this feed at alltop.
YALSA blog post about recent coverage of teen library services
ShiftedLibrarian post about gaming and libraries (see this earlier post as well)
New web-based comic strip application
Cool time-lapse video of the spread of Wal-Mart across the US
Tame the Web on the banning of social networking sites at the Mishawaka-Penn-Harris PL in Indiana
Provocative blog post on what constitutes "real" library work these days
NPR story on Asian stereotypes in the media (starting with Long Duck Dong in Sixteen Candles)
WWE and new marketing push for kids from Variety. There's more here at AdWeek.
Crunchyroll, a website targeted at Asian youth
New York Times article on the Facebook application, The Honesty Box
Interesting experiment in interactive fiction sponsored by Penguin UK
New York Times article on Nickelodeon's massive games launch
Keep up with teen news with this feed at alltop.
YALSA blog post about recent coverage of teen library services
ShiftedLibrarian post about gaming and libraries (see this earlier post as well)
New web-based comic strip application
Cool time-lapse video of the spread of Wal-Mart across the US
Tame the Web on the banning of social networking sites at the Mishawaka-Penn-Harris PL in Indiana
Provocative blog post on what constitutes "real" library work these days
Friday, February 1, 2008
Just because it's new and shiny, don't do it!
You might be interested in checking out this Blog about social networking: http://onlinesocialnetworks.blogspot.com/
One of the postings, from Jan. 19, has the audio of an Iowa Public Radio interview (a little less than 30 min. long) with Professor Michael Bugeja, from Iowa State University. Real Audio stream. He presents the “con” side of using social networking and other popular technologies with educational tools. He talks briefly about the hidden costs of technology. For example, social networking has marketing motives “seamlessly interwoven in the interface.” When the interviewer comments that using social networking and other technologies in education engages students more, Bugeja comments that this can lead to sacrificing content for engagement. On his website, he states, “This is not the Age of Information. This is the Age of Distraction. And distraction in academia is deadly because it undermines critical thinking.” (http://interpersonal-divide.org/) He said that just because young people are using social networking and other technologies, including texting and i-pods, it doesn’t mean we should use them in education. Some of the devices are not really conducive to education. Additionally, we need to keep distinctions between education, socialization, and entertainment. He gave the example of not wanted to learn when playing video games--when he plays video games, he wants it to be just for entertainment. He also talked about how e-mail and the internet makes it impossible to separate work and social life.
He brings up some great points that we don't always think about, such as the hidden agenda of social networking and even free e-mail sites. Also, we shouldn’t use new technologies just because they are "new technologies" without thinking about if they are the best tool to use. However, I wasn't convinced by his argument about needing to separate education, socialization, and entertainment. They have always been intertwined. That is just how we interact and learn. We have always used the same tools in different kinds of ways. People use discussion as socialization, and also in education; we read books for entertainment, but also in education. Just like Ong discussed, even writing is a technology that we use. Neither is making social connections while learning anything new. Peer-support and socialization in the classroom is also essential to classroom learning. Collaboration helps us understand better than simply taking in information, such as from a lecture.
After I listened to his interview, I found the Economist.com debate between Bugeja and Ewan McIntosh, National Adviser on Learning and Technology Futures for Learning and Teaching in Scotland. The proposition was the following: “The house believes that social networking technologies will bring large [positive] changes to educational methods, in and out of the classroom.”
If you want more to think about regarding the negatives of using social networking in education, also see this attack on Facebook and the founders and backers of Facebook by Tom Hodgkinson. It begins with the sentence, “I despise Facebook,” which sets the tone of the article. This writer is so extreme, it's hard for me to get past his hostility.
One of the postings, from Jan. 19, has the audio of an Iowa Public Radio interview (a little less than 30 min. long) with Professor Michael Bugeja, from Iowa State University. Real Audio stream. He presents the “con” side of using social networking and other popular technologies with educational tools. He talks briefly about the hidden costs of technology. For example, social networking has marketing motives “seamlessly interwoven in the interface.” When the interviewer comments that using social networking and other technologies in education engages students more, Bugeja comments that this can lead to sacrificing content for engagement. On his website, he states, “This is not the Age of Information. This is the Age of Distraction. And distraction in academia is deadly because it undermines critical thinking.” (http://interpersonal-divide.org/) He said that just because young people are using social networking and other technologies, including texting and i-pods, it doesn’t mean we should use them in education. Some of the devices are not really conducive to education. Additionally, we need to keep distinctions between education, socialization, and entertainment. He gave the example of not wanted to learn when playing video games--when he plays video games, he wants it to be just for entertainment. He also talked about how e-mail and the internet makes it impossible to separate work and social life.
He brings up some great points that we don't always think about, such as the hidden agenda of social networking and even free e-mail sites. Also, we shouldn’t use new technologies just because they are "new technologies" without thinking about if they are the best tool to use. However, I wasn't convinced by his argument about needing to separate education, socialization, and entertainment. They have always been intertwined. That is just how we interact and learn. We have always used the same tools in different kinds of ways. People use discussion as socialization, and also in education; we read books for entertainment, but also in education. Just like Ong discussed, even writing is a technology that we use. Neither is making social connections while learning anything new. Peer-support and socialization in the classroom is also essential to classroom learning. Collaboration helps us understand better than simply taking in information, such as from a lecture.
After I listened to his interview, I found the Economist.com debate between Bugeja and Ewan McIntosh, National Adviser on Learning and Technology Futures for Learning and Teaching in Scotland. The proposition was the following: “The house believes that social networking technologies will bring large [positive] changes to educational methods, in and out of the classroom.”
If you want more to think about regarding the negatives of using social networking in education, also see this attack on Facebook and the founders and backers of Facebook by Tom Hodgkinson. It begins with the sentence, “I despise Facebook,” which sets the tone of the article. This writer is so extreme, it's hard for me to get past his hostility.
Thursday, January 24, 2008
Study on Teens & Social Networking
To go along with the Frontline episode, Growing Up Online, that was on this week. If you didn't catch it when it was on PBS, I recommend watching it.
There's a recent study that came out from the Pew Internet and American Life Project "Teens and Social Media." It's has some interesting but not surprising findings about more girls blogging and posting photos than boys. The future ramifications of kids internet lives on their futures will be interesting.
There's a recent study that came out from the Pew Internet and American Life Project "Teens and Social Media." It's has some interesting but not surprising findings about more girls blogging and posting photos than boys. The future ramifications of kids internet lives on their futures will be interesting.
Privacy & Connection - An Introduction to Social Networking
Can I brag a little? I am very lucky to work with a fantastic electronic resources librarian. She just wrote an article outlining her concerns with getting into online social networks and explaining the differences between them. I think it's great for users at any level, but would be particularly useful for people who haven't begun to poke around these sites yet.
It's published in a legal website, but totally applicable for anyone else and you might find her extra insight into privacy issues helpful if you haven't set up a "public" web presence before.
LLRX.com: Law and Technology Resources for Legal Professionals
In the article, she covers 4 networks that would apply to any of us: Facebook, LinkedIn, MySpace, and Ning. If anyone would like to check out an example profile, or if are already "on them" and would like to link to classmates, here are links to my profiles:
It's published in a legal website, but totally applicable for anyone else and you might find her extra insight into privacy issues helpful if you haven't set up a "public" web presence before.
Social Networks for Law Librarians and Law Libraries, or How We Stopped Worrying and Learned to Love Friending
By Debbie Ginsberg and Meg Kribble, Published on January 19, 2008LLRX.com: Law and Technology Resources for Legal Professionals
In the article, she covers 4 networks that would apply to any of us: Facebook, LinkedIn, MySpace, and Ning. If anyone would like to check out an example profile, or if are already "on them" and would like to link to classmates, here are links to my profiles:
Another take on social networking for kids
I just found this story about Kerpoof, a website for kids designed to act as both a "social networking" site and a multimedia tool set.
It's an intriguing idea - unlike MySpace or Facebook, the "networks" are groups that require passwords to join, keeping the connections private and much more secure. The idea seems similar to Ning, a social networking site where anyone can set up their own "network" based on a shared interest or other connection. The difference here seems to be the extra level of privacy controls so kids, teachers, and/or parents can be careful who kids connect with online.
According to techcrunch's Mark Henderson,
If you are just starting to check out social networking sites, the Library 2.0 Ning group may be something you want to look into - it's a group setup just for people interested in figuring out new services and features libraries can develop using recent technology and media trends.
It's an intriguing idea - unlike MySpace or Facebook, the "networks" are groups that require passwords to join, keeping the connections private and much more secure. The idea seems similar to Ning, a social networking site where anyone can set up their own "network" based on a shared interest or other connection. The difference here seems to be the extra level of privacy controls so kids, teachers, and/or parents can be careful who kids connect with online.
According to techcrunch's Mark Henderson,
"Kerpoof is working on making it possible for kids to collaborate over movies and stories, too, and on adding support for games and social puzzles later in the year. A type of virtual currency will be coming soon as well."Evidently the plan is to transition into a subscription-based fee service in the future, but for now it's totally free. People working with kids may want to get a good look at it now before they have to pay for it.
If you are just starting to check out social networking sites, the Library 2.0 Ning group may be something you want to look into - it's a group setup just for people interested in figuring out new services and features libraries can develop using recent technology and media trends.
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
MySpace Evolves... Facebook games in court
Last week I posted some links to new security controls added to MySpace as part of a deal with 49 state legislatures.
Today I saw this article in the New York Times describing the push for MySpace to continue updating its site design and features as part of the ongoing push to keep at the head of the social networking sites pack: From MySpace to YourSpace by Brian Stelter
MySpace is in a funny position - many people (kids especially) like it because it's so easy to customize and MSM industries like it because its easy to use to promote products (especially music & video). But other users are leaving because they dislike the cluttered pages, anarchic social contacts and pushy marketing ("MySpace refugees," the article calls them).
With new security settings protecting kids and increased privacy controls on the horizon, will MySpace keep its loyal fanbase and draw in new users? MySpace's answer to keeping people engaged with their website has been more and more media content. But how long can they continue to compete with YouTube and the hordes of other video and music sites that provide content more flexibly and with more interactive features? The article mentions new celebrity content guides, but will that compete with IMDB and AllMusic.com, which are easier to browse and have giant databases of information?
Facebook, the lead competitor with MySpace in the U.S., tries to keep its users loyal by providing more and more content to keep them in the site. The "applications" approach has been a mixed bag - some people object to them as "cluttering up" the previously pristine profile pages, so they've added a way to minimize their appearance while you browse through your friends sites.
For the most part, though, their hands off approach to letting outsiders create content and add it to their website has been very successful. But how long will they keep up this approach? Scrabulous, one of the most popular apps on facebook (there are over 46,000 people using it to play "asychronous" games with friends) is facing challenges in court from Hasbro.
Will legal challenges force them to take a more direct role in managing the content on their site? Will their marketing strategies that rely on "word-of-mouth" connections between friends take off, or will people migrate to yet another new social networking site that hasn't been infiltrated by commerical interests?
Today I saw this article in the New York Times describing the push for MySpace to continue updating its site design and features as part of the ongoing push to keep at the head of the social networking sites pack: From MySpace to YourSpace by Brian Stelter
MySpace is in a funny position - many people (kids especially) like it because it's so easy to customize and MSM industries like it because its easy to use to promote products (especially music & video). But other users are leaving because they dislike the cluttered pages, anarchic social contacts and pushy marketing ("MySpace refugees," the article calls them).
With new security settings protecting kids and increased privacy controls on the horizon, will MySpace keep its loyal fanbase and draw in new users? MySpace's answer to keeping people engaged with their website has been more and more media content. But how long can they continue to compete with YouTube and the hordes of other video and music sites that provide content more flexibly and with more interactive features? The article mentions new celebrity content guides, but will that compete with IMDB and AllMusic.com, which are easier to browse and have giant databases of information?
Facebook, the lead competitor with MySpace in the U.S., tries to keep its users loyal by providing more and more content to keep them in the site. The "applications" approach has been a mixed bag - some people object to them as "cluttering up" the previously pristine profile pages, so they've added a way to minimize their appearance while you browse through your friends sites.
For the most part, though, their hands off approach to letting outsiders create content and add it to their website has been very successful. But how long will they keep up this approach? Scrabulous, one of the most popular apps on facebook (there are over 46,000 people using it to play "asychronous" games with friends) is facing challenges in court from Hasbro.
Will legal challenges force them to take a more direct role in managing the content on their site? Will their marketing strategies that rely on "word-of-mouth" connections between friends take off, or will people migrate to yet another new social networking site that hasn't been infiltrated by commerical interests?
Thursday, January 17, 2008
Discipline, Schools, and Facebook
This interesting story from the Minneapolis Star-Tribune discusses recent suspensions and reprimands at an area high school. What did the kids do? They posted photos of themselves at parties--drinks in hand--on Facebook. OK, I won't argue that high school kids should be drinking; it's against the law. Posting pictures of yourself breaking the law is pretty dumb. Yet, the report seems to indicate that the pictures were not available for public viewing, meaning that someone narked on their classmates.
How should Facebook profiles and other online information be used in school settings? This case isn't the first time online information has been used as evidence against students. It's happened in Toronto, Cincinnati, and St. Louis.
How should Facebook profiles and other online information be used in school settings? This case isn't the first time online information has been used as evidence against students. It's happened in Toronto, Cincinnati, and St. Louis.
Monday, January 14, 2008
Social Networking Sites, Teens & Government Deals
I just caught this story on techcrunch, my default source for all breaking news on techie stuff. Of course it's also on traditional news sources too, like the AP and Reuters.
MySpace just changed/upgraded several policies for younger teens using their site to try to protect them from contact with sexual predators and any other adults they don't know. Some of the new policies are aimed at giving parents more control, some are aimed at changing the visibility of younger teens' profiles and some are simply upgrading the response time for complaints.
It will be interesting to see how teens themselves respond to the policy changes. Will they mind having a separate high school section? Many teens already lie about their age to use the site, I wonder how these changes will affect that sort of behavior.
The teens I know on MySpace are pretty careful about the way they use it, using fictional locations and fictional names and posting pictures with multiple people in them so it's hard to tell who they are unless you know them. They've figured out the security settings for the most part but they still get unwanted messages from people sometimes (I do too, not necessarily age inappropriate people or "obscene" messages, just unwanted contact). I'm not sure how much their parents understand about the way they use the website but I know they share tips among their friends.
It seems like most of this legislation/tutoring stuff tends to come from a top-down perspective, but I wonder how much they try to take advantage of the "horizontal" relationships to spread information about the site and the best security tips. Besides updates from Tom, which are kind of annoying. Also I wonder how the new limitations about adult/teen interactions will affect libraries trying to make themselves available on MySpace. I don't have any experience with institutional use of MySpace- my younger sister got me to add a profile but I barely use it since facebook took off. Anyone else have more to add on that front?
[From Carol: There's even more about the MySpace story available at cNet.]
MySpace just changed/upgraded several policies for younger teens using their site to try to protect them from contact with sexual predators and any other adults they don't know. Some of the new policies are aimed at giving parents more control, some are aimed at changing the visibility of younger teens' profiles and some are simply upgrading the response time for complaints.
It will be interesting to see how teens themselves respond to the policy changes. Will they mind having a separate high school section? Many teens already lie about their age to use the site, I wonder how these changes will affect that sort of behavior.
The teens I know on MySpace are pretty careful about the way they use it, using fictional locations and fictional names and posting pictures with multiple people in them so it's hard to tell who they are unless you know them. They've figured out the security settings for the most part but they still get unwanted messages from people sometimes (I do too, not necessarily age inappropriate people or "obscene" messages, just unwanted contact). I'm not sure how much their parents understand about the way they use the website but I know they share tips among their friends.
It seems like most of this legislation/tutoring stuff tends to come from a top-down perspective, but I wonder how much they try to take advantage of the "horizontal" relationships to spread information about the site and the best security tips. Besides updates from Tom, which are kind of annoying. Also I wonder how the new limitations about adult/teen interactions will affect libraries trying to make themselves available on MySpace. I don't have any experience with institutional use of MySpace- my younger sister got me to add a profile but I barely use it since facebook took off. Anyone else have more to add on that front?
[From Carol: There's even more about the MySpace story available at cNet.]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)