|
June 21, 2006
MySpace and the Participation GapEveryone seems to agree that we live in a era of participatory culture. Few people agree on what should be the terms of participation. From time to time, I will direct attention towards challenges and obstacles to the public's right to participate. More often than not, these debates center on young people and their access to media. Young people are the shock troops in the digital revolution -- early adopters and adapters of technology in their constant search for a room of their own in a culture where adults get to define all of the rules. My former student, danah boyd, has been researching MySpace and the other social network sites. She's become a go-to gal with the media on MySpace issues and a sharp critic of the proposed legislation. Recently, the two of us got together for a joint interview about DOPA and MySpace more generally. My own concerns about DOPA center around two key factors: Around the country, some teachers are already incorporating social network sites and blogs into their teaching practices. They are using them to connect kids with others who live in very different circumstances or who have specific expertise relevant to a particular assignment. They are using them to generate data which can be used in math or social studies classes. But if this law is passed, it will make it much harder for these teachers to do their job in preparing students for their future digital lives. True, the law allows exemptions for recognized educational purposes but it creates some strong barriers for teachers to overcome before they can pursue such projects. Having dignified the fear that MySpace is a "Big Bad Evil" through federal legislation, they will face increased public pressure not to take Little Mary or Johnny into their horrible place.
To be sure, there are some real risks involved in letting young people enter into social networks without some degree of adult guidance -- issues of privacy and cyberbullying for example. And yes, there are some predators there -- though right now, these sites are being heavily policed. We do encourage parents and teachers to discuss responsible and appropriate ways of interacting in virtual worlds and give periodic reminders that while the world may be virtual, the people they are interacting with are real people with real feelings. We do not advocate parents spying on their kids; we do advocate adults communicating with their children about their values, expectations, and norms as they relate to these emerging digital environments. You would think that if MySpace were as dangerous as critics claim, there would be a stronger effort made to educate young people about the safe and responsible use of social network software, much as earlier generations of educators taught kids what to do if a stranger calls on the phone when their parents are not there. Instead, the law would leave kids to confront these challenges on their own, outside of adult supervision, and off of school grounds. Our position is in favor of education and against regulation. For a short interview segment with me talking about these issues, see Beet TV. 2 CommentsHenry Jenkins is the co-founder of the MIT Comparative Media Studies Program. |
Reactionary behaviour often leads to the easiest solution being implemented, but as we well know, the easiest solution isn't always the best. I wonder if the difficulty of internet regulation stems from the breadth of its focus.
Kids will always find a way to procure/do something they are not meant to legally, assuming they want to do it in the first place. I appreciate these are uncharted waters that we are wading into but perhaps regulation at the naive end is not the solution. Tougher penalisation and subsequent regulation of the offender is surley the more logical approach? It's all well and good to protect the kids, just as long as we don't come within a country mile of even vaguely stepping on people's civil liberties, right?
I wholeheartedly agree that parents and teachers should be at the forefront of education in responsible social interaction. Perhaps in some instances, the social divide may level out the technology divide - incorrectly (and irresponsibly) implemented, it would only serve to exacerbate the divide. The government can get involved as well, and not just at the legislative level. Perhaps a website where offenders could be reported (run by a relevant law enforcement agency) would work well within existing legal frameworks? But to assume that regulation of public sites is the answer to protecting children in cyberspace barely touches the true needs of the issue.
This proposed law illustrates how the earlier law requiring filtering of school and library Internet access (when Federal funds are accepted) is in fact at the start of a slippery slope towards greater repression and censorship. First they came for the pornographers; next they're going after the social networking sites; will blogs and Wikipedia be next?