annotated version: eu safer internet forum - rethinking responses to young people's online...

EU Safer Internet Forum - October 20th 2011Practical Participation - [email protected] | @timdavies

Rethinking responses to young peopleʼs online livesParticipation, protection, provision

Rethinking Responses to Young People’s Online Lives

Thursday, 20 October 2011

mailto:[email protected]




19992011

20072002

Res

earc

hing

dig

ital y

outh

wor

k

Ret

hink

ing

polic

y re

spon

ses

E-Pa

rtic

ipat

ion

in A

ctio

n

Local online engagement

Putting the talk in context: From age 16 Iʼve been involved at the intersection of Childrenʼs Rights Campaigning, Youth Participation and digital media.






19992011

20072002

Res

earc

hing

dig

ital y

outh

wor

k

Ret

hink

ing

polic

y re

spon

ses

E-Pa

rtic

ipat

ion

in A

ctio

n


Those elements first came together

for me in 2002 when I was part in the

UK delegation to the UN Committee

on the Rights of the Child as a

member of the UK governments youth

advisory board. Throughout the trip I

was using the Taking IT Global

platform to blog reflections and

photos and to report on the

Committee hearing to, and to interact

with, young people back home.






19992011

20072002

Res

earc

hing

dig

ital y

outh

wor

k

Ret

hink

ing

polic

y re

spon

ses

E-Pa

rtic

ipat

ion

in A

ctio

n


In 2007, working with the UK National Youth Agency, I was asked to look into “How were youth workers engaging with social network sites?”. So we did some survey research, some focus groups, and some action research - and found the answer was “generally not very well”: but






but, there was real potential for informal educators to engage with social media: (a) to give young people space to critically discuss and explore with their peers the role of digital media is playing in their lives;







(b) to support young people to

develop skills and resilience to make

the most of digital opportunities,

including opportunities to participate

as equal stakeholders in society; and







(b) to support young people to

develop skills and resilience to make

the most of digital opportunities,

including opportunities to participate

as equal stakeholders in society; and

and (c) to encourage young people to become, in the words of a famous youth work pamphlet of the 1980s, ʻCreators, not consumersʼ in the online world.






But as I look around at current action on technology and young people, Iʼm not

convinced we are realizing that potential. Fear, or at best check-list based

approaches to e-Safety are limiting public or voluntary sector supported youth

engagement with the very opportunities through which young people could best

develop digital literacy and develop as active digital citizens. And weʼre missing

hundreds of opportunities to improve online safety because of our current

strategies.






19992011

20072002

Res

earc

hing

dig

ital y

outh

wor

k

Ret

hink

ing

polic

y re

spon

ses

E-Pa

rtic

ipat

ion

in A

ctio

n


So I came to look at how we should be ʻRethinking Responsesʼ to young people

and the Internet

In this presentation Iʼm going to suggest that in part comes down to the way we

frame our responses to young people and the Internet. Both in the use of an

ʻopportunity-riskʼ dichotomy to direct and research Internet safety work, and in the

way that common ʻmythsʼ frequently drive policy making with respect to the Internet.

Iʼm going to put forward the idea that the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child

can offer a richer conceptual framework for thinking about supporting safer digital

lives.






Youth work online month of action: www.youthworkonline.org.uk

Rethinking responses paper: http://bit.ly/oJKVOd

Challenging myths workshop: www.ycig.org

Three core inputs

I draw upon three key inputs into this presentation: - The experiences of the Youth Work Online network of over 1000 practitioners exploring digital media in work with young people;- A recent paper on Rethinking Responses presented at EU Kids Go Online- A recent workshop at the Internet Governance Forum in Nairobi that looked at ʻChallenging Mythsʼ to young people and the Internet.




http://www.youthworkonline.org.uk


http://www.timdavies.org.uk


http://www.ycig.org

http://www.ycig.org



The current frame

So what is the current framing? Well, looking at recent conference papers and events, the phrase that constantly returns is ʻopportunity and riskʼ.






“…online opportunities and risks go hand in hand: the more children and young people experience the one, the more they also experience the other, and vice-versa.”

Livingstone & Bober, UK Children Go Online, 2005

So letʼs take a look at the dominant framing of Internet safety work: opportunity and risk.

Since early UK Children Go Online work, quite possibly long before, questions about the Internet and young people have been framed in terms of opportunities and risks. We might suggest this was an attempt to balance a framing that would otherwise have been just about ʻrisksʼ, and in that sense, an opportunity-risk framing is useful.






Risk Opportunity

And yet, rather than being presented as things that go hand-in-hand, much

policy making treats opportunities and risks as if they were two sides of a

balance: as if focussing on reducing risks can raise opportunity.






RiskOpportunity

And yet, rather than being presented as things that go hand-in-hand, much

policy making treats opportunities and risks as if they were two sides of a

balance: as if focussing on reducing risks can raise opportunity.






Risk Opportunity

But if we take seriously the research that opportunity and risk go hand in

hand, weʼre not able to just push-down risk without also pushing down

opportunities.






Risk

Opportunity



opportunities.






Risk Opportunity



opportunities.






Risk Opportunity

And as Risk in policy making tends to be the ʻheavierʼ concept: the one that

gets more attention when young people are involved: we have in the past

ended up with policies of blocking, control of fear-based messaging that are

very willing to compromise on rights to self-expression, to play, to creativity

and so-on in order to manage risks.






Risk Opportunity

The framing has a second problem: risk is not necessarily bad. Harm is.

And yet much research and practice focusses on measuring and reducing

exposure to risk, without looking at how frequently risks lead to harms, or

constructing logic models or narrative that show the mediating factors

between risks and harms.






Broken frames drive bad policies







1] Mis-use of blocking and filtering








2] Confusing of risk to organisations with risk to individuals









3] Neglect of digital divides










4] Downplaying the full range of Children’s Rights










4] Downplaying the full range of Children’s Rights

5] Inspiring ineffective safety campaigns






Challenging mythsMoving beyond deficit-focussed models and polarised claims

Before I go on to sketch out an alternative framing for thinking about young

peopleʼs online lives, I just want to draw out a few quotes from last months

ʻChallenging myths about young people and the Internetʼ workshop at the

Internet Governance Forum, which think were particularly useful in

highlighting how, when we move beyond a deficit approach, or a polarising

model, we can identify better education and capacity building approaches.






Myth: Young people are digital natives, or digitally naive

“...the tendency to pigeonhole young people into one category or the other prevents us from developing a deeper understanding of diverse

youth experiences of networked media, and how individuals can have different experiences at

different times and in different spaces.”Sheba Mohammid






Myth: Young people don’t care about privacy

“ ...if we were given more of a knowledge of what privacy is and how we can protect ourselves, youth

would be more personally invested in action.”

Kellye Coleman

Kellye Coleman and Conner Dalby focussed on exploring young peopleʼs

attitudes to privacy: highlighting the tendency of information campaigns to

start from an assumption that they have to convince young people to care

about their privacy. By contrast, Kellye and Conner argued that young

people care a lot about privacy, but that what young people need (and

indeed, what most of us need) is supportive information and guidance to

identify good strategies for managing privacy, and to have good reasons

given for why extra privacy-protecting steps are important if they are not

already being adopted.

Kellye outlines a desire not for information about ʻprivacyʼ per se, but a

detailed dialogue about privacy in particular contexts.






Myth: Social media is addictive

“The Internet is all your favourite things in one place. When your favourite things change you just add another thing. It's not addiction, just having a

really fun time kind of thing. Having all your favourite things in one place. Who wouldn't want

to be on that?”Dan Skipper

The phrase ʻInternet Addictionʼ is a one that particularly frustrated many of our young panelists in Nairobi. Perhaps the response to the general application of this term to young peopleʼs online behaviours was best summed up in one blog post on this workshop, which noted that “If we call it Internet addiction; then we might as well call any time spent on something fun an addiction”.






Myth: The Internet is a free, anarchic playground

“The myth is that young people think the Internet is all free. It's all open and whatever you do, it does not yield any negative consequences... The opposite

is actually the truth...

Many fear the Internet is under surveillance which leads to serious chilling effects or freedom of

expression and democratic participation. ”Max Kall

The responses to these myths highlight that we canʼt simply list some risks

(e.g. disclosure of information; talking to strangers; spending ʻtoo muchʼ

time online) and then look to remove them. We need a far deeper analysis

based on dialogue with young people, and shared understandings the

diverse dynamics of young peopleʼs experiences of a digital world.






A new frame?

So how can we get beyond the opportunity-risk tension. Well, the place

Iʼve looked for a framework is within the UN Convention on the Rights of the

Child.






UNCRC

United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child

Protection

Participation

Provision

The convention is the most widely agreed International treaty: framed in 1989 and covering a wide range of rights ascribed to all those under 18. It includes a subtle appreciation of the ʻevolving capacities of the childʼ, and whilst encouraging adults to act in the best interests of any child or young person, recognizes that the views of young people are fundamental to decisions made about their lives. The rights in the UNCRC are commonly divided into three groups: Provision Rights; Protection Rights; and Participation Rights.






Prot

ectio

n

ProvisionParticipation

The UNCRC is the most widely agreed International treaty: framed in 1989 and covering a wide range of rights ascribed to all those under 18. It includes a subtle appreciation of the ʻevolving capacities of the childʼ, and whilst encouraging adults to act in the best interests of any child or young person, recognizes that the views of young people are fundamental to decisions made about their lives. The rights in the UNCRC are commonly divided into three groups: Provision Rights; Protection Rights; and Participation Rights.






!

So what would this mean in the context of Internet safety? Well, it helps us locate young peopleʼs various rights within a clear structure.

Telling us whether we start from protection, participation or provision, as an e-safety expert, a participation professional, or an Internet Service provider, we each need to consider related rights of young people as a guide to actions we should take.






!

So for example, I might be interested in supporting young people to participate in decision making on key

social issues, possibly even issues that might be considered sensitive.

-The right to freedom of expression, a participation right, is not realized in isolation from the provision of

spaces and support that enables expression to take place, nor in the absence of laws, regulation and

responses that protect a young person from discrimination, abuse or harm as a result of their free expression.






For example, Savvy Chavvy, a social network site set up for young Gypsy and Traveller young people was

created as space for a specific group of young people to express themselves, particularly important for many

who had been experiencing racist abuse on Facebook. The project has paid considerable attention to

ensuring the provision was safe, with moderators gatekeeping who was allowed in the space, and that it was

participative, with young people involved in setting the rules of the space and getting involved in itʼs

moderation and management.






!

Support digital citizenship

Empower young people

Respond to risks

Promote resiliency

Provide positive spaces

Youth shaped services






!



Respond to risks

Promote resiliency



To express how the three-P’s relate, we can add

six principles: one principle to express what

responses look like on each side of the triangle

(responses focussed on a particular set of rights),

and one principle at each intersection - showing

how these mutually re-enforcing areas of rights

relate.






!



Respond to risks

Promote resiliency



So if we’re researching e-participation, we should ask how it empowers young people with skills to manage their safety online, and how young people are shaping the provision of participative spaces.






!



Respond to risks

Promote resiliency


Youth shaped servicesIf we’re planning a protection policy, we

need to look at how it builds on young

people as empowered participants in

their own protection, and how we

promote resiliency.






!



Respond to risks

Promote resiliency



Etc...






!






!

This is just a draft model: a sketch of how

we can find alternative frames for thinking

about young people’s lives

Refining a model that can capture the depth of insights into young people and technology that research, and young

people’s own voices offer us; the strong foundations of the UNCRC; and a need for

simplicity; will take more work.






!



Respond to risks

Promote resiliency



But the triangle of rights does give us a way to take any starting point, and widen our perspective on appropriate responses to supporting safer online lives.






Where next?






Where next?

So: where next?

Well, I hope Iʼve convinced you to question an opportunity-risk framing,

and to consider the need for an alternative. I hope Iʼve also encouraged

you to look at the UNCRC as a resource (and a challenge) in

developing that framing.






Where next?

A number of people Iʼve discussed the Three-P model with have tried to take it and just slot it within their existing work: an extra slide in the deck about e-Safety. But I donʼt think it can work like that: itʼs intended as a broader challenge to Internet safety policy making; and indeed to youth policy, which in many contexts fails to find root in the UNCRC.






Where next?

Information based campaigns have their place.

Negotiated, transparent and proportional restrictions on access to

technologies or online spaces have a role to play.

But these are just part of supporting young people to live safer, better

lives in a digital world. And in most cases weʼre missing many

components and risking a compromise of the full realization of young

peopleʼs rights.

Fortunately, I think the time is right for rethinking. In fact, itʼs already

going on. Although Iʼve taken a line of critique in this presentation, Iʼve

been encouraged that the discussions at this years annual ʻYouth Work

Onlineʼ open space conference were much more about projects to build

digital literacy, than about working around local government blocks to

digital engagement.






Where next?

Emerging good practice is out there. And the chance to develop rights based responses further is here.






www.youthworkonline.org.uk

www.ycig.org

www.timdavies.org.uk

@timdavies

Continue the conversation...






http://www.ycig.org

http://www.ycig.org



annotated version: eu safer internet forum - rethinking responses to young people's online...

News & Politics

practical participation

young peopleat

young peopbut

liv eseu safer internet

young peop informal

provisionrethinking

role of digital media

social media