Digital media's impact on youth: Fresh research

"America's young people spend more time using media than they do on any single activity other than sleeping," according to The Future of Children, a joint project of Princeton University and the Brookings Institution. So we all need to know how our children and students use media - the Web, phones, videogames, instant messaging, music, video, TV, etc. - and how they affect their users. The just-released new issue of the project's journal Children and Electronic Media, published semi-annually, "looks at the best available evidence on whether and how exposure to different media forms is linked to child well-being."

Among the key findings in the Executive Summary are....

"Content matters" to young people much more than delivery devices or platforms (I was glad to see this because my own observation has long been that "the message is [increasingly] the medium" where youth is concerned, seeing how fluidly they move from uploading to downloading, online to offline, and device to device when socializing and using media).

They use media to communicate better with their friends not strangers.

Their exposure to media "can enhance healthful behaviors—such as preventing smoking and alcohol and drug use, and promoting physical activity and safe sex—through social marketing campaigns."

"Some risky behaviors such as aggressive behavior and cigarette and alcohol consumption are strongly linked to media consumption," but others such as obesity and sexual activity "are only tangentially linked" or need more research.

Advertising is an "integral and influential" part of children's daily lives - just another message being communicated (they don't understand it's about getting them to buy stuff and not just information) - "and many of the products marketed to children are unhealthful."

Government regulation of media content either won't work or won't happen.

What should be done, then? Rather than regulate, the project says, government should help parents and educators do the regulating in homes and schools. It should also help the development of positive content that educates and counteracts negative or non-constructive messaging in electronic media - it should "fund the creation and evaluation of positive media initiatives such as public service campaigns to reduce risky behaviors."

Chapters of particular interest to anyone involved with children's online safety: "Media and Children's Aggression, Fear, and Altruism," "Online Communication and Adolescent Relationships," and "Media and Risky Behaviors."

Related links

A nationwide survey released today (5/9) by Common Sense Media and Joan Ganz Cooney Center (of Sesame Workshop) found that 83% of parents believe "digital media give their children the skills they need to succeed in the 21st century," yet 67% of parents "do not think the Web helped teach their kids how to communicate," 87% "do not believe the Web helped their kids learn how to work with others," and 75% "do not believe the Web can teach kids to be responsible in their communities."

"Internet porn ‘encourages teenagers to have sex early': Experts warn of increase in STDs among young" in Scotland's Sunday Herald about a study in the journal CyberPsychology and Behavior.

More safety features at Facebook

As part of its agreement with 49 state attorneys general in the US, 70 million-member Facebook is implementing "40 safeguards to protect young people from sexual predators and cyberbullies," the San Jose Mercury News reports. Facebook's agreement follows that of MySpace with the attorneys general, announced in January, and many of the new features are similar, for example, restricting users' ability to change the age they signed up with; faster removal of adult content from the site; "safety and privacy guidelines that third-party vendors and developers [such as widget makers] have to follow on Facebook; deleting links out to porn sites; investigating and deleting users who break Facebook's terms of use; and prominent display of privacy and safety info. MySpace says that, among many such implementations, it has "designed functionality to meet the 72-hour requirement," indicating one of the AGs' requirements that needs to be part of the industry best practices toward which their Internet Safety Task Force discussions just may, by default, be moving (I hope). [The UK's Home Office has developed some best-practice guidelines but without a lot of focus on the "back office" operations of social sites - see this). The New York Times has more on the new Facebook safety measures.

Toward solving 'cyberbullying': Editorial

Is the following what your teenager would think of as "cyberbullying"?: "Caustic comments, once passed around class as folded notes, are now immortalized on semi-public Web pages, where they can be viewed by thousands. Students are called fat, their sexuality is questioned and their fashion choices critiqued, often in language not fit to print in a family newspaper," the Washington Post reports, citing a number of specific such incidents in Washington-area schools. Educators, online-safety advocates, and many other adults often use "cyberbullying" as a blanket term for all that and more, basically any sort of harassment online. When some friends recently used the term in a conversation with their teenager, the basic response went something like: "Huh? What does this have to do with me? There's no lack of civility at our school." And yet just this year a teacher at that school was "trashed" by students in a social site. It just could be that "cyberbullying" is pretty meaningless to teens. They're familiar with the full range of behaviors but not this new blanket word whose use may actually undermine parents' and other adults' efforts to engage them in conversations aimed at helping kids think about these behaviors.

One Post source suggested that parents occasionally ask their kids if there was "any bullying on Facebook today?" Maybe it'd be better either to read up on some of the specific online behaviors and incidents in the news and talk about those, using them as "teachable moments" they can relate to. Or just ask questions about their school day - the kinds of questions our parents asked us. Then we can ask if they've noticed those things going on with their friends (or them) on MySpace or Facebook and how they'd handle it.

The Post reports that one principal "identified MySpace as the possible source of a conflict" that got physical at school and in a local mall. MySpace wasn't the source; its role was more like that of the school or the mall, the place where the behavior occurs. When we're talking with our children, it'd be helpful to understand this, too. Yes, their MySpace use can help expose their attitudes and behaviors to a lot more peers simultaneously and that certainly is a problem, but MySpace, Facebook, etc. are not the source of their behavior. Social sites are no more responsible for mean gossip or bullying than a locker room is.

Parenting young people who see little distinction between online and offline will get more effective when we stop blaming the places where antisocial behavior occurs (because we're better informed than that) and start asking relevant questions based on their own social experiences on the Net and everywhere else. When we can communicate in language they can relate to, sending the clear message that they are accountable for their social behavior online as much as offline, we'll move much more quickly toward solving the cyberbullying problem.

Benefits from having virtual selves

According to findings at Stanford University, it may actually help people to have an avatar, which has implications for "residents" of Teen Second Life, Whyville.net, and of course grownup versions of virtual worlds. It has a lot to do with what having a virtual self can do for offline self-image, according to this NPR report. At Stanford's Virtual Human Interaction Lab, people visit for a new approach to losing weight, for example. They take photographs of the visitor's head, create an attractive avatar, or graphical image, of him and show this attractive self running - he actually sees himself losing weight, which seems to encourage him by showing him just how very possible it is to lose weight. So he proceeds to "try this at home" and virtual reality becomes reality. The lab also studies virtual identity. Lab researcher Jeremy Bailenson told NPR that as people with attractive avatars spend more and more time as their virtual selves, they tend to become more social - their confidence level goes up.

UK leads Europe in social networking

This does not surprise, given Ofcom's recent finding that 49% of the UK's 8-to-17-year-olds have an online profile (see a related link with this feature). But it's further confirmation that, as The Guardian put it, Britons are "addicted to social networking." Social-networking sites "reached 9.6 million users in the UK in 2007, according to a new report from Datamonitor," according to this Guardian blog post. "This puts it ahead of bigger countries, including France with 8.9 million and Germany with 8.6 million. Spain is in fourth place with just 2.9 million." WebProNews led with the Datamonitor finding that "close to half of all people in the UK will be members of a social-networking site within four years."

Two new WB sites for kids & youth

Warner Bros. has two new Web sites aimed at a generation increasingly more interested in the Web than in watching TV. KidsWB.com features timeless favorites like Bugs, Scooby Doo, and DC Comics heroes (e.g., Batman), the Associated Press reports, and "TheWB.com - with full episodes of shows such as 'Friends,' 'Smallville' and made-for-online shows" - is targeting 20-somethings. "It also will be possible to view TheWB.com inside Facebook users' home pages and vice versa," the AP adds.

Disney.ru & other Russian sites

Hannah Montana has arrived in Russia. Disney's getting very local around the world, as Disney.ru joins counterparts in the UK and Japan. The Russian-language site has similar features to other Disney Web properties, with sections featuring movies, TV, games, and marketing of Disney offline attractions, all of which can be navigated by individual Disney characters, the company's press release says. Gosh, maybe it's controlled by the FSB! Just kidding, but read in the International Herald Tribune about a parody site called FSBook.ru that makes a joke out of Russian "fears about how personal information that is freely shared on social networks may be used by government agencies" like the former KGB. It does give new meaning to concerns about posting personal info in a social site!

Reality TV fans more at risk?

People who watch reality TV shows are more likely than non-watchers to share share more photos of themselves and "to accept friends they don't know in order to build larger networks on social networking sites," WebProNews cites new research as finding. According to the study by University of Hawaii and the University of Buffalo, fans tend to mimic the behavior they see on television, and reality TV "actors" are "rewarded for behaviors such as being the center of attention." The shows send the message that behavior aimed at gaining celebrity is a good thing, the researchers said. They added that "age and gender are not factors when it comes to the likelihood of watching reality television, but women are more likely to share photographs."

Grand Theft Auto IV's realism all bad?

A lot of media reports about GTA IV's blockbuster release last week focus on the negative. Don't get me wrong, this violent game is appropriately rated "M" for ages 17+ only in the US, but listen to this in Slate.com and see if it isn't somewhat encouraging: "Based on my play experience [with GTA IV] so far and in talking with reviewers who have finished the game," Chris Baker writes, "I get the sense that freewheeling killing sprees will no longer be the main draw. This is partly because the central missions and story are so well-conceived and well-written compared with previous iterations of the game and partly because the violence is far more disturbing." It's no longer cartoonish, he writes. "Shoot an innocent bystander, and you see his face contort in agony. He'll clutch at the wound and begin to stagger away, desperately seeking safety.... I felt unnerved. What makes Grand Theft Auto IV so compelling is that, unlike so many video games, it made me reflect on all of the disturbing things I had done." Maybe this disturbance is healthy? Could it be that GTA4 signals a future of more thought-provoking game play (at least for healthy players)? Baker's view was echoed in a thoughtful New Zealand Herald piece covering GTA4's release: Some GTA players "have referred to the 'uncanny valley' hypothesis - that when facsimiles of humans, such as game avatars, look and act almost, but not entirely, like actual humans, it causes a response of revulsion" or "repulsion, eeriness or discomfort," CNET reports. Interestingly, this is in the context of New Zealand law, which says it's illegal for anyone to make a game rated R18 (this country's game rating for ages 18+ only) available to minors. Even parents who do so "could face three months in prison or a $10,000 fine" (the law, in effect since 1994, has never been enforced). [Here's Slate's Chris Baker in a discussion about GTA4 with readers of WashingtonPost.com.]

This just in: In its first week of release, GTA4 made $500 million in sales, the Wall Street Journal reports. Its maker, Take Two Interactive, said retailers sold more than 6 million copies worldwide, claiming that a record for first-week sales of a videogame." Halo 3 sold $300 million its first week, the Journal added.

'The talk' revisited

It's not what you might think it’s about. It's not even a single, now-you-get-it conversation. It's an ongoing, long-term conversation families need to have about safe, constructive use of the Net and communications devices because both kids and technology keep changing. Marian Merritt, Symantec's chief online-safety evangelist, recently wrote about it, and I agree with her: "Your goal," she suggests to parents, "is to understand how your child is using technology, recognize any potential risk factors that need addressing and ensure you are the person your child can go to if something weird should happen when they are on the Web." All of that's important, especially that last point, because research shows that kids don't talk to parents about bad stuff that happens online, and we need to do everything possible to encourage them to. Merritt offers talking points for "the talk(s)" in the form of some questions you can start off with, but don't forget another good bit of advice: "Have the conversation during a quiet time when there are no time pressures," have the online computer at hand in case you want to check things out together, and "keep the chat neutral, not confrontational" so your child will continue the conversation willingly the next time!

Nude photo-sharing: Q from a family that's been there

In response to my feature "Naked photo-sharing trend," "Marcia" in New Jersey emailed me about her own daughter's extremely difficult experience with sharing a photo of herself. With Marcia's permission, I sent her story and question about it to psychiatrist Jerald Block in Oregon and Det. Frank Dannahey, a youth division officer in Connecticut and with everybody's permission (for privacy protection, "Marcia" is not her real name), I'm sharing their perspectives here....

"Just recently my 14-year-old daughter, a freshman in high school, sent a nude picture of herself to a boy who sent it to someone else, then a few girls got it and proceeded to send it everywhere. This was a total shock of course that my daughter would take a picture, but trying to be an understanding parent in this world, I listened carefully and stayed calm. She said that the boy bugged her and bugged her until she could not take it anymore. The school is trying to handle this.... My daughter went to a counselor at school and talked about it. She does not know why she did it but my feeling is the boy egged her on until she felt she had to, and now she knows she never should feel like she is being controlled by somebody.

"My question is, even though it is going to be hard for her to go back to school, the school is telling me that it is best for her and I think it is best that she just not talk about it with anyone. But I feel that these kids that have been spreading this around should realize that it is a "criminal act" and that is where I stand now and don't know how to approach it. I don't want to take anyone to court and she is suffering enough from her own mistake - I want her to be able to get back to her life and enjoy it. She knows she made a stupid mistake and she has to live with that. Also, her picture did not have her face at all in it, but the girls who sent it around made sure they put her name on it. This was all done by cell phone, not on the Internet."

Detective Dannahey:

"Wow, this 'power of control' seems identical to my case and what the teen involved told me. As far as the criminal side of this, there are a few problems concerning the 'child porn' aspect. I notice that the mom said that her child’s face does not appear in the photo. If this case was to come into my office, the first thing we would have to try doing is to determine 1) if we could prove the photo was of that specific child and 2) if we could not prove that it was in fact that specific child, could we prove that it is a photo of a minor. I have had several cases of this type. In some cases you can use the background in the photo to prove that it was taken in the child’s home, which could be helpful in proving that it is a specific child. If a photo is very clear in detail we might be able to prove who's in the photo by birthmarks, marks on the body, etc. You can also use the file data from the photo to at least give you a time period of when the photo was taken and in this case data from the phone where it was taken from. Lastly, we have taken a child’s photos to a physician who is recognized as a court expert in the area of child exploitation and, based on the child’s development, he or she *might* be able to make a convincing case that the child in the photo is a minor. Would every police department go this far? Maybe not.

"I would say that in this case, you would have a criminal violation in the fact that a group of teens is circulating a nude photo, supposedly of a specific minor, and attaching a name to the photo as being a specific person. This action would obviously cause alarm and humiliation to a teen. In this case, you may or may not prove the 'child porn' aspect of it, but you would certainly have a charge relating to the alarm and humiliation factor. That exact charge would differ from state to state. I know this sounds a little complicated... The fact that this child’s face does not appear in the photo severely complicates this case."

Dr. Block:

"This is a complex and surprisingly common occurrence. I can imagine two different strategies: (1) just wait it out, or (2) notify the police. Transferring the photo is a serious federal crime, so perhaps a police officer would be willing to address the school and educate them at the same time. However, if anyone actually got into trouble, the backlash against the girl might be terrible. Also, by bringing in the police, the issue is prolonged and cemented into the minds of her classmates. Finally, there may be some legal risk to the girl herself. An aggressive prosecutor could come after her (see this). I'd consult a lawyer, then, before talking to the police.

"So, if it were my child, I probably would be inclined to 'do nothing' and let it blow over. However, I would send the daughter to see a therapist so that she would have a safe place to discuss and think through the harassment, which is awfully shaming and painful. Also, I would leave the decision about whether to involve the police or not to her. Giving her that decision (in the context of therapy, where it can be thought through carefully), might give her a greater sense of control over the situation. What a difficult position to be in, as a child or parent."

Related links

In addition to cases this year in Alabama, Pennsylvania, and Georgia (see this item) - as well as the New Jersey one above that may not become a case - three recent reports in the nude photo-sharing trend:

Wisconsin: Two 17-year-old Hudson, Wisc., boys "were charged with misdemeanors for being party to defamation of character in the April 1 incident, which started when a girl used her cell phone to send nude pictures of herself to male friends" - by the Associated Press in the Minneapolis Star Tribune.

Ohio: "Trading Nude Photos Via Mobile Phone Now Part of Teen Dating, Experts Say" - story about teens in Columbus from the Associated Press at FoxNews.com

Utah: "Cell phone nudes" - A 15-year-old Farmington, Utah, boy is charged "one felony count of dealing material harmful to a minor, and three misdemeanor lewdness counts. The charges come in the wake of a growing trend among Utah teenagers who trade nude photos of themselves over cell phones." Archived at the Salt Lake Tribune.

Online teens: Snapshot by numbers

A whopping 93% of US teens (12-to-17-year-olds) are online, Pew/Internet's Mary Madden told NPR recently. That's up 20 percentage points from the 2000 figure for online teens in the US. Not surprising to most of their parents, the "frequency and intensity" of their Internet use is "also increasing, such that most teens are online every day," Madden also told NPR, and "a majority of teenagers who go online maintain one or more profiles at social-networking Web sites."

'Honesty Box' encouraging cyberbullying?

You've probably seen mentions of JuicyCampus.com, which has gotten some national attention. I've also blogged about "Honesty Box," which - as a widget social networkers can put on their profiles - is in effect a mini JuicyCampus (see this about the latter). These are phenomena of the participatory Web, on which too many people have a distorted sense of their free-speech rights that goes something like "I can say anything nasty I want about anybody (which is not what the First Amendment is about) because I'm anonymous (which they aren't, truly). Having said that, no social site or anything on the user-driven Web is all good or all bad, but some sites and services - such as JuicyCampus and Honesty Box - do seem to be more negative than neutral, more conducive to the darkside of human nature. The ReallyWorried blog is campaigning to get Facebook to delete the Honesty Box widget from its lineup of these little software applications. Three interesting points are made among the comments underneath the blogger's post: 1) Honesty Box is an opt-in widget users can choose not to have on their profiles (and can unsubscribe if they do and change their minds); 2) that may be true about unsubscribing, but the widgetmakers make it hard to unsubscribe; and 3) Facebook "should do everything in its power" to be a safe site for all. The Honesty Box application is not going to help him achieve this." So, my readers, what do you think? Email me your thoughts at anne@netfamilynews.org, or post them at the ConnectSafely forum for the benefit of all. Thanks!

Teens' definition of writing...

...does not include all the texting, IMing, blogging, and commenting they're constantly doing online, and yet they're writing all the time as they compose phone text messages, IMs, blog posts, and comments in social-networking sites. This disconnect between what they're doing and their perception of it is a very interesting finding from a new study by the Pew Internet & American Life Project. Why does the disconnect matter? Because there's a debate going on among adults - parents, educators, etc. - about whether all this writing is hurting their formal writing and, just as importantly, Pew says in its description of the report, "because teens believe good writing is an essential skill for success and that more writing instruction at school would help them." The study "looks at teens’ basic definition of writing, explores the various kinds of writing they do, seeks their assessment about what impact e-communication has on their writing, and probes for their guidance about how writing instruction might be improved." Meanwhile, any writer will tell you that the two most important activities for aspiring professional writers are writing a lot and reading a lot. Here's coverage from The Times of London and CNET.

'Grand Theft Childhood'?

The release this week of the latest version of Grand Theft Auto (IV) sparks a new flood of headlines about 1) how the hot videogame industry is headed for the stratosphere (USATODAY) and 2) videogame violence. Interestingly, a $1.5 million study by two Harvard Medical School professors funded by the US Justice Department found that the connection between violent videogame play and violent videogame players "may be more tenuous than previously thought," the Harvard Crimson reports. The study resulted in a new book by Profs. Cheryl Olson and Lawrence Kutner, Grand Theft Childhood, which says "videogames do not affect all children equally." The Crimson adds that "Olson said that gaming - including playing 'M'-rated games - is such a widespread teenage phenomenon that it should not be considered abnormal." What is abnormal, the authors suggest, is excessive videogame play. They advise a balance of gaming and other activities. A thoughtful post about Kutner and Olson's research in the OpenEducation.net blog suggests that parents play with their kids as "a great way to keep the conversation going and help you navigate the game. Parents may initially find the skills and dexterity very challenging but abandonment is not the answer." Why? Well, for one thing, the study cites the view of Michael Jellinek, M.D., professor of pediatrics and psychiatry at Harvard Medical School and chief of child and adolescent psychiatry at Massachusetts General Hospital, "that a parent’s awkwardness 'can be used to your advantage when it comes to strengthening relationships with your children'.” Here's the Chicago Tribune's meaty coverage of the swirl around GTA IV's release, Chicago-style.