My visit to Australia for the聽聽has been rich in hospitality and insight 鈥� I鈥檝e had the privilege of talking with people in government, online-safety advocacy, industry, school (students!), primary and secondary education, research, of course many parents and grandparents, and even 鈥淎ustralia鈥檚 Dr. Phil,鈥� as Michael Carr-Gregg has sometimes referred to himself (but the latter is still a clinical psychologist as well as media personality). I can鈥檛 possibly fit all that I鈥檝e learned into one blog post, so I鈥檒l be breaking it out into several posts). First anecdotal, next published research鈥�.
A panel of smart, candid high school students, moderated by Dr. Carr-Gregg, lasted for a mere 30 minutes. I could鈥檝e listened to them for a couple of hours, so I sought them out afterwards, and they kindly shared more of their thinking. [聽they are, in uniform because most Australian students seem to wear school uniforms and they came right from school, thoughtfully formulating their answers to a question I'm asking. Between us is Dr. Carr-Gregg in yellow tie. The photo was taken and posted by Jeremy Blackman of the聽, my gracious hosts.]
Here are some highlights from the panel (Ethan, Jon, Claire, Filip, Cameron, and Ashley):
Sexting: For some reason, this topic 鈥� and what the minimum age should be for criminal responsibility in their country 鈥� was raised with the students first (more soon about it from a brilliant researcher here). Naturally, teens are as confused as are adults and the laws in many countries. 鈥淚t depends鈥� seemed to be the consensus, sensibly 鈥� because neither trust between friends nor a law is being violated in every case of sexting that even gets legal attention. 鈥淭he law is unfair and needs to be altered,鈥� said one panelist, in sync with what I鈥檝e heard legal scholars say. They seemed to struggle with the age factor 鈥� one said that children need to be held accountable for their actions too 鈥� but the panelists agreed that children need education about the consequences, and 鈥渆ducation is better than prosecution.鈥�
Inappropriate content: When asked about whether pages depicting violence, hate, misogyny, etc. should be taken down, one student said, 鈥淣obody鈥檚 forcing you to look at or like that page. You can block it too, so that you never have to look at it if you don鈥檛 want to.鈥� Another said, 鈥淔ree speech is important,鈥� adding that it鈥檚 better to allow people to 鈥渆xpress their displeasure鈥� with and on an offensive page than to require a service to delete it. A third panelist said that, if it promotes violence, it should be taken down, 鈥渂ut people say awful things to each other in person, and [online] is just another place where that happens.鈥�
They鈥檙e self-regulating. Bearing out a聽聽in Canada, they鈥檙e both aware of the need for balanced use of digital media and working on that in their own lives. One panelist referred to the 鈥淕reat Friend Deletion of 2010,鈥� so that, ever since, he only has FB friends who he actually knows offline (about 300). Another has her privacy settings set as private/friends only. But one panelist called on parents to help their kids strike a balance between online and offline. He made an important qualification, though (which I hope parents will hear): If parents go overboard and take social media away altogether, 鈥測ou can become a social outcast and get bullied. That鈥檚 a concern.鈥� Another panelist said that digital media are 鈥渆nmeshed in and important to daily life.鈥�
Great advice for parents: The students said their generation will 鈥済o online whether you say to or not and will do what they want,鈥� so 鈥渢eaching us why or why not is better than just saying no. You can鈥檛 take our technology away without a good reason.鈥� But, hey, said one panelist, 鈥渋t鈥檚 not bad online. We go online to talk about what we had for dinner half the time. Bad stuff happens, but that鈥檚 not what social media鈥檚 all about. People talk badly about others聽offline聽too 鈥� this is just another medium, and people should get used to that.鈥� Another panelist agreed: 鈥淧eople are doing things on the Net that they do in offline life 鈥� it鈥檚 the same thing. People need to be more educated before they pass judgment on social media.鈥� His comment is representative of a finding from Australian research I鈥檝e quoted before, that 鈥渞ather than sliding into a moral vacuum when they go online, young people draw upon the same moral framework that shapes their offline engagements.鈥�
Of parental monitoring. There seemed to be acceptance of this, but not of聽secret聽monitoring. Panelists seem to agree that they should be notified by their parents if monitoring was going to happen. This was a finding in the Canadian study too.
Of 鈥渄igital citizenship鈥�: When I asked them about this afterwards, they didn鈥檛 seem enthusiastic about the concept. 鈥淵ou鈥檙e not a separate person online,鈥� said one student suggesting that the term suggests something different from 鈥渃itizenship.鈥� Another simply said that it鈥檚 鈥渁 weird term,鈥� and a third felt it sounded like someone was 鈥渞ebranding鈥� Internet safety. It鈥檚 the early days for this concept in Australia, it seems.
Socially very mobile: Like US youth, and bearing out the EU and AU Kids Online research, these teens seem to use social media mostly on their phones and devices of similar size and portability 鈥� whether it鈥檚 Facebook or Kik Messenger (Australian youth鈥檚 No. 1 texting app it appears). Remember how we鈥檇 pass notes in class? Texting 鈥� and in Australia, Kik, specifically 鈥� is the new note-passing, it seems (in elementary school too).
A minimum age?聽Yes, the panelists said. The minimum age for Facebook and all social media should be 13, because otherwise kids would grow up too fast, one said, suggesting that 12-year-olds shouldn鈥檛 feel pressure to 鈥渨ear what 18-year-olds wear and go clubbing.鈥� Another agreed, saying U13s 鈥渃an be really irritating鈥� to have around in social media, and 鈥� besides 鈥� they shouldn鈥檛 be exposed to inappropriate photos (he wasn鈥檛 given the chance to define 鈥渋nappropriate鈥�).
Anne Collier Guest Blogger
