Sunday, November 16, 2008
Internet Safety Task Technical Force Research Document Draft
A draft of "Online Threats to Youth: Solicitation, Harassment, and Problematic Content" is now completed and available for public review. This document is a review of research literature on the risks posed by the Internet to youth (children and adolescents), as well as from specific technologies and social media. The focus of the document is on quantitative, national-level studies based in the United States, although qualitative studies and those involving more localized populations are also referenced. It will ultimately be used to advise the Internet Safety Technical Task Force at the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University, and attached as an appendix to the Task Force when it is released in January.
This document was authored by myself and danah boyd. We received incalculable assistance through comments and suggestions from the research advisory board, which includes David Finkelhor (Director, UNH Crimes Against Children Research Center), Eszter Hargittai (Associate Professor of Communications, Northwestern University), Sameer Hinduja (Assistant Professor of Criminal Justice, Florida Atlantic University), Amanda Lenhart (Senior Research Specialist, Pew Internet and American Life Project), Kimberly Mitchell (Research Assistant Professor, UNH-CCRC), Justin Patchin (Assistant Professor, University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire), Larry Rosen (Professor of Psychology, California State University, Dominguez Hills), Janis Wolak (Research Assistant Professor, UNH-CCRC), and Michele Ybarra (President, Internet Solutions for Kids).
The purpose of posting this document for public review is to get feedback, particularly on new areas of research, and more generally on the scope and accuracy of the summarized data. Please feel free to review the document and give us feedback on danah's blog, or over email at aschrock@cyber.law.harvard.edu and danah@danah.org. I'll post more details about the document in the coming weeks, and look forward to your responses.
This document was authored by myself and danah boyd. We received incalculable assistance through comments and suggestions from the research advisory board, which includes David Finkelhor (Director, UNH Crimes Against Children Research Center), Eszter Hargittai (Associate Professor of Communications, Northwestern University), Sameer Hinduja (Assistant Professor of Criminal Justice, Florida Atlantic University), Amanda Lenhart (Senior Research Specialist, Pew Internet and American Life Project), Kimberly Mitchell (Research Assistant Professor, UNH-CCRC), Justin Patchin (Assistant Professor, University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire), Larry Rosen (Professor of Psychology, California State University, Dominguez Hills), Janis Wolak (Research Assistant Professor, UNH-CCRC), and Michele Ybarra (President, Internet Solutions for Kids).
The purpose of posting this document for public review is to get feedback, particularly on new areas of research, and more generally on the scope and accuracy of the summarized data. Please feel free to review the document and give us feedback on danah's blog, or over email at aschrock@cyber.law.harvard.edu and danah@danah.org. I'll post more details about the document in the coming weeks, and look forward to your responses.
Labels: contact, content, internet, online predators, pornography, risks, safety, threats
Saturday, November 08, 2008
The Role of Online Communities in the 2008 Presidential Election
Following the election, there’s been a lot of talk about the role social media played in Obama’s successful campaign, and how he may use these connections in his administration. Here’s a few of the points in the ongoing discussion of how the events resulting in the election of Obama to president unfolded using online communities and convergent media.
Henry Jenkins forshadowed the Obama win at an Annenberg speaker series. He posited that, if Dean was the first campaign to recognize the value of a digital campaign, Obama was the first campaign that was truly transmedia. Successive endeavors by his campaign underscored the truth of Jenkins’ statement: Obama purchased the first political advertisements in a video game, forwarded news links were resoundingly pro-Obama, and the pro-Obama amateur (and semi-pro) fan videos were particularly popular (see the McCain/Obama “Dance-off” and Sarah Silverman’s “The Great Schlep”).
Post-election, Mashable had an excellent article about the alignment between Obama’s digital connections and offline political plans. His vast SNS connections, SMS info, and email addresses could be used to further social service in public life (such as Peace Corps), direct communication with politicians, and possibly help elect officials that align with his vision. This would be more than an endorsement, but a call to arms for millions of dedicated political enthusiasts. What remains to be discussed is if he will continue to use and control these contacts, and not give them up to the Democratic Party. Personally I am skeptical about the role of Twitter, as it’s not yet and may never be a mainstream mode of communication.
On November 5th the Social Media Club LA held an event, paneled by Jason A. Kiesel (freedomspeaks.com), James Lee (Lee Strategy Group), Tony Katz (www.tonykatz.com), and Leo Briones (Centaur North Strategic Communications). What was the effect of social media on the election? Certainly, Obama used it more effectively than McCain to communicate with his ground team, similar to two-step mode of opinion change. Yet, panelists agreed that it was difficult to separate from the immersive campaign environment.
Immersive transmedia efforts may be the next big challenge for research and industry alike. I just got an iPhone. While I’m pessimistic about ubiquitous computing, it’s difficult to dispute that it not only blurs the communication modes (one-to-one, many-to-many) but makes these distinctions increasingly irrelevant. I found the ease with which switching modes and media can be performed quite soothing. If you get a call while you are listening to music, when you answer it, the music fades out gently and eases you into a person-to-person discussion. Or you can check your Facebook account while texting. It’s smooth and graceful, which may be why I find it so subversive… and right around the corner is 2010, 2012, 2014…
Henry Jenkins forshadowed the Obama win at an Annenberg speaker series. He posited that, if Dean was the first campaign to recognize the value of a digital campaign, Obama was the first campaign that was truly transmedia. Successive endeavors by his campaign underscored the truth of Jenkins’ statement: Obama purchased the first political advertisements in a video game, forwarded news links were resoundingly pro-Obama, and the pro-Obama amateur (and semi-pro) fan videos were particularly popular (see the McCain/Obama “Dance-off” and Sarah Silverman’s “The Great Schlep”).
Post-election, Mashable had an excellent article about the alignment between Obama’s digital connections and offline political plans. His vast SNS connections, SMS info, and email addresses could be used to further social service in public life (such as Peace Corps), direct communication with politicians, and possibly help elect officials that align with his vision. This would be more than an endorsement, but a call to arms for millions of dedicated political enthusiasts. What remains to be discussed is if he will continue to use and control these contacts, and not give them up to the Democratic Party. Personally I am skeptical about the role of Twitter, as it’s not yet and may never be a mainstream mode of communication.
On November 5th the Social Media Club LA held an event, paneled by Jason A. Kiesel (freedomspeaks.com), James Lee (Lee Strategy Group), Tony Katz (www.tonykatz.com), and Leo Briones (Centaur North Strategic Communications). What was the effect of social media on the election? Certainly, Obama used it more effectively than McCain to communicate with his ground team, similar to two-step mode of opinion change. Yet, panelists agreed that it was difficult to separate from the immersive campaign environment.
Immersive transmedia efforts may be the next big challenge for research and industry alike. I just got an iPhone. While I’m pessimistic about ubiquitous computing, it’s difficult to dispute that it not only blurs the communication modes (one-to-one, many-to-many) but makes these distinctions increasingly irrelevant. I found the ease with which switching modes and media can be performed quite soothing. If you get a call while you are listening to music, when you answer it, the music fades out gently and eases you into a person-to-person discussion. Or you can check your Facebook account while texting. It’s smooth and graceful, which may be why I find it so subversive… and right around the corner is 2010, 2012, 2014…
Labels: annenberg, apoc, election 2008, henryjenkins, obama, transmedia, usc
