Pew Report download http://pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2011/PIP_Teens_Kindness_Cruelty_SNS_Report_Nov_2011_FINAL_110711.pdf

Comment : This is a US report but based on work I have seen from the EU - I would say that there is a high degree of alignment - I still worry that we believe we can teach the screenagers where in fact they are teaching us.  We are observing and they are changing faster than we can monitor.....

The majority of social media-using teens say their peers are mostly kind to one another on social network sites.

Their views are less positive than those of social media-using adults.  Most American teens who use social media say that in their experience, people their age are mostly kind

to one another on social network sites. Overall, 69% of social media-using teens think that peers are mostly kind to each other on social network sites. Another 20% say that peers are mostly unkind, while 11% volunteered that “it depends.” At the same time, in a similar question asked of adults 18 and older, 85% of social media-using adults reported that people are mostly kind to one another on social networksites, while just 5% felt that people are mostly unkind.

88% of social media-using teens have witnessed other people be mean or cruel on social network sites

15% of social media-using teens say they have been the target of online meanness

More teens report positive personal outcomes than negative ones from interactions on social network sites: 78% report at least one good outcome and 41% report at least one negative outcome

19% of teens have been bullied online, by text, or by phone.

How do people respond to mean behavior online?

Teens say they most often see people ignoring cruelty, but a substantial number have witnessed others standing up for victims.

A majority of teens say their own reaction has been to ignore mean behavior when they see it on social media.

Two-thirds of teens who have witnessed online cruelty have also witnessed others joining in – and 21% say they have also joined in the harassment

Teens rely most heavily on parents and peers for advice about online behavior and coping with challenging experiences

Most of these exchanges happening on social network sites are not taking place in full public view, as the majority of teens take various steps to manage their privacy online

55% of all online teens say they have decided not to post content that might reflect poorly on them in the future.

A notable number of teens also engage in online practices that may have the potential to compromise their safety online

Most parents of teens talk with their child or use non-technical measures to manage their teens’ online experiences

39% of all parents of teens have connected to their child on a social network site, but that does not necessarily prevent online trouble for the teen.

There are New Digital Rules but children still need to learn that courtesy, kindness and good citizenship come first in the physical and digital world but cyberbullying can occur 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

“Digital Citizenship: Breaking the Culture of Mean,” is a 30-minute DVD produced by TIE, a professional development association as a tool for teachers. It explores how to identify, address and stop bullying and cyberbullying in a variety of settings, and it suggests that students need to be trained in how to leave a “digital footprint” that will have positive, not negative, effects on their futures.

Nickelodeon as part of their The Big Help initiative, has launched a service to battle cyberbullying and other cybersafety issues with Common Sense Media. Nickelodeon will feature on-air and online advice on what kids and teens should do when confronted with cruel or hostile posts, texts, emails or other online messages.

Common Sense Media's "Rules of the Road," offers a set of useful guidelines that help kids practice safe online and mobile behaviours. Some examples of these tips include protecting privacy and online reputation, assuming everyone can see what is posted online, and balancing time spent online and offline. Specific tips for dealing with bullies are to not reply to hostile messages, blocking bullies from access to Facebook pages or other online profiles, and making a copy of hurtful messages to show to an adult if necessary.

Our granddad’s had 1 profession for life

Our dad’s could have had 1 job for 50 years

We are likely to have had 7 jobs over 50 years

Our kids will need 7 jobs at the same time and will probably not make 50 years

Our grandkids need us to start writing their applications now

My starting position is that the education system is encouraging the Social Media Generation (SMG) to think about their digital footprints – Halleluja!   I agree with the principal that you should make ‘people’ aware that what their write about themselves can come back to haunt them.  Indeed, further, what they say about others may be an indication of their professionalism.   However, following a round table, it is also evident that what the SMG have done is created ‘virtual identies’  There is one, the public facebook which looks like they have never done anything exciting or broken any health and safety law (basically rather dull and duitiful), and then the series of private worlds where they use nick names to share the reality of their shared lives.

Therefore, the employer can now see a perfect digital history, which has been created for them, meaning that as an employer your online check is now as good as reviewing a CV.  You know it is beefed up, indeed Mr Employer did you know that I can now buy virtual (facebook) friends who make me look good (rock on Chinese entrepreneurs)

The SMG are extended their use of virtual identities further to their address books on digital devices (mobile phone)  The names of friends have changed from the shorted first name or the nick name you cannot loose to esoteric names such as “Master Frog” and “Mrs Smith”  enabling them to hide conversations and identity from their friends and others (especially parents)  Indeed it appears that some don’t tell the real person who or what they are called in their address book, so hiding identities if your phone is stolen or borrowed.

So are we encouraging the Social Media Generation to lie and hide now that they know that they can be tracked?

A weekly post cast by Jim Hopkinson who works for Wired.com

http://thehopkinsonreport.com/2010/08/19/episode-118-social-media-is-the-new-rock-and-roll/comment-page-1/#comment-88918

This one is a thought providing piece on Social Media saying that SM is for this generation the rock and roll of previous generations - worth listening to.

my view is that I like the analogy draw up but I am not sure if I agree with it all but it did made me think.

One aspect to consider is why the youth love technology/ social media?  One answer is (based on a massive amount of real research by FT/ Orange) is that technology/social media gives kids a place to go where parents don't have control.

This idea fits well with what the article says and to the roots behind other generational gaps/ ideals/ fashions.

If social is a place where "we" go today as parents don't have control, with all these new controls there will be new opportunities as the new generation or youth find a place where their parents (or heaven forbid) grandparents are not.

http://myfootprintsd.com/index.html

I am delighted that “Digital Footprints” is a common conversation in the world of teaching.  Most of the material, as with this one, are focussed on asking our kids to take care with what they say about themselves.   I would like to see this conversation extend to help them understand that this is the data that they control.  What others say about you, you cannot control; but what others say also contributes to your digital footprint. 

I understand that conceptually it is hard to teach that digital footprints also include data that describes what you are doing and your behaviour (location, attention, purchases, key strokes, search terms, clicks, time, activity …) but this hidden data is as important, and in many cases more important)

I believe that those teaching need to understand that the model of “public” has shifted.  Digital natives have grown up with the internet and the presentence of data; it is us old guys who harp back to the days of broadcast TV and newspapers where yesterday’s news is already forgotten. 

Going viral is the part of a digital footprint that provides the opportunity and threat.  You want it if your content is fabulous but not to become infamous!

There are four common interpretations of the phrase "digital footprint" and
they all share two common characteristics which are that digital footprints
are about an individual's interaction with a digital world and that the data
created from the interaction can be exploited. The differences depend on
how deep, or prepared, you want to look.

The most common definition of a digital footprint is the content you leave
about yourself in the web. This is content you create for a blog, comments
you leave, photo's you up load or your profile and content you create on a
social networking site. There is little difference between your
professional profile and your personal profile. This is used as a
definition in education circles to help children understand that what they
say provides a representation of them what is "Your Digital Footprint?" This
definition introduces the ideas of reputation.

The second definition is created by adding the interactions you have with
the web, with content you create. This is where a users activities are
captured, the types of details captured include web pages viewed, the
frequency of visits along with the intervals between them, clicks, IP
address, the time spent on each page, interactions with forms, landing pages
and downloadable content. In reality every interaction with the web can be
captured and stored. This definition introduces the ideas of attention.

The third definition is that a digital footprint is the content and captured
interactions you leave and the content that others leave about you in the
web. This is the move from you as a single person to you as part of the
social group. This is what you say about yourself and others about you.
This definition introduces the new idea of the social graph.
The forth definition extends the web to other devices and services including
mobile, TV, iPod and m2m (machine to machine)

The forth definition is the most complete and in reality this is what is
happening. It is possible that every interaction with every digital device
is captured and stored. The value from the analysis of this captured data
can be very high; indeed Google and Facebook are built on this data and the
willingness of users to provide data. User benefit in an exchange of data
for free services, and increasingly user don't have to complete forms as the
data is collected as they go about their routes and routines. "My Digital
Footprint" This extremely personal and private data is subject to strict
privacy laws which provide strong protection for the user. The analysis of
this data is where the value lies and that value can come from behavioural
analysis, profiling, targeting, prospecting, normalising, group profiling,
feature profiles, benefit trades and determination of who influences you and
who you influence. 

Finally the phase "Digital Footprint" is also used in two further context,
the first is by companies or individuals trying to show which geographies or
markets their digital services is offered "Our Digital Footprint" and by
companies taking about the size of a digital device, where footprint means
area.
June 2010

image - http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/mar/09/ukcrime-facebook

The response from Facebook to the tragic story of Ashleigh Hall today highlights a growing sense of unease about a digital world.  I am under no illusion that education and care play an important, if not critical, part in protecting those who will inherit our digital present. 

In the opening to my book I said that a “digital footprint” is like marmite; some like it and some don’t.  Reading the responses to the Ashleigh Hall story, it is clear that this is a sane view. Facebook and other social network supporters are out in strength and waving the banners about benefits and this is contrasted with the stark reality from others who have been harmed and violated.  There is common ground about education and ensuring that you follow well published and sensible guide lines about your information and how to behave.  

I am however worried about the view that somehow we should look to processes and technology to save us from our social failing and responsibility.  Technology, be it a knife, car, laser, stun gun, pepper spray, Facebook or mobile can be used in anyway that the holder of the technology sees fit.  Processes are unfortunately only as good as the people who run them.  We can clearly see how technology can make it easier, both to commit crime and solve crime, but neither bring accountability or responsibility.

Digital footprint data, if you opt in can deliver reputation and other benefits, but this digital world suffers from the same real issues as our physical life, some decide to opt out, lie and deceive.  We have been unable to solve the real, so why should a single button solve the digital?