ABSTRACT
In the wake of the 2011 UK riots, and disregarding the fact that more people used such tools to organise clean-up operations, David Cameron’s first response was to propose a ban on the use of Facebook, Twitter and Blackberry Messenger. Two months later, Lissa Paul celebrated the fact that the riots and the Occupy Wall Street protests demonstrated that the young perpetrators ‘know how to communicate very effectively and they also know very well how to use the power generated by their ability to communicate’ (Paul 2011, p.8). Such reactions demonstrate the often confused debate around young people’s use of digital technology – one that too often centres on the technology itself rather than its use, and one that can simultaneously invoke alarmist knee-jerk reactions and celebrations of emancipation. This chapter will look at perceptions of risk with regard to young people’s use of
the internet and digital media, showing how much of the debate is polarised and emotive, portraying young people as either technologically savvy or extremely vulnerable. This polarisation is, it will be argued, unhelpful, echoing earlier moral panics in the popular media. Examining more recent policies and publications as well as internet safety initiatives and organisations, the chapter will examine contemporary responses to the debate, identifying common risks that young people face online. It will be argued that to identify any perceived risks and issues of vulnerability
they have to be contextualised against an understanding of technological development and its associated discourses in relation to young people, as well as a realistic examination of young people’s use of digital media. As such, one could argue that the shift to so-called ‘web 2.0’ and ‘media 2.0’ tools (particularly social media and social networking sites) and the proliferation of access platforms has widened the
scope of the debate beyond mere communication and access to encompass a wide range of ‘traditional’ media. For example, expressing concerns over the premature sexualisation of young people and in the wake of the furore surrounding the Rihana/Christine Aguilera routines on the 2010 final of The X Factor, David Cameron endorsed a report by Reg Bailey (Chief Executive of the Mothers’ Union) that found Ofcom’s controls on age-appropriateness too weak. This preoccupation with the traditional 9 p.m. watershed completely misunderstood the way that ‘television’ is now produced, distributed and watched. Traditional television content can now largely be viewed irrespective of time and place, the rise of video on demand services and proliferation of platforms meaning that people are not only watching at different times but viewing via PCs, phones and games consoles. The report betrays a misunderstanding of both the nature of technology and its use, and also utilises a model of media effects which, it will be seen, is now widely discredited. Issues of e-safety education and the response to perceived risks in both school
and home will also be discussed. For example, many school and local authority policies have historically advocated a restrictive, protectionist approach to technology through the use of ‘walled garden’ systems, censorship software and blocked or limited access to sites, and there has been a corresponding rise in home-use tools such as filtering software and parental controls. Set against this is the increasing realisation that such moves, as well as being often ineffective, may adversely magnify issues of vulnerability through restricting young people’s opportunities, understanding and development. Whilst exploring examples of good practice and recommending an approach that both empowers young people and promotes a model of resilience, recent political developments are identified that potentially render such approaches problematic.
