Sunday, November 3, 2013

Pandora's box


According to Greek mythology, Zeus gave his daughter Pandora a small box with a giant lock on it. The key for the lock was given to her husband Epithemeus. Zeus left strict instructions with him that the box must never be opened.

Even though Pandora was very curious, her husband heeded the warning from Zeus knowing all to well that Pandora's father could be quite cunning, and so he wouldn't allow the box to be opened.

Pandora's curiosity got the better of her one day when Epithemeus was sleeping, she took the key and opened the box. Hate, envy, disease, and sickness flew out of the box, all the bad things that had ever been experienced. Pandora tried to close the box but it was too late, just as the lid was closing out flew a small bug. The bug was "hope".

As a result of the opening of the box evil had now been unleashed unto the world, but also, and more importantly so had "hope".

This blog is a follow up for the last blog which took a light hearted view into the internet and social media. It's not set out to form any conclusions, it's not designed to offend anyone, it's simply here to raise a few questions, and hopefully encourage discussion.



Whilst I was in America I became heavily reliant on the internet for communictaing with the UK, and also for keeping up with what family and friends were doing. One of the main things that stood out was how many poeple would post pictures of their children on social media. On several occasions I saw the children of people I'd never met before simply because I was friends with someone who'd commented on, or liked a picture. 

I started to wonder to myself if it was right that I could see the children of people whom I'd never met. On other occasions I saw pictures that some people might describe as inappropriate, inappropriate in the sense that they were semi-naked pictures which could possibly be seen by the wider public. 

This got me wondering who else could see the pictures we post online, is everyone in your contact list someone you have regular contact with, or maybe just someone you used to know a few decades ago, and are your security settings adequate?

In addition to this, certain sites have a licence to use your content in anyway they see fit, and even if you deactivate your account it's nigh on impossible to remove your images completely. 

When I read the article with the headline, "People exist on social media before they've even taken a breath", it all felt a little wrong to me, and I wondered what the guidelines were?

According to most of the children's charities that I researched, Facebook's content isn't suitable to anyone under the age of 13, although it also said most children simply lie about their age to open an account anyway, and often with the aid of an adult. 

Most of the pictures of children I've seen posted on social media, are of children a lot younger than 13. Does this count as inappropriate exposure to sites not recommended for those below this age?



However, I feel there are other issues concerning social media and the young that need to be looked at.

A lot of the content on social media seems to have a lot of one upsmanship inherent to it. We've all seen people putting pictures of their new car on the net, and then immediately post how much it cost. We've all seen the pictures of people extreme skydiving on an ironing bored whilst juggling porcupines, is it all not just a bit self centred and false?

If so, then isn't this spreading a message to the young that it's all about self gratification and what's in it for you?

Many friends I know who've stopped using social media recently have done so for the very reasons I've described above. One friend who has a young child put it to me that some people seem to post endless pictures of their children to prove how much of a good parent they are.

I'm not saying this is or isn't the case. I'm not saying social media has a positive or negative influence. I simply want to know what the rules are, where are the guidelines?




As I thought deeper into the issue of guidelines for social media, I began to broaden my search for answers about the internet as a whole. I wondered at what age you should give a child an iPad (other tablet devices are available), I assumed it must be around thirteen, the same as the age for opening a Facebook account. After speaking to some of my friends who are themselves parents it turns out I'm woefully out of touch, a good friend told me the other day it was more like 4.

I still can't quite get used to this idea. At the age of 4 I was busy throwing my own poo around, and urinating in my mothers pot plants when she wasn't looking (that last part is actually true and they were in the living room). 

The internet is an amazing technological achievement, it's helped make communication instantaneous and affordable. It's helped produce huge scientific achievements by facilitating the work of labs all over the world. It's helped to bring down borders and even governments. It's educational value and content are simply unparalleled. 

All of this advancement has however come at a price. The very freedom it wields so readily can be hijacked for the most inhumane causes.

During the recent Kenyan Mall siege, al-Shabab live tweeted from the mall attempting to legitimise and justify in real time the indiscriminate killing it was carrying out. Although we of course find this sickening, there are others out there who sympathise and even champion their cause. 

A report from the Simon Wiesenthal Centre on digital hate speech from May 2013 said there's been a 30% increase in online hate forums and terrorism over the past 12 months. 

There are literally hundreds of reports on internet bullying, and the disgraceful practice of "trolling".

70% of young teens have been victims of cyber bullying, and the craze of "sexting" has claimed many lives through suicide in North America and Europe.



So with all of this potential negative influence should we still be in such a hurry to expose the next generation to the internet?

Now I can hear some people reading this saying to themselves that it's the parents job to police their child's exposure to the internet, and that if they were responsible they would know what their children were looking at.

I think this is a very simplistic way of looking at things. The pressures of modern life where both mum and dad have to work just to keep a roof over their heads, clothes on their backs, and food in their bellies can feel insurmountable. Hence it's not always that easy to find the time to constantly supervise their offspring.

In addition to this, we shouldn't neglect the responsibility of the markets. Tech firms have made millions from the growth in the internet, but in the main this is to further their bottom line. Corporations spend huge sums of money to employ whole teams of experts, who's sole task it is to influence what you, and your children wish to consume.

The influence of the internet is without bounds, and so I believe it's unfair to simply imply it's down to the parents to police it.




So now I should imagine you're thinking if I have children I'll move to a log cabin at the top of a mountain. Well that would never work anyway with Google's proposed project "loon" (Google it). 

But that wouldn't be the answer, to restrict or even forbid your child's contact with the internet would only stifle their development. Today's modern industry demands that people are in the main, I.T. fluent, and this is only going to increase as fibre optic cables tighten their choke hold on the modern world. 


In the last decade or so the pace of change has been so rapid, that in some respects I don't think we've had the opportunity to stop and take stock of the situation. Market forces who've moved in are so powerful that this kind of pause is not in their interest, and so a debate would have been ridiculed and left to the lobbyists to dispose of. 

This all takes me back to my earlier question, where are the guidelines for exposing the most vulnerable in society, children, to the internet?

Shouldn't theses guidelines radiate from government, and shouldn't they then be implemented in close partnership with the I.T. industry?

And after all, if government doesn't govern with the best interests of it's electorate at heart, then what's the point of government?


All of the above stills are from Moab, Utah. There will be a blog post about one of the most amazing places I visited during my time in America next time round.


But for now, I'll leave you with several things to think about.


Mark Zuckerberg hopes that eventually there will be no age restrictions on Facebook, and no doubt he'll get his way.

What if one day the fruit of your loins decides that they never wanted to be on social media because it's not cool anymore, but now they can't remove their data as it's no longer their property?

My generation approaching their mid-thirties are statistically the worst offenders for posting pictures of their children on the internet.

As with the storey of Pandora's box the internet brings with it "hope" for the world. Unfortunately this "hope" comes served with a huge side order of pain, but you only need look at the Arab Spring from 2010 to see how it can liberate.

And lastly, the irony of me writing a blog criticising social media that's advertised on social media is not lost on me.


4 comments:

  1. Oliver uses a tablet every day. He's 3

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Appreciate the comment Chris, please feel free to comment on anything you read on here.

      Delete
  2. Lily didn't get an iPad till she was 10 but she's now glued to it. Her & her friends upload videos to YouTube, which, I admit, I don't vet as much as I should. She also face times me from upstairs. Lazy get!! She doesn't have a Facebook account, although she did in her last ur of primary but I closed it when some so called friends made nasty comments on a photo. I agree there should be tighter regs re internet use & certain sites that are not suitable for young children. But they also need the internet. A lot of her school work is done on the computer. She has to email assignments to her teachers. Homework is uploaded onto a website that all the kids can access. So it's a vicious circle the way I see it. On the other hand they can't play out the way we used to. I remember sledging in princess ann park with my friends. I wouldn't dream of letting lily do this & if she goes to the park (Albany) she is on a strict time limit with numerous phone calls from me. No win situation :(

    ReplyDelete
  3. Good points in your post! My children do not have any technology other than nintendo DS, but I have a habit of posting their pics on social media without considering the things you have said here! I know that so many people enjoy hearing about the family, especially their grandparents and others, but I think that you bring up some very good things for us to consider! Thanks :)

    ReplyDelete