Do We Need an Internet Ed. Class?
posted by Deven Desai
While I was attending the excellent privacy conference Dan Solove and Chris Hoofnagle organized in D.C. a few days ago, it occurred to me that just as one takes driver’s ed. before being able to drive a car, it might make sense to have a required Internet Education class in middle school. Driving is a key way people engage in the economy, and the Internet, especially email and social networking use, is becoming as essential if not more so. Given all the benefits and problems of the Internet from meeting new people and peer production to unfortunate gossiping and dog poop events, it dawned on me that Internet Ed. might fill a gap that appeared as I listened to various people at the conference.
During the two days, several discussions seemed to turn to the way information placed online can offer tremendous benefits but also pose harms. That idea is not so new. But an underlying theme was that this tension is greater than before. Given the increased reputation problems of the Internet, some folks talked of a more paternal approach to reminding people about privacy (or lack of it) on work computers. The problems of PGP and complex privacy policies as opposed to easy-to-read ones as opposed to heavy opt-in ones and how people perceive the differences posed several paradoxes. In other talks people expressed concerns about cutting off the openness that has made the Internet what it is today. Many questioned just how informed people are about privacy and even if informed how much they care. These ideas should be familiar to those interested in privacy, but so many people sharing ideas about an evolving area of the law and truly seeking to find ways to solve problems made the conference invigorating.
For example, Lauren Gelman is working on how online presence operates under a binary system of public or private yet many think of their online presence as limited essentially to those in one’s circle but with a few new people possibly joining the circle. To me it seems that in some cases people might know that anyone could look at one’s pictures, blogs, MySpace pages etc. In others, some might know that but just not expect that outsiders would look. And some may be quite unaware of the way little things can catch fire and draw attention to what had been a small, personal moment. And then it hit me, why not have Internet Ed.?
Internet Ed. at an early stage might address the possible generation gap in understanding what is privacy and how the Internet works. Like driving, using the Internet can open up tremendous possibilities for fun and for work. Like driving, irresponsible or uninformed Internet use can lead to undesired consequences. Like driving, horror stories of how a picture from a drunken party ruined someone’s job prospects may not deter irresponsible Internet behaviors across the board. Still, by setting out the way in which irresponsible or immature behaviors such as sharing too much information about one’s personal life, not checking about how a site uses personal financial information, and childish rants can affect one’s life, people would have some sense of the possible repercussions of their acts. None of this idea is to suggest that people won’t continue to rant etc. regardless of age. And none of this idea is to suggest that people should act the same way at all times under some sort of enforced code of conduct (although the idea behind sites that choose to establish rules and use their community norms to shape the rules seems well in line with some of the benefits of the Internet). Rather, as a friend noted, the Internet may be similar to tattoos and piercings. In the near future many more will have them and so it will not be as big a deal. Still, in some areas of life such as politics and upper management, one may have to explain that largish hole in one’s ear or the tongue sneaking out of one’s collar towards one’s jaw. So Internet Ed. may help bring home the idea that certain acts may seem great and even be great at the time but others, and even the person who liked the act at the time, may see those moments differently later in life.
Image Source: WikiCommons
Author: strngwrldfrwl
License: Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike 2.0 License.
Cross-posted at Madisonian
June 18, 2008 at 10:13 am
Posted in: Privacy, Privacy (Consumer Privacy), Sociology of Law, Technology, Web 2.0
Print This Post
Responses (4)
Ruth Parlin - June 19, 2008 at 11:23 am
Actually, librarians for some years have been teaching Internet Ed. in elementary schools. We call it “information literacy.”
Deven - June 20, 2008 at 1:02 pm
Dear Ruth,
That is great to hear. Can you share what is covered in the classes? I’d love to know.
Best
Deven
Ruth Parlin - June 20, 2008 at 1:49 pm
Hi, Deven,
The American Library Association started developing standards for information literacy instruction in the early 1990s. (Librarians once called it “bibliographic instruction,” but broadened the name and the nature of instruction in response to the growth of electronic research sources.) Here’s a link to the standards: http://www.lita.org/ala/aasl/aaslproftools/informationpower/InformationLiteracyStandards_final.pdf.
In 1998, privacy wasn’t so much a feature of info lit standards. Florida’s more recent standards do take up the issue of privacy under national indicator 8.1, Respects the principles of intellectual freedom: http://www.fldoe.org/bii/Library_Media/pdf/section_1.pdf
I have no idea how many schoolkids are actually getting info lit instruction that includes privacy issues. But if you want to advance the ideas you discuss in your post, you might find a receptive audience in the American Association of School Librarians: http://www.acrl.org/ala/aasl/aaslindex.cfm
Cheers,
Ruth
Deven - June 20, 2008 at 9:08 pm
Dear Ruth,
You have made my day. The wonders of the Internet persist as you share some useful information and educate. I will check the links out. Thanks so much.
best
Deven
Leave a Reply