Re: [projectvrm] Why Kids Sext (Atlantic) VRM opportunity

[John Havens < >]

Thanks for the reco - will read Danah's book.

Outside of the specific issues of sexting, I do think the lack of digital control involved in a majority of reports I've heard on the subject provide an opportunity for VRM like discussions.

E.g: For teens who want to make sure their sexts stay solely with their intended recipient; for parents who give kids phones but understand photos go to clouds so taking away their phones is moot when these situations occur (meaning, they could offer their kids a cloud where they might have access until the kids were a certain age).

Outside of any of my/our concerns over the nature of these issues, my overarching point is it's a hot button cultural issue that demonstrates a real need for better tech to protect our digital lives shared with one person that's violated by others.  ("violation" defined as guys posting girl's photos on an Instagram page without their consent).

And btw - perhaps those Moms who inadvertently taught their daughters about sexting could use clouds as well. :)

On Oct 19, 2014, at 1:31 PM, John Wunderlich < "> > wrote:

John;

Before drawing any conclusions from media reports (which may or may not be selectively reporting for purposes of driving ratings), I'd recommend you take a look at danah boyd's book, "It's Complicated, The Life of Networked Teens".

One tidbit to share with you, that I recall hearing danah speak about at a conference, is that when she interviewed young woman about texting, a significant minority of them found out about sexting by picking up and using their mothers' phones.

John Wunderlich

Privacist @PrivacyCDN

On 19 October 2014 13:02, John Havens < " target="_blank"> > wrote:

Interesting.

In the NPR interview, the majority of kids whose pictures appeared on an Instagram page with 100 pictures (most of whom hand't given permission to be on the page) were upset with the violation of trust/posting as they weren't aware their photos were on the page.

So it seems a VRM permission tech based idea would still serve here. Outside of whether kids want to sext or not, offering them tech to support their choices, whatever they are, would be helpful.

Also, dire warnings or no, laws on books call sexting child pornography. So I agree with you the law's involvement could mess things up here, but this is still kids sending naked pictures of themselves where they are often sent to more than the original/intended recipient because of pranks, etc.  And even if 77% of kids said the pictures sent caused them no problems, they will care if law enforcement decides to prosecute them. 

Also, that number means that 23% surveyed had an issue of some kind with how their pictures are sent/received. That's still almost a quarter of kids not consenting to these photos which some consider a sex crime.

On Oct 19, 2014, at 12:24 PM, Christopher Herot < " target="_blank"> > wrote:

I did not hear the interview but I did read the article and came to somewhat different conclusions. The primary harm here is from the reactions of the authorities to a phenomenon they are only recently discovering is widespread and pretty evenly balanced between boys and girls. Despite all the dire warnings from the adults the kids have the data:

In a study of 18-year-olds by Elizabeth Englander, 77 percent said the picture they sent caused no problems for them. The most common outcome of a sext, says Englander, is “nothing”: no loss, no gain.

There are some parallels to the warnings given about drugs, where the evidence is that the primary harm comes from contact with the criminal justice system.

From: John Havens < " target="_blank"> >
Date: Sunday, October 19, 2014 at 8:43 AM
To: " " target="_blank"> " < " target="_blank"> >
Subject: [projectvrm] Why Kids Sext (Atlantic) VRM opportunity

Just listened to an NPR interview about kids and sexting. It's the cover story for The Atlantic in November:

http://m.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/11/why-kids-sext/380798/

I was horrified on multiple levels. Top concerns for me were the fact that boys pressure girl 14 or 15 times with requests for sexts than after girls relent and send them, the boys send them to all tier friends and call the girls whores. Just as upsetting was how widespread the behavior had become, and that sexting is also perceived as genuine intimacy amongst teens, despite the massive risks of sending, let alone taking, pictures of this kind that live in the cloud.

So, my personal (and parental) concerns aside, the author of the article felt any policy around sexting should mainly punish people publishing pictures (like on an Instagram page, which the NPR interview focused on) without people's consent. While I think this is a good idea in theory, without technological (and respect) frameworks in place to help with this, we'll have a "he said, she said" issue going on where people setting up these pages will just say, "she said I could post it."

While Snapchat supposedly (and now they're dealing with a ton of ire about their privacy policies anyway) was a way to work around this, it's flawed. Having your picture available for longer than three seconds means someone can take a screen shot of the photo who is waiting for it.

Long story short - if sexting is going to happen (and it is - over 30% of all teens in the US are actively taking or storing naked pix of themselves/others on their phones) VRM or P2P ideals would be really helpful here on multiple levels:

-Parents can talk to their kids about respecting their bodies/intimacy enough to have solid tech protections around their photos.

-Parents can teach kids a about legal implications. In nearly every state, having these pictures is considered child pornography - often it's a felony; while I'd like to see some of these asshole guys get fully prosecuted to be made examples of (the ones coaxing dozens of girls to send their pictures in supposed confidence and then posting them on public pages), I was a teenager once and realize the dumbass things you do at that age and don't necessarily want them to ruin the rest of their lives. So Dads can talk to their sons and teach them what CONSENT means.

-VRM gets a really meaningful context. What data is more personal than naked selfies? So teach kids, the most tech savvy of any of us, to set up clouds and control who gets to see what. The "killing" of data would be a huge benefit here - a kid sees her photo where she didn't want it, and blam. Photos gone before the "prank" takes hold. The definition of "consent" is given tech parameters that allow genuine control.

Final note - having worked in PR in the past, a great way to spread awareness about a new tech/paradigm (VRM) is to latch on to a well know cultural issue (sexting) with a new angle.

The new angle - if it's happening and going to continue to happen but legislation moves too slow to help (duh), VRM provides a solution.

Thoughts?