Text archives Help


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


Chronological Thread 
  • From: John Havens < >
  • To: Graham Reginald Hill < >
  • Cc: " " < >
  • Subject: Re: [projectvrm] Why Kids Sext (Atlantic) VRM opportunity
  • Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 06:49:49 -0400
In no way did I infer that "locking up kids" was a solution.  And my entire point at creating a solution here is to actually assist kids.  Where they understood a VRM, P2P option was available and they opted to use it, then they could send a photo (as they're already doing - this is where I'm actually noting their behavior) to a partner in trust/confidence.  Or at least, they could send it knowing the cloud option provided a security that apparently doesn't exist for them now.

No arguments here about the US prison system and its craziness.  But my entire point of this thread was actually to provide VRM like solutions to help kids avoid jail.  I believe that's a system our kids and grandkids would welcome. 



On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 6:37 AM, Graham Reginald Hill < " target="_blank"> > wrote:
Hi John
 
If this is a genuinely new phenomenon, I suggest that time needs to be spent understanding its origins, why they do it and how to tackle it at source - if indeed it needs to be tackled at all - before resorting to a knee-jerk lock-em-up and throw away the key response. 
 
Prosecution should be an absolute last resort and only in the most egregious cases; in the US' patently unfair legal system that despite only having 5% of world population, locks-up 25% of the world's prison population. The countless tails of inmates locked-up for decades in inhumane conditions, for what any civilised country would consider relatively trivial crimes, should be a warning for all of us. Prosecuting someone as an example for the rest, not only doesn't work, but is so ridiculously illiberal that I am amazed that anybody intelligent would suggest it.
 
By 2020, the latrgest group in Western socienty will be digital natives like the ones you describe. Perhaps we should be trying to make a world fit for them, rather than trying to fit them into a world made by our parents for their parents.
 
Best regards from Bishopsgate, Graham 
 
 
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?



--

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19.

§