Berkman at 10 Unconfernece
From ETS
Contents |
[edit]
Random Thoughts on the Un-Conference Portion
[edit]
Planning Session
- I am watching Doc Searls and David Weinberger moderating the un-conference portion of the event and thought I'd capture some random thoughts.
- Each person pitching a session has to be in this 30 minute session to describe their session in under 20 seconds.
- They just let people write it up on a big board and then the moderators reads the title and hand the microphone to them to do their pitch.
- If two sessions are similar, they ask that the people proposing join forces.
- It seems like they have some "plants" in the audience from Berkman with some "canned" talks
- Weinberger just said he feels there are too many men taking sessions, trying to encourage females to participate.
- They are updating it in writing on a board and have the wiki projected on the big screen and that is being updated on the fly ... after a successful pitch.
- They have a YouTube Room
- You stop in and can record a brief youtube message that is instantly posted
[edit]
Open Media: Some Session Notes
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/berkmanat10/Open_Media
[edit]
Open Thoughts
- Presenters took turns introducing themselves for a handful of minutes each
- Everyone in the room (about 50) had to introduce themselves and say just three words about what they do or what represents them
- Asked the audience to take notes in the wiki, but no one volunteered ... all sessions should have a designated wiki worker
- There are some real parallels here with where we are getting to in higher education ... we are being forced to rethink our approach to teaching and learning. There is lots to be learned by connecting these dots.
- I liked that the first presenter set one "house rule" that there would be no hand-wringing
- I am noticing that a session like this can create some real tension between perspectives
- One of the presenters just asked that people refocus on the goal of the session ... it settled a handful of people down.
- The cost of trying new approaches in media is next to zero (if not zero)
- There are a lot of opportunities for experimentation between technology and innovation in journalism
[edit]
There are identified challenges
- Advertising
- Market Forces
- Access ... cost/class/education
- Are consumers concerned abut where they are getting their media from? Does it matter if it comes from a blog or newspaper?
- Internet metrics appear to be rigorous but they are actually quite poor
- Lack of understanding of multiple business models to sustain new media startups
[edit]
What do we want?
- One goal are informed citizens, so that means access to quality media/news
- Transparency
- Inclusive
- Accuracy
- Personalization ... there seems to be some doubters in the room on that one and I can identify with from the education space.
- Many perspectives one story
- New ways to visualize data -- they are talking specifically about mapping new media ... beyond simple geographical map mashups, but more as an advanced way to see/touch multiple perspectives of stories/sources/etc
[edit]
Action Items
- Creation of independent feedback loops -- where other journalists and citizens can bring an official voice back to original stories
- Simplify tools so individuals can be more active participants -- de-geekify the environments so they are more powerful and even easier to us.
- Bloggers need to implement Open ID so that their contributions can be tracked in a horizontal way -- in other words, with Open ID it is possible to have a single identity that you can assert across all your contributions making it possible to view not only all your posts n your blog (vertical), but across all of your contributions (horizontal) no matter if they are posts or comments.
- Creation of new research to understand how ratings drive news -- in the new media world this means more than TV ... think of click throughs, Digg, and other metrics
[edit]
Session Pictures
[edit]
Digital Natives: Some Session Thoughts
[edit]
Open Thoughts
- Walking in I am very skeptical ... I, like many others, feel this space is played out ... but I am anxious to see how a group like Berkman frames this conversation
- They are using the Question Tool to help drive conversation ... they have several "myths" they are going to discuss and are asking us to vote up the myth we'd like to spend the most time on.
- Most of this is based on John Palfrey and Urs Gasser's work over the last 5 years. They are discussing what their challenges and opportunities will look like over the next 10 years.
- My quick perspective here is that this is an emerging research space that people in the educational technology community has brushed off as being flaky and over played.
- Judging by the standing room only crowd I think we've jumped the gun.
- There book, Born Digital is the product of this research
- Another great website from Eszter Hargittai at Northwestern
[edit]
Framework for the Session: Urs Gasser
- It is good to step back and try and make sense of the space you are participating in -- much of our work in this environment is defined by narratives ... stories that have been defining the Internet. It strikes me that we are still working to gain understanding through traditional models -- in this case the old habit of storytelling.
- They are defining the DN as those born roughly around 1980
- Assumptions -- Helps define this in more than a generational definition
- They have access to the Internet
- They know how to use the Internet
- Layers
- Descriptive -- How to understand what is going on with young people online (making friends, creating, mashups, connections, etc).
- What are the right methods to observe the online space? (currently using case studies, but the trend is towards empirical data)
- Analytical -- Try to find out how our observations match with existing theories (innovation, political activism, creativity, etc are not new)
- Theories and the need to expand on existing theories
- Evaluative -- What are the opportunities involved with these changes?
- Values ... participation, autonomy, etc ... what are our shared values across the world?
- Prescriptive -- How can we support the things we like to see? What actions should we take?
- Approaches ... how to regulate and address the challenges
- Descriptive -- How to understand what is going on with young people online (making friends, creating, mashups, connections, etc).
Method
- Looking at how young people understand their digital practices
- Conducted a series of focus groups
[edit]
9 Myths of Digital Natives
- These are taken from session description (with personal comments)
- Myth #1 The online world presents a wholly new and completely different set of issues for youth we must address.
- Many of the issues cropping up with children and young people playing, being, and living online – from cyberbullying, to information evaluation, to online civic engagement - are the same as age-old offline issues, however filtered through a new medium with new possibilities, and new considerations.
- Myth #2 Digital Natives are wasting time online.
- Young people are learning, gaining skills, and becoming collaborative, critical and informed members of society through their online and digital engagements.
- Myth #3 Young people online are hugely susceptible to falling victim to sexual predators.
- Digital natives are very aware of the issue of predators sexual online, and even more aware of how to avoid this danger. In fact, one of our most consistent findings among young people across ages and socio-economic groups was their ability in using a variety of strategies to avoid unwanted contact with strangers online.
- Myth #4 Digital Natives don’t care about privacy.
- New technological affordances have meant that for most digital natives, sharing via digital tools has become the norm – but this does not mean they don’t care about privacy. Privacy concerns vary largely among young people based on age, education, and if repercussions of privacy compromise have been experienced. “Privacy from whom?” is an important question here – hugely differing attitudes are prevalent in regards to sharing with friends, strangers, service providers, and government entities.
- Myth # 5 Digital Natives don’t care about copyright.
- Copyright is a complicated and scary word – for most digital natives, a notion just vaguely related to something illegal. Young people are hugely lacking in knowledge regarding issues of legality concerning copyrighted content online. While for sure the norm among young people is access for free, many are not indifferent to the rights of creators.
- Myth #6 All digital natives are experts at navigating online spaces and tech-savy creators.
- While the vast majority of young Americans have access to technologies, the knowledge of digital tools, online spaces, and skills in this arena widely vary. While socio-economic and access to education are strong factors in determining digital natives’ skill level, so is their social group: a major motivator for young people to create online is to do so as part of a online or offline community.
- Myth #7 Digital Natives are all politically engaged on the internet.
- Most digital natives are not politically engaged, online or off. We did not meet many young people taking part in civic activities online. But the potentials for engagement are great in the digital space due to two major factors: (1) digital natives understand their active role in society, and that their voices are and will be heard (2) online spaces are extremely fluid – based on networks, a single space accommodates for entertainment, socializing, learning, and political engagement - in doing so, networks readily draw those young people who may otherwise be uninspired politically to begin to engage.
- Myth #8 Digital Natives behavior is outside the realm of understanding for parents, teachers, and other digital immigrants.
- Promises and perils online are often rooted in the same core issues and causes as their offline equivalents. Parents and teachers have much knowledge and wisdom to help guide young people as they move about digital space. However, the medium is different, and it is important for those in the Digital Natives’ lives to learn about the online spaces young people are living in, just as they do about the real-life spaces.
- Myth 9 Digital Natives are a homogeneous body
- Current initiatives on online child safety assume that digital natives are a homogeneous body - accordingly, we rely on benchmarks of 'competency' based on the 'ideal prudent child' Recognising that digital natives have significant implications for the way we educate, engage and empower young people. More importantly, we need to rethink whether the best interests principle or competency rhetoric continues to be relevant in the digital environment.
[edit]
Session Pictures
