<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"MS Mincho";
panose-1:2 2 6 9 4 2 5 8 3 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"\@MS Mincho";
panose-1:2 2 6 9 4 2 5 8 3 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
@page Section1
{size:595.3pt 841.9pt;
margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
</head>
<body lang=EN-GB link=blue vlink=blue>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>John<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>from the session last week with a bunch of
London based screenagers (14, 16, 17, 19 and 21 years old) - it is evident that
they are far more aware than their parents of harm and benefits, indeed they
are the educators of the teachers, younger siblings and parents (and me)<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>They (screenagers) have found various
ways round services that they don't want to be tracked on and indeed one
question came up about "show me how easy it is to track" which showed
that, at scale, it is much harder than you think...... 1. location is off. 2. parents
pay for mobiles. 3. mobile is pay as you go. 4. several subscription for
mobiles 5. use of persona and pseudonyms 5. closed user groups 6. privacy
setting managed 7. use different IM to respond to question 8. migrate
across platforms and services over an evening..... 9. private back channels 10.
shared machines at home <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>So we have "Consumer Kids" Mayo
and Nairn at one end is about the possible but as show in the demo's of
tracking - not probable..... At the other end someone knows everything and you
cannot hide - again possible but not probable. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>best<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Tony</span></font><font color=navy><span
style='color:navy'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>07808 142121</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:12.0pt'>
<hr size=3 width="100%" align=center tabindex=-1>
</span></font></div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 face=Tahoma><span lang=EN-US
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma;font-weight:bold'>From:</span></font></b><font
size=2 face=Tahoma><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'>
idc-bounces@mailman.thing.net [mailto:idc-bounces@mailman.thing.net] <b><span
style='font-weight:bold'>On Behalf Of </span></b>John Sobol<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Sent:</span></b> 08 November 2011 15:21<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>To:</span></b> idc@mailman.thing.net<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Subject:</span></b> Re: [iDC] Why Parents
Help Children Violate Facebook's 13+ Rule</span></font><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 10:56 PM, Seeta Gangadharan <<a
href="mailto:seeta.gangadharan@yale.edu">seeta.gangadharan@yale.edu</a>>
wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6.0pt;
margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0cm'>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>Hi Lynn/all,<br>
<br>
Though survey research might be useful in ascertaining snapshots of<br>
low-income communities' sentiments towards surveillance and privacy, I'm<br>
not certain that a survey will capture breadth of harmful experiences<br>
that result from tracking or that are perceived to result from tracking.<br>
I'd love to hear someone who's working toward that end to suggest otherwise.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</blockquote>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><br>
Hi all,<br>
<br>
I would be interested to hear from people about this question too,
specifically, what are the actual harmful experiences that have resulted from
corporate tracking/targeting of teens/kids, as opposed to the perceived or
potential harmful experiences? I can think of the RIAA lawsuits but would be
keen to hear about others. <br>
<br>
Personally, as a parent of 'tweens I sympathize with the perspective that
assumes that any and all tracking and targeting of our kids - corporate or
otherwise - is inherently dangerous and undesirable. But another part of me
wonders whether this is not an unfounded assumption.<br>
<br>
For example, I am of the belief that the passion for privacy that is inherent
to literate culture and that arises out of the anonymity of literate technology
has been a key factor in destroying our perception of the interrelatedness of
all things, and thus in enabling our disastrous delusion that it is OK to
exploit the earth to death (ours). Perhaps our desire to migrate anonymity into
networked culture is a fundamental mistake? Perhaps we need to maximize our
interconnectedness and our collective being, not as unknown atomic individuals
but as individuals unafraid of being known by our words and deeds (or profile),
i.e. not anonymous? Perhaps the price we pay for our targeted social networking
is targeted commercial networking? Perhaps it is inevitable and OK that our
economy should become personalized - as it once was in oral economies - and our
resistance to this stems from our allegiance to literate economic principles
and values that are based on impersonal standardization as opposed to targeted
personalization and interaction (automated or in-person)? <br>
<br>
Targeted marketing already serves us well (or does it? I would say it does) on
ebay and amazon and etsy etc. Besides, was listening to the radio not a form of
targeting, and of suggestive marketing, or watching TV or reading the
newspaper? We let our kids do those things, so the difference appears to be in
the personalized tracking/targeting capabilities not in the pushing out of
suggestions per se. Partly what I'm saying is, do I care if personalized ads as
opposed to generic ads are targeted at my daughter? No I don't. Do I care that
a vast store of data about her personal and commercial (and when she gets
older, professional) life is in the hands of a company that could be hacked or
that could sell it to a 3rd party for non-commercial uses? Yes, definitely. So
although I don't really care about marketing, I do care about security.
So from my personal perspective, perhaps the focus of researcher's concern
should be less on the not-so-nefarious practice of targeted marketing and
instead on the seemingly more alarming danger of personal data being exported
for non-commercial purposes? <br>
<br>
Obviously the 'potential' harm is 1984ish and nightmarish. But perhaps the
'potential' benefits, on the other hand, are utopian. Or more likely both are
somewhat exaggerated. But I disagree with you Danah when you say that the key
determining factor is social norms. I think the determining factor is the architecture
of the technology, or the code as you/LL put it. Because social norms
change as a result of technological architectures and not the other way around,
despite the fact that it is heresy to say so. (Unfortunately, the Myth of the
Myth of Technological Determinism is even more entrenched than the Myth of the
Myth of the Digital Native!) So partly what I am wondering is whether - given
that the architecture of networked culture promotes personalization and
destroys anonymity, fighting that new digital norm is a less useful activity
than building constructively on it, no matter how uneasy this may make those of
us who were raised to cherish and expect anonymity in commerce and elsewhere. <br>
<br>
For example, I do not believe that the appropriate response to the RIAA's
litigious attacks on digital sharing is deeper hiding and sneakier sharing
tools, precisely because downloaders will always be trackable. I think the
appropriate response is collective self-empowerment in which millions of people
should come together and publicly acknowledge their actions as part of a
popular movement to challenge IP law and at the very least stop the harmful
music industry attacks on students and their families. Alternately, bands
should shed their labels and develop digitally-enabled fanclubs in which every
single fan is known by name and can be tracked and targeted, so music and media
can flow downstream to fans and money can flow upstream to bands and the RIAA
can be left out of it all entirely. That would be an excellent example of
benevolent targeted marketing and personalized commerce, and I'd have no
problem with my 12 year old sharing her personal info in that context...<br>
<br>
These are open-ended questions. Just thinking out loud and exploring different
perspectives...all comments welcome...<br>
<br>
John Sobol<br>
--<br>
<a href="http://www.youareyourmedia.com">www.youareyourmedia.com</a><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>