Young People, Ethics, and the New Digital Media

1. New Digital Media: A Frontier of Opportunity and Ethical Risk for Youth

Indeed, the frontierlike quality of the new digital media means that opportunities for ethical lapses abound.

Digital frontier. The new digital media (NDM) like social networks, blogs, games, and instant messaging, represent a vast, often unregulated frontier for young people. This landscape offers unprecedented opportunities for creativity, connection, and civic engagement, enabling anyone with internet access to become a producer or commentator. However, this openness also means fewer established rules and enforcement mechanisms, creating fertile ground for ethical challenges and potential harms.

Promises and perils. The NDM facilitates "participatory cultures" with low barriers to expression and sharing, fostering mentorship and a sense that contributions matter. Examples like the TVNewser blog started by a college student or the Global Kids program show youth using NDM for positive social impact and leadership development. Yet, alongside these inspiring examples are instances of misuse, deception, and ethically ambiguous behavior, highlighting the dual nature of this digital frontier.

Ethical fault lines. This report identifies five core ethical issues amplified by NDM: identity, privacy, ownership/authorship, credibility, and participation. These issues, while present offline, take on new or distinct stakes in digital spaces due to features like persistence, searchability, replicability, and invisible audiences. Understanding these "fault lines" is crucial for navigating the NDM responsibly and realizing its potential for good.

2. Defining "Good Play": Meaningful and Responsible Online Participation

Accordingly, we define good play as online conduct that is both meaningful and engaging to the participant and responsible to others in the community in which it is carried out.

Beyond work and games. While NDM activities include traditional games, "play" here encompasses a broader range of voluntary, leisure-time pursuits like social networking, blogging, and content creation. These activities often occur in informal "third spaces" without explicit adult supervision or clear standards, blurring lines between hobby and potential work or civic engagement. Despite their informal nature, these activities are significant as they express cultural norms and can have real-world consequences.

Ethical dimension. Unlike some views of play as outside of morals, online play carries significant ethical potential and perils. Anonymity, fictional identities, and the ease of exiting communities can reduce accountability where ties are weak. However, online play often occurs in a digital public, making actions visible to vast, unknowable audiences, placing a significant onus on participants to consider the implications of their creations and interactions.

Responsible engagement. Good play requires not just personal engagement and meaning but also responsibility towards others in the online community and broader society. This involves navigating the ethical fault lines of identity, privacy, ownership, credibility, and participation in ways that are considerate and contribute positively. The challenge lies in fostering this sense of responsibility in environments where rules are often implicit and consequences not always immediately apparent.

3. Identity Online: Exploring Selves, Navigating Deception

The real developmental task of identity formation is increasingly happening in virtual spaces.

Digital identity exploration. Adolescence is a key period for identity formation, traditionally involving exploration in offline spaces. NDM provides new, often perceived as "low-stakes," environments for this process. Youth use platforms like MySpace, Facebook, and blogs to express values, tastes, and feelings, deliberately crafting online personas. This need to "write oneself into being" online can encourage self-reflection and experimentation with different aspects of the self.

Promises of virtual identity. Online spaces offer diverse avenues for creative self-expression, allowing youth to explore aspects of their personality they might suppress offline. Anonymous or semi-anonymous spaces can feel "safe" for working through personal issues or trying on different roles, potentially increasing social tolerance by "taking the role of the other." Receiving feedback from broader audiences than just close friends can validate identity experiments and build confidence.

Perils of virtual identity. Identity play can easily cross into deception, misleading online friends or strangers about one's offline self, age, or intentions. Exploring harmful identities (e.g., misogynist avatars) is possible, though real-world effects are debated. Concerns exist about fragmented identities if online personas become disconnected from the offline self, and self-reflection can be overshadowed by the performance of identity for an audience. Over-reliance on external feedback ("tethering") can also undermine autonomous self-development.

4. Privacy in the Digital Age: Disclosure, Control, and Invisible Audiences

To many young participants, privacy is not about hiding personal information but rather involves carefully managing its disclosure—what is shared, how it is presented, and who can access it (Woo 2006).

Shifting privacy norms. Offline, privacy is often seen as concealing personal information, protected by laws against unwarranted public exposure or surveillance. Online, NDM features like persistence, searchability, replicability, and invisible audiences challenge this. Many youth engage in a "culture of disclosure," where privacy is less about hiding and more about strategically managing what information is shared, how, and with whom, often assuming a peer audience.

Strategies for control. Youth employ various strategies to manage online privacy:

• Using privacy settings to limit profile access.
• Selective disclosure, omitting sensitive details.
• Code switching, maintaining different profiles for different audiences.
• Deception, providing false information (e.g., age) for perceived safety or privacy.
  These practices indicate conscious management, but assumptions about audience behavior can be naive.

Risks of disclosure. Despite strategies, youth often underestimate the risks. Information shared online can persist indefinitely, be easily searched and replicated, and reach unintended "invisible audiences" like parents, teachers, or future employers. This can lead to "collapsed context," where information intended for one audience is seen by another, potentially damaging reputations or opportunities. Unwitting participants (friends mentioned in blogs, people in shared photos/videos) are also vulnerable to privacy lapses by others.

5. Ownership and Authorship: Collaboration vs. Copyright in a "Free Culture"

What is clear is that past conceptions of ownership, authorship, and copyright are now contested and are likely to be significantly revised or reinterpreted for the digital age.

Blurred lines. Offline, ownership and authorship are tied to legal property rights, with clear rules about credit and fair use enforced by law and institutions like schools (anti-plagiarism). Online, technology makes copying and sharing easy, blurring the lines between author and audience. Collaborative platforms like wikis and user-modified content in games challenge traditional notions of individual ownership, while Digital Rights Management is difficult to enforce.

Emerging norms. The ease of access and sharing online contributes to what some call an "infringing culture," where youth expect immediate access to content and may not see illegal downloading as unethical, especially when framed against large corporations. Conversely, a new ethics of "free culture" and collaboration is emerging, valuing open access and shared creation. This tension means traditional concepts of ownership and authorship are contested and require reinterpretation.

Promises and perils. NDM offers opportunities for "cocreation" and participation in "knowledge communities," empowering youth as creators and collaborators. This can build valuable skills and a sense of efficacy, demystifying authorship and opening doors to potential careers. Open access to information democratizes knowledge. However, youth creators can be exploited by corporations who benefit from user-generated content without providing credit or compensation. The temptation to abuse free access through illegal downloading or plagiarism remains a significant peril, potentially fostering a sense of entitlement that extends to other contexts.

6. Credibility Online: Expertise, Misrepresentation, and Trust

Signaling credibility is at once easier and more difficult online when traditional means for conveying competence and motivations are unavailable.

Defining credibility. Credibility involves both competence (skills, knowledge, credentials) and integrity (truthful representation, good intentions). Offline, credibility is often signaled through formal credentials earned over time. For youth, it's built through a track record of fulfilling obligations competently and with clear intentions in various roles (student, friend, community member). Online, the absence of visual cues and formal structures changes how credibility is conveyed and assessed.

Opportunities for demonstrating expertise. NDM's "low barriers to participation" allow individuals, regardless of formal credentials, to contribute and build credibility based on the quality of their online participation. Youth can become recognized experts or leaders in online communities, demonstrating skills and gaining feedback. This openness allows youth to explore different domains and develop skills that could lead to future careers, fostering a sense of efficacy and potentially leading to "collegial pedagogy" with adults.

Risks of misrepresentation. The ease of participation and difficulty of identity verification online create opportunities for deception about one's identity, competence, and motivations. Misrepresenting credentials or expertise is easy when verification is lacking. While some deception might be intended for privacy or exploration, it can be harmful, especially in contexts where accurate information is crucial (e.g., health forums). The lack of accountability structures makes assessing credibility difficult and places a significant onus on individuals to be truthful and transparent about their expertise and intentions.

7. Participation: Civic Potential and the Perils of Online Conduct

Participation is the culminating ethical issue in the new digital media, and it arguably subsumes the issues of identity, privacy, ownership and authorship, and credibility.

Forms of participation. Participation online encompasses communication, creation, sharing, and using knowledge in various spheres (political, social, economic). Unlike offline life, where access is often limited by resources or attributes, NDM offers broader access to participatory roles for anyone with technology and basic skills. Standards of behavior are less explicit, and Web 2.0 encourages proactive content creation beyond passive consumption.

Promises of engagement. NDM can empower youth by allowing them to assume leadership, mentoring, and educating roles in online communities. Interaction with diverse participants can broaden perspectives. The openness facilitates "citizen media" or journalism, allowing ordinary people to report news and contribute to public dialogue, as seen in environmental videos or political blogs. This can mobilize youth to social and political action, fostering a sense of efficacy and potentially leading to a new model of "engagement 2.0."

Perils of engagement. Despite the potential, digital divides persist, limiting access for some youth. Among those who participate, misconduct like hate speech, cyberbullying, and trolling are risks, often enabled by anonymity and lack of accountability. Communities may struggle to establish shared standards of behavior. Conversely, users might overcommit to narrow interest groups, leading to "balkanization" and isolation from diverse viewpoints. There's also a risk that online civic engagement doesn't transfer to real-world political participation, leading youth to disengage from traditional systems.

8. The "Good Play" Model: Five Factors Shaping Online Ethics

Our research and reflection have shown us that the ethical stances of young people are shaped by how they manage their identities and privacy, regard ownership and authorship, establish their credibility, treat others, and consider broader civic issues as they participate in online spaces.

Interplay of influences. Ethical online conduct ("good play") is not solely determined by individual choices but is shaped by a complex interplay of factors. The model proposes five key influences: the affordances of the technology itself, technical and new media literacies, person-centered factors, peer cultures (online and offline), and ethical supports. Understanding how these factors interact is crucial for promoting responsible digital citizenship.

Technological and skill base. The design of NDM technologies (e.g., copy/paste, privacy settings, collaborative features) enables certain behaviors and affects perceptions of issues like privacy and ownership. A young person's technical skills and broader media literacies (understanding audiences, evaluating credibility) determine their ability to navigate these spaces effectively and ethically. However, technical skill alone doesn't guarantee ethical behavior; it enables both positive and negative actions.

Personal, social, and support systems. Individual cognitive and moral development, personal values, and goals influence ethical decision-making. Peer cultures, both online (e.g., infringing cultures, disclosure norms) and offline (e.g., cheating cultures), exert powerful social pressure. Crucially, the presence or absence of ethical supports—adult mentors, educational curricula, explicit codes of conduct—plays a significant role in guiding youth towards responsible online engagement and helping them reflect on the implications of their actions.

9. Youth Ethical Stances: Distinct Perspectives and Areas of Confusion

Many informants with whom we spoke claimed that digital youth are qualitatively different from older generations in an ethical sense.

Different understandings. Evidence suggests that "digital youth" may hold distinct mental models regarding the five ethical fault lines compared to older generations. Their comfort with sharing personal information, collaborative creation, and fluid identities online points to evolving norms around privacy, ownership, and self-representation. These differences are not necessarily better or worse, but they highlight a potential disconnect with traditional ethical frameworks and adult expectations.

Naive assumptions and confusion. Despite their technical fluency, youth can be surprisingly naive about the potential consequences of their online actions. They may underestimate the persistence and reach of online information, assuming their content is only visible to intended audiences. Confusion exists around issues like copyright and fair use, sometimes leading to unintentional transgressions. The lack of explicit ethical codes in many online spaces contributes to this confusion and leaves youth to navigate complex situations based on implicit peer norms or personal values.

Variation exists. While generalizations about "digital youth" are common, there is significant variation in their ethical awareness and conduct. Some youth are "completely delusional" about online risks, while others are "hyperaware." Factors like developmental stage, personal values, and exposure to ethical discussions or role models likely contribute to these differences. Understanding this variation is key to developing effective interventions.

10. Cultivating Ethical Minds: The Need for Supports and Reflection

For the promises of the new digital media to be positively realized, supports for the development of ethical skills—or, better yet, “ethical minds” (Gardner 2007a)—must emerge.

Beyond technical skills. Simply providing access to technology and teaching technical skills is insufficient for fostering responsible online behavior. Youth need to develop "ethical minds"—the capacity for critical reflection on the implications of their actions for themselves, others, and society. This involves understanding their roles online, the responsibilities these roles imply, and the potential consequences of their choices in the digital public.

Role of ethical supports. Adults (parents, educators, policymakers) and institutions (schools, libraries, online platforms) have a crucial role in providing ethical supports. This includes:

• Mentorship: Guiding youth through complex ethical dilemmas.
• Education: Implementing media literacy curricula that explicitly address online ethics.
• Modeling: Adults demonstrating responsible online behavior.
• Creating clear norms: Online communities and platforms establishing and enforcing codes of conduct.

Fostering reflection. Interventions should encourage youth to reflect on their online experiences, bringing implicit norms and potential consequences to conscious awareness. Role-playing exercises and discussions of real-world case studies can help youth develop perspective-taking skills and consider the ethical dimensions of identity, privacy, ownership, credibility, and participation. The goal is empowerment through ethical understanding, enabling youth to leverage the NDM's potential for positive impact while minimizing risks.

Last updated: June 12, 2025