• Commentary

I had the privilege of attending a panel discussion organised by the Optimist Clubs of Barbados on Internet Safety. It was both timely and very helpful in empowering those who were there to be critical thinkers and safe promoters of the Internet. It began with a brief video presentation on eSafety followed by some very articulate secondary school students who shared their views about the Internet. The evening’s schedule was very tight and lots was discussed, however, due to time constraints I was not able to share my views on the matter then so I have posted my comments and some afterthoughts below.

Some things I didn’t get to share or comment on:

• It was mentioned and I also agree that there is little to no research on Internet use by children within Barbados, however, similar to industry stakeholders elsewhere (e.g., UK) studies are conducted regularly on aspects of Internet usage. As one of the major Internet service providers on the island Lime like the others should play a bigger role in protection of the youth online and its customers in general.
• One of the panellists shared his concern about the Internet allowing for ‘fantasy’ or living alternate lives online, however, psychological theory shows that identity exploration and experimentation are integral to development at adolescence and therefore should be supported. In relation to the physical world, cyberspace can be a much safer place for identity play. There is a need to distinguish between the cultural norms for ‘healthy’ early human development and what is necessary for this process as opposed to putting these young individuals on ‘virtual lockdown’.
• That said, we must not neglect to acknowledge these significant differences between various childhood developmental stages as this is particularly important if one wants to be successful in promoting Internet safety. For instance, it was noted that the computer should be located in a public place in the home. While this may be fitting for an ‘inexperienced’ child that requires heavy monitoring, for an adolescent who is soon to be a young and independent adult this can be a hindrance to the developmental process as supervision from afar may be more suitable.
• Another observation I made was that some persons seemed to be of the view that the Internet is not real and that there is a disconnect between online activities and regular life. I recall vaguely, someone mentioning ‘fake’ relationships or talking to ‘fake’ people online. Surely people online are living breathing individuals offline as well. Sometimes there are digital replicas of things in the physical world but these things exist in their own right online and are indeed ‘real’. For example, Internet infidelity results in the same hurt as if someone was unfaithful to his or her partner offline. Cyberspace exists within and impacts our ‘real’ world and that should be enough to validate its ‘realness’.
• Research from the UK shows that mediated by age there are roughly 4 areas of potential risks to the child online. While popular risk areas such as content and contact were well covered in the discussion, commercialism and exclusion from access were not. Commercialism typically speaks to breaches of privacy and targeted advertising at children, whereas, exclusion from access (often considered as a solution) refers to children not being given the opportunity to learn to use this vital technology or acquire this new ‘life skill’. Of course, we should not be contributing to the digital divide or disenfranchising our young ones by pulling the plug on online technology as this reduces opportunities for access to this vital and necessary tool in our contemporary society. Therefore, more focus needs to be placed on this particular online risk.
• One of the conclusions of the discussion that was not made clear is that Internet filters and similar equipment are not a total solution in itself but merely complimentary. As one of the panellists indicated, an adequate solution would include greater information and education offered by media/Internet/cyber literacy. Too often parents and other adults focus on the technical aspects (e.g., pushing buttons) of literacy and believe children (individuals below age 18) know how to ‘use’ technology, however, a critical understanding of the medium is also integral. Additionally, we need to ensure not only that they are able to access and understand this medium but to also create and participate in this new digital landscape. This is one of primary ways we can really ensure their future as global citizens and perhaps also effective Barbadian citizens as well.
• Following on from the above point, this is why I’m not thrilled about the decision to ban mobiles from schools when a comprehensive approach has not been devised at a higher level. In the absence of such a strategy, this move, I believe, has now increased the perceived value of mobiles by school children and amplified the negative effects.
• Nonetheless, though we can begin to implement a media literacy strategy immediately research is urgently needed to access the current state of Internet use by children within Barbados. As I have pointed out, this effort should not only include governmental agencies but also stakeholders in industry and higher education, all informed by pertinent research in the area and with consideration paid to our cultural context.
• Along these lines, some persons did express their intentions to launch projects that will help spread the word about Internet safety, this is definitely the right way to go.