It is a story of the beginning of March, but maybe it is still “fresh” for the some public: the city of Chicago has banned the use of an app to minors. The app in question is called Yik Yak and allows you to anonymously share messages with 500 users in the vicinity, acquaintances or strangers who they are.
I think many of you have already figured out where we are going to end up: teenagers posts + anonymity + = disaster. The motivations behind the ban have been very simple: cases of evacuation of schools due to bomb hoaxes, anonymous allegations of rape … I have to continue?
This news made me think about a lot of points and I wanted to share it because I consider it very important for the education of our brats.
Speaking of bullying and cyberbullying today is increasingly fashionable, especially in the US and Australia. I often wonder what the emergency is real and what is “emergency” created by the press or by the fact that once you make a count of acts of bullying was difficult but now, by electronic transmission, it is easier to trace the phenomenon. Also the new media make it easier and more efficient also commit bullying.
We are discovering little by little that social media can easily become anti-social media; they are simply “average” that without a “social” to be transmitted remain useless tools.
Facebook has made us more social and sociable? Or are we reduced to visit us at the bar with friends and physically while virtually ignoring them socialize with other distant friends?
As I thought about these things I have been overwhelmed by the terrible picture: what difference exists between a teenager on Facebook or Yik Yak, harassing a / a friend / a and a drone pilot causing “collateral damage” in a distant land during a war?
They say it is easier to kill with the computer because the more physically distant from the target six more so are emotionally. Out of sight, out of mind!
Give an asshole in the face of a friend is one thing, post insults on a friend’s page is another; anonymously accused of having been raped by the teacher is even more different.
Maybe positivism with we welcome the new technologies is too optimistic? But also be an anti-technological retrograde is not good: you cannot smash your PC and then shortly after, right?
For now I have concluded that I have too many questions and too few data available (I am a Vulcan engineer, but if you call me philosopher does not offend me) and even fewer answers to give.
One thing I understood: humanity is filled with continuous tools and then label them as good or bad, requires them by law or vetoes them, but in the end it uses to communicate. I do not think there ever will be, I hope, a phone where you talk about love in the receiver and in another you hear of hatred, then all of these tools are used to convey what we are. Even those who are not exactly “social.”
We want to use the kitchen knife to stab a spouse or prepare a tasty ? We want to use nuclear power to bomb or produce energy? We want to use Facebook for friendship or to inflict pain? The tools are for our interaction.
In the end, it is easy to say that:
- The pimply teenagers are unfortunate;
- Do not have to use anonymous, even though they then the right to privacy in the Charter of universal rights;
- Today’s young people are the worst, take drugs, are sexually depraved and all the other usual things that the old tell the young.
The truth is that as we age like to do all the same brush, especially when it comes to “things of youth” that is hard to understand.
We “young parents” we are also the “young old” who stop publishing photos of the festivities to your Facebook wall and begin to publish those of their babies, who are distancing themselves from the young of the moment and who label arrogantly as the wimps 21st century. However, those young people are the product of the society that we and our parents before us we have created.
Some hateful attitudes towards young people make me think that the chef is complaining about how disgusting his plate without any fault attributable or, even better, allow customers to eat what “no fault” made it inedible, at the same time demanding that these pay the bill.
If we forbid young people to use certain tools just because some have abused, we should think about how come we do not have them taught to discern between use and abuse, how come we have failed to convey the values that we want to impose by law. I would also like to know how we would use that tool if we had known it existed, perhaps we would have used to make acid comments on the lips redone colleague big ass?
Without wishing to defend the abuser of an instrument, I am often confused in the face of a society that increasingly wants responsibility away from minors, except then point their finger as soon as an irrelevant minority of them is bullshit. For now I am more inclined to believe that the responsibilities of a gesture should be attributed to its author, adult or minor it is, and that in the case of a minor, we should make an examination of conscience on because we have not taught him that certain things are not done. I think this approach I can do to be a better dad, what do you think?
To leave you a quote from one of my uncle in front of my cousin who complained about the injustice of being forced to eat the soup while her older sisters were exempted, more or less he said: “They are too big and we cannot educate them well, but you’re small, we still have hope. So shut up and eat. “