Cartoon Network is airing an abridged version of CNN’s original documentary THE BULLY EFFECT this Sunday, April 28th, at 5:30 and 8 p.m. (ET/PT). CNN anchor Anderson Cooper hosts and engages in a frank and candid conversation about bullying.

Last year, Anderson Cooper’s AC360⁰ followed the kids profiled in Lee Hirsch’s 2011 film “Bully” to find out what happened to them since the documentary’s release. CNN’s documentary, THE BULLY EFFECT, was the result. Sunday’s telecast on Cartoon Network follows 14-year-old Alex Libby. While he was abused by classmates and ignored by administrators two years ago in Hirsh’s film, Alex’s life since then has completely turned around, in part because someone stood up for and with him. His story isn’t easy but, in the end, is full of hope and inspiration.

Along with both telecasts of THE BULLY EFFECT, renown bullying prevention expert Rosalind Wiseman will host an exclusive, live online chat at StopBullyingSpeakUp.com to answer questions from youth, parents and educators.

On Monday morning, the complete THE BULLY EFFECT documentary will be posted online at CartoonNetwork.com and will be available on You Tube and in other forums. Learn more about THE BULLY EFFECT here.

There were some issues with “Bully” (I wrote about them here and here) but it’s really interesting to see what happened to the kids Hirsh profiled after that film was released. And it isn’t often these days that a network airs something commercial-free, and then makes it readily available online.

If you’re interested in the issues around bullying, tune in Sunday night and have your questions ready for Rosalind Weisman. You can also find more resources about bullying prevention and digital citizenship here.

Creepy? Maybe, but predictable. Facebook, like many websites, tracks where you go online and uses that information to serve you ads customized to your likes and habits. If you take the time to dig through the privacy information posted on the site, you’ll see what they track (though Facebook is known for unexpectedly changing its privacy rules). Selling access to or information about you to advertisers is how Facebook and many websites make money.

Facebook’s data use policy says “We receive data from the computer, mobile phone or other device you use to access Facebook, including when multiple users log in from the same device. This may include your IP address and other information about things like your internet service, location, the type (including identifiers) of browser you use, or the pages you visit.”

Now, Facebook has released Home for Android phones, an app that GigaOM (a well-regarded website that covers “the intersection of business and technology”) describes as “intended to be the dashboard to your mobile world” and “the start button for your apps.” Writer Om Malik is concerned about the amount and depth of data available to Facebook from mobile phones through this app. GPS data showing where you go and when, data about what apps and services you use, who you text, and more. With so much of our lives (especially true of young people) playing out via mobile phones, the privacy implications are huge. And, yes, GigaOM, like almost everyone on the web, collects data about its users but deserves kudos for the clarity of its privacy policy.

Just how much personal information one is willing to give up will vary by the individual. There is some benefit to websites tracking our activities, in that it helps them customize our experience with them. But the more we use the internet for all aspects of daily life, the more personal information we expose and the more we allow companies to build detailed profiles about us.

Some people are unaware of or unconcerned about the amount of data being collected. Others go to elaborate lengths to keep their data private. The potential for misusing this data is always present and privacy advocates are deeply uncomfortable with the amount of information websites collect. Such concerns led to efforts to establish “do not track” options for web users.

“Do not track me” bills have been introduced in Congress and the Obama administration proposed a Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights. Most browsers now have a do not track feature and many websites and services allow you to opt out of certain data being collected, but the system is far from perfect. In fact, Google’s Chrome browser says:

“You can include a ‘Do Not Track’ request with your browsing traffic. However, the effect depends on whether a website responds to the request, and how the request is interpreted.” The explanation goes on to say “At this time, most web services, including Google’s, do not alter their behavior or change their services upon receiving Do Not Track requests.” So you’re left to wonder what’s the point?

When it comes to privacy, we may be our own worst enemy. Alessandro Acquisti at Carnegie Mellon University studies how people make privacy decisions and his findings suggest that we’re rather irrational. A recent New York Times article about Acquisti’s work points out that many business and policy decisions assume people will make rational choices about their personal information. Yet his work shows “we don’t always act in our own best interest” and “[w]e can be easily manipulated by how we are asked for information.” A variety of factors, from distraction to tempting offers, can prompt consumers to give up personal data. The need for instant gratification at a website may tempt us to skip the steps necessary to protect our privacy.

If that’s the case, much of what policymakers and privacy advocates have done is based on a false premise and will not be very effective.

In the fast changing world of the Internet, this is one topic where there will be much more to come.

Image credit: Microsoft Office Clip Art.

Once you’ve had your chuckles, it’s worth asking why a company would spend the money, time and effort to create an ad for a fake product. If done well, such a prank can get people talking about the company and or product, resulting in lots of free publicity. The Taco Bell ad inspired outraged letters to the editor, calls to Congressional offices, and news stories. Revealed as an April Fool’s joke, it was a major topic of conversation for days. However, some thought it a tasteless and unpatriotic stunt, so there’s always the possibility for unintended results.

In an age of social media and in an effort to appeal to young consumers (the 18-24 year olds most desirable to advertisers), corporations also use initiatives like this to position their brand as trendy and cool, hoping to spark social media conversations that extend the ad’s reach and generate more free attention.

Take a look at the elements that go into making this ad appear legitimate—the voice of the narrator, the way the imagery plays off familiar scenes in ads, the dramatic lighting and camera angles—as well as the (wink, wink) clues that this is a joke. Also note in the bacon bra (“oh, this old thing?”) a twist on the frequent use of sex to sell products. And the pop culture reference to Kevin Bacon.

Yes, by posting a blog, I am participating in the viral spread of this ad and, in a way, furthering the corporate aims of Scope. But it is a great example of a piece of media that can be analyzed using the 5 core concepts and key questions of media literacy .

Mabye the next time you see one of these viral videos you’ll pause for a moment to reflect on the purpose behind it and the execution of the idea before you share, forward, pin or tweet it to your friends.

There have been great articles celebrating, remembering and raising awareness of women’s issues as part of Women’s History month. Whether 100 years ago or today, the disenfranchised still struggle to break-through and have their voices heard amongst the hyper-chatter inside the Beltway, Washington, DC.

Social media has become a viable line of communication and with it sprouted a new profession for young and not so young executives. Congressional Members and their staff try to keep up with these new technologies and ways of communicating with their constituencies. But here’s a lesson in social media strategy taken from a very unlikely playbook that’s almost 100 years old. The National Woman’s Party (NWP) was founded in 1916 by suffragists Alice Paul and Lucy Burns. Both were young college educated women who found the existing suffrage organization, the National American Woman Suffrage Association, NAWSA (headquartered in New York City) to be stuck in the past with an aging leadership with no chance of achieving widespread voting rights for women. Not surprisingly, NAWSA found Alice Paul to be quite unorthodox in her non-violent but militant approach in demanding women’s suffrage. So, as a compromise (or perhaps to get rid of her) NAWSA provided her with a $10.00 budget and sent her to Washington, DC to lobby the Halls of Congress and the White House for a federal amendment to the U.S. Constitution granting women the right to vote. This timely move to Washington DC allowed the soon-to-become NWP to devise a lobbying strategy that included a congressional card index system.

The congressional card index proved to be one of the most innovative tactics used on Capitol Hill. The suffragists compiled cards with information about every member of the House and Senate that included background information about the individual’s public career, their values, favorite projects, prior votes, etc. The women routinely updated and consulted these files to prepare for their meetings with members of Congress. They were so detailed and effective that the press began to call them “the deadly political index”. In addition to information about the members of Congress, each of the original cards contains candid comments by NWP members who interviewed them.

A card entry from the index reads.
“A smart alec of the worst kind! My interview was a complete waste of time and a sore trial on my patience.”

And another:
“So violently opposed as to be even hostile in his attitude. Almost insulting in his insinuations that we are abnormal women because we do not want to be protected as we should. “The normal woman knows her place,” he says. There is no hope for him, I am sure, and he should be avoided as far as possible. He opposes the Amendment on the grounds of States’ Rights and also on the principle of the everlasting inferiority of women.”

Today, women and men exercise the right to vote without much thought to the passage of the 19th amendment and those who fought to achieve it. The teaching of U.S. History in our public schools routinely overlooks The National Woman’s Party, but it is important to remember that the NWP became one of the most significant women’s rights organizations of the twentieth century—and they did so largely by creating and using a campaign of mass propaganda, and without the technological advances available today. They shrewdly created and used not only the congressional card index, but also political cartoons, posters, pamphlets, and banners in order to educate the public, influence politicians, and fight back against long-established media hostility toward the suffrage campaign. Their work paid off, and on August 26, 1920 the 19th Amendment was signed into law granting suffrage to twenty-six million American women.

The Sewall-Belmont House & Museum is the home of the historic National Woman’s Party and is located on Capitol Hill. The House holds the many artifacts, stories and yes, even the original congressional card index. The story of the NWP’s continued fight for equality is showcased at the museum for all to experience—let’s hope it inspires future generations to keep breaking barriers through social media so that all voices can one day be heard.

Photo credit: Suffragette parade Mar. 3, 1913; Wash., D.C. by George Grantham Bain 1865-1944. [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

In the latest installment of the campaign, Dove released a free Photoshop Action (a one click tool for achieving a particular effect) called “Beatuify.” Purportedly, it would help give skin a rosy and healthy glow. Dove hoped the Photoshop users who frequently manipulate images of women to make them look younger, thinner, taller, more perfect, would download and use the Beautify Action.

And here’s the clever part. Once someone tried to use the Action, the photo they were working on would instantly revert to its original state, removing all the alterations that shaved off pounds, smoothed out wrinkles, and erased blemishes. A message would pop up calling for these photo editors to “stop manipulating our perceptions of real beauty.”

Many photos for advertisements, publicity, magazine covers, feature spreads and more are heavily edited to make the models look better and more attractive. The downside to this practice is its potential to give people, especially young girls, an unrealistic view of beauty. And that can lead to low self-esteem, may contribute to eating disorders, and likely encourages women to buy products so that they can look/eat/dress like that ideal (if unrealistic) conception of beauty. This is also done with male models, though to a lesser extent, and boys can be affected the same ways girls can.

Dove’s Campaign for Real Beauty has been remarkably successful in raising awareness and starting conversations about the meaning and perception of beauty, about media manipulation of images, and about girls’ self-esteem. Dove, and its Unilever corporate parent, also market cosmetics, vitamins, and supplements that cater to individuals’ desire to be seen as thin and attractive.

[Media literacy educator and advocate Bob McCannon points out Unilever’s Axe brand as an example of advertising that contradicts the messages in the Campaign for Real Beauty and can lead to both confusion and frustration among boys (to whom the ads are targeted) but also among girls who see the ads. Added 3/20/13]

We can learn a lot from the campaign’s viral videos, but that’s only one part of a more complicated equation. In assessing this chapter of the campaign, we also have to ask some classic media literacy questions: Who created this message? What is their intent? Who is the audience? How is this in Dove’s interest? How might different people interpret this?

That, as the late radio personality Paul Harvey used to say, is “the rest of the story,” the second part of the lesson and, only when you look at the ads through the lens of media literacy will you truly learn all the meaning of the Campaign for Real Beauty. Learn more about media literacy here.

The ability to code is important for America’s economic future, and could be the ticket to a good job with an exciting company. Beyond that, it can be fun and rewarding. Just ask the kids whose code gets a robot to perform a task successfully or a game to work as they envisioned.

Launched last week, code.org’s goal is for every student in every school to have the opportunity to learn coding. To that end, the website can help students start learning to code or point them towards schools in their area that teach coding. An educator can find coding resources and programs they could bring to their own school.

What are you waiting for? Get started today at www.code.org.

A few years ago, a couple of Canadian teens noticed a 9th grader was being bullied because he wore a pink shirt and, ergo thought the bullies, he was gay. The teens decided to do something about it, to no longer be bystanders but to become “upstanders.” They purchased 50 pink tank tops and, the next morning, handed them out to friends at school. A sea of pink shirts met the bullied child as he arrived that morning and not only changed his life, but also changed the school’s climate.

Pink Shirt Day became an annual even that spread from that school throughout Canada and is now going worldwide. Many US schools and communities are participating this year tomorrow, February 27th.

It’s important to note that one event, one assembly, or one lesson will not typically change behaviors. What happened at that Canadian high school was the result of a set of circumstances that aren’t often repeated. However, there is great value in these kinds of events for raising awareness and kick-starting a longer, deeper conversation about bullying and school climate.

So go ahead and get your pink on. And then buckle down to the hard work of really changing behaviors, attitudes and school culture. Learn more in Cable in the Classroom’s Digital Citizenship web pages.

Image: Anti-Bullying Flashmob, January 2011 You Tube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MhYyAa0VnyY

Is this a good idea or not? I’m not sure.

Cool or Creepy, it’s a logical extension of social networking into the afterlife. We’ve already seen any number of tribute sites created to celebrate the life, accomplishments, and friendships of a deceased individual. And there have been instances of people setting up cruel sites on which to mock a dead person.

Many of the family members of 9/11 victims treasure the last voice mail messages their loved ones sent before the twin towers collapsed or flight 93 crashed. There have also been cases where, for example, a soldier was killed in Iraq or Afghanistan and his family was not permitted access to their late son’s email account. It’s all so new that the rules are being written as we go.

One could imagine someone dying of cancer and wanting to send posthumous message of love and encouragement to his survivors. Or one could see someone using this kind of service as a way of sending a suicide note or justifying their suicide. What are the ramifications?

As is often the case with technology, the tools are neither good nor bad. It’s how we use them that counts.

All the more reason to always keep a frank, open, and trusting dialogue with your children or students. And all the more reason to be teaching digital citizenship.

Photo: All Saints Graveyard, All Saints Church, Boyne Hill, Maidenhead
© Copyright Lee Kindness and licensed for reuse under this Creative Commons Licence

We think of digital citizenship as a positive and proactive approach to helping children use digital tools safely and effectively, bringing together Internet safety and security with digital literacy, responsible, ethical behavior and civic engagement.

Commissioned by Cable in the Classroom (CIC) and conducted by Harris Interactive the Parent Views on Digital Citizenship survey polled 999 US parents with children aged 8 to 18. In the survey, nine of ten parents think it’s very important or important that their children learn about the three elements of digital citizenship: Internet safety and security (93%), ethical and responsible online behavior (93%), and critical thinking (87%). Because of parents’ unfamiliarity with digital media and information literacy, we used a longer explanation that included the term critical thinking.

However, there are considerable gaps between how important internet safety, online ethics and responsibility, and critical thinking are to parents and how knowledgeable they feel they are about them. Eight in ten parents would like to have more information and guidance about one or more of the elements of digital citizenship.

The survey also showed that, as children get older, parents felt learning ethical, responsible behaviors and critical thinking became more important. Parents of elementary and middle school students are most concerned with their child learning the principles of Internet safety and security, compared to other aspects of digital citizenship; 74% say that it is very important that their child learns about Internet safety and security, compared to 68% who say this about ethical and responsible online behavior and 58% who say this about critical thinking. Parents of high school freshmen and sophomores are more likely than those of juniors and seniors to say that it is very important that their child learns about ethical and responsible online behavior (73% vs. 57%).

Cable in the Classroom’s online poll of more than 2,000 educators, Teacher Views on Digital Citizenship showed similar trends. A majority of educators think their schools or districts do not emphasize the elements of digital citizenship enough. Librarians and technology directors are noticeably more apt to believe this. Educators are also more likely to think it is not emphasized enough the higher the grade level (elementary, middle, high) that they teach.

Less than 40% feel very well prepared to teach digital citizenship. Librarians and tech directors (45% each) are more likely to feel very well prepared than are teachers (38%) or administrators (33%). And responsibility for teaching digital citizenship is spread across a wide range of positions. Educators felt the needed more help teaching ethics and responsibility and digital literacy than Internet safety and most wanted teaching materials (curricula, lesson plans, etc.) and professional development.

It is encouraging to see other elements of digital citizenship getting as much attention as Internet safety. If we want children to grow into safe, effective, ethical and responsible users of digital technology, ready for full participation in the 21st century workforce, society, and government they need to experience the full range of digital citizenship education.

Cable in the Classroom has been advocating for digital citizenship education for a long time. Informed by the findings of these surveys, we have begun production of a series of videos and curricular materials to help teachers learn about and teach digital citizenship topics. The videos and support materials will be available, free of charge, beginning in late spring.

Learn more about digital citizenship here. After February 11th, see a recording of the webinar research presentation here.

Photo: Microsoft Office Clip Art

One of the things I like about digital citizenship, and a reason we at Cable in the Classroom support digital citizenship education, is its focus on rights and responsibilities. Any digital environment these days is not simply the construct of an adult, teacher or mentor. It is the result of a complex interplay between what the adults and the kids bring to the table. It’s participatory learning, where all learn from each other and the technology supports and enables this interaction.