Is technology helping families communicate or holding them back?
|
Version 0 of 1. Forget the cliché of teenagers spending their lives glued to their phones, sending Snapchats, messaging friends and running the risk of cyberbullying – digital technology is offering a whole host of brand-new ways to bring families and friends closer together for happier relationships. That was the message from a roundtable discussion sponsored by Vodafone and hosted by the Guardian, and attended by a range of experts in the fields of education, psychology, wellbeing and communication. The event launched the third edition of Vodafone's Digital Parenting Guide, which includes research that sheds light on the role of digital technology in modern family life. The data – gathered after 1,500 parents and 500 young people were polled – indicates that most parents and children believe their family lives have been enriched by technology, and more than that nine out of 10 kids feel they have more opportunities thanks to technology. Indeed, it's clear that some technology can encourage stronger emotional connections within families. If you're in different countries, you don't have to wait for weeks for a letter to arrive, or rack up gigantic phone bills – you can just connect via Skype or FaceTime. "These technologies are really good at sustaining relationships when there's distance involved," said clinical psychologist Lucy Maddox. Sophie Linnington of digital parenting resource The Parent Zone agreed, talking about the experience of families playing online games with relatives across continents. And it's not just about linking parents with children, or cousins of the same age – the silver surfers also have a raft of opportunities to connect with their young relatives. Claire Lilley of the NSPCC talked about how technology can be particularly useful for grandparents, who might not be familiar with digital media but are willing to learn in order to communicate with their grandchildren. "My parents feel much more connected to their grandchildren because of Skype," she said. "It's been good for them because they've had to engage with technology. They wouldn't have done that without the motivation to see their grandchildren." That might mean having to learn new skills that may prove challenging at first. Siôn Humphreys of the National Association of Headteachers drew distinctions between digital immigrants, who had to learn about technology, and digital natives, who had grown up with it. He also wondered whether there were different boundaries between generations in terms of what they were happy to share online, highlighting the importance of young people being encouraged to audit their "digital footprint" – the amount of information freely available about them online, mostly via social networks. Learn to fall But not everyone necessarily agrees that there needs to be a tighter rein on young people's digital usage; in fact, there's an argument that allowing them to develop their judgement through trial and error is important. That was the view put forward by Callum Negus-Fancey of brand advocacy specialists Let's Go Holdings: "Being taught to manage risks is a very useful life skill." Linnington agreed that it was important to encourage young people to use analytical critical thinking skills to assess the implications of using particular technologies. Humphries suggested that perhaps some parents were not confident about setting boundaries for technology usage because of their own skills limitations. "Get the kids to teach you. Harness them as the experts," responded Lilley. This collaborative approach, allowing for more communication between parents and children, could have an impact on a person's whole parenting ethos. David Miles of the Family Online Safety Institute suggested there was a great amount of "surveillance and oversight" over young people now. Does technology simply encourage "helicopter parenting" – or parents keeping very close tabs on their children – simply because they can? Negus-Fancey argued that technology gave children more autonomy and allowed for compromise with parents; the teenager with a mobile phone can ring home to ease any worries over their safety rather than having to be home by a strict curfew just in case. Cindy Rose of Vodafone agreed that mobile technology encouraged independence rather than the opposite, and talked about a personal security app that was currently in development alongside a mobile wallet as a payment method. Certainly the data from Vodafone's new research backs that up: 95% of teenagers told researchers they felt safer leaving their home with their mobile phones. That's not to say that there aren't valid questions to be considered about the use of technology within families. Lilley suggested that the omnipresence of digital communication interrupted "present parenting" and engagement with the moment – and that the emails pinging in from afar on a device can distract parents from talking to their children who are right there in front of them. Maddox added that there was something to be said for young people and parents "having time to just be quiet and actually have their minds at rest, not actively doing anything". E-safety The spectre of cyberbullying is never far away from these kinds of conversations. Educating young people about e-safety is essential – but whose responsibility it is remains unclear. Adults – whether parents or teachers – might not have the necessary skills or understanding of young people's online habits; and certainly the packed school curriculum, focused on qualifications, has limited space to address these issues. It could be that peer mentoring schemes, where children are trained up as digital champions and take the lead on advising and supporting younger schoolmates online, might be a way forward. Lilley suggested that children are loath to ask adults for help or tell them about any problems they encounter online because they don't want their devices to be taken away. Louise Chunn, founder of self-improvement site welldoing.org, agreed that mindset was understandable: "It's like putting something over their mouth – all their friends are talking, and they can't." Similarly, it's tough for schools to issue blanket bans on particular apps or devices, because, as Humphries pointed out, it is simply unenforceable – not all students can be searched and not all devices can be checked over. Governmental policy is still attempting to get to grips with the possibility of internet regulation in order to protect children from potentially harmful content, and it requires the buy-in of the big players in digital technology, because parents aren't always aware of what their children are looking at. "Parents have been shocked to find out that their kids can access porn – that's a really big deal to get their heads around," pointed out Chunn. But not everyone is convinced that regulatory measures are either necessary or appropriate. The UK's strict adherence to a "preventative" mindset, trying to block access to content wholesale, has encountered criticism, and some of the content filters that have already been rolled outhave prevented young people from accessing important content such as advice sites. That's led to many organisations considering their digital strategies to get round this potential problem. Miles talked about his work with charitable organisations who want to ensure their online services are available to all young people who need them. "The answer for some charities is to develop social media, apps and mobile to reach out to kids – so that when they face these developmental crises, they've got somewhere to turn," he said. But it's not just about a national response: there are also home content filters available on the market, although each device within a household might need to have different levels of access. There's also the risk that this kind of whole-home filtering could lead to parents abdicating all responsibility for their children's internet surfing habits. But as Miles pointed out, young people don't see the internet as scary or risk-laden – they enjoy it and see it as an important way to communicate. "The world is a place of risk," acknowledged Maddox. "It's not to say the medium is bad, but we need to educate in a way that's not patronising and that doesn't lump all teenagers together. They're just experimenting with new ways of interacting." And as these experiments continue, adults need to stay in touch too – not just with their children, to build up stronger, more communicative relationships, but also with the technology. It may be evolving, but it is here to stay. At the table Louise Tickle Journalist, The Guardian Louise Chunn Founder, welldoing.org Siôn Humphreys Policy advisor, curriculum, National Association of Headteachers Claire Lilley Safer technology expert, NSPCC Sophie Linnington Deputy chief executive officer, The Parent Zone Dr Lucy Maddox Child and adolescent clinical psychologist and lecturer on child development, NHS David Miles Director – Europe, Middle East & Africa, Family Online Safety Institute Callum Negus-Fancey Chief executive officer and founder, Let's Go Holdings Cindy Rose Consumer director, Vodafone Credits This content has been sponsored by Vodafone, whose brand it displays. All content is editorially independent. Contact Rachel Joy on 020 3353 2688 (rachel.joy@theguardian.com) |