Sex Offenders on MySpace: Think Again(Apophenia Does the Math)

Apophenia (danah boyd) provides a very sane response to the recentpronouncements about throwing 90,000 registered sex offenders offMySpace. Sounds like a big number until you (a) do the math or (b) askwhat are they doing---and where are there real problems that we are notattending to? http://tinyurl.com/bqm9mq    In terms of actually understanding that number, measuring it against other numbers and populations, it suggests that fewer numbers than one would guess are on MySpace and that begs the question of what they are doing there.  

But she makes another, larger argument too:  we know there are at-risk kids engaging in reckless behavior on MySpace and other social networking sites.  Why don't we concentrate on them?   Why don't we work to help them?   And we also know that incomparably more child abuse is caused by a relative, a neighbor, a trusted church or community leader or teacher than by some stranger contacting a child via the Internet.  So why do we make the technology the issue instead of looking at deep social and familial responsibilities and irresponsibilities?   Why, so often in history, is "technology" the scapegoat?  Perhaps (and this is my answer; I don't mean to attribute this to danah) it is because technology can seem "agentless" whereas looking at the family or the neighbors or social leaders in positions of trust means there is agency and that requires responsible action, not just handwringing and anonymous, sanctimonious, but ultimately empty rhetoric.

Read her piece and think about the social function of such public pronouncements:  Apophenia (danah boyd) provides a very sane response to the recentpronouncements about throwing 90,000 registered sex offenders offMySpace. Sounds like a big number until you (a) do the math or (b) askwhat are they doing---and where are there real problems that we are notattending to? http://tinyurl.com/bqm9mq