Australian educator and blogger, story the other day about a conversation he overheard at StarBucks (StarBucks in Australia?). Moller said,
…the kids were talking about an advertisment that comes up at the movies warning people about the risks of downloading movies online. The advertisment challenges the viewer that because they wouldn’t steal a purse or break in to a house and steal a TV they shouldn’t download a movie because it is the same thing. Makes sense to me – Stealing is Stealing!! However, the insight these teens put on the conversation was interesting indeed. One said that it was a stupid argument because if someone just left a purse sitting out in the open where it was easy to get to then of course you would just take it. He continued, stating that because movies and music is so easy to download and because it is out there in the open for anyone to take so easily then it is ok.
21st Century Educator » 21st Century Ethics
Moller continued…
I think it is an evolution of social networks and the thinking that is being developed by young minds of today. To think that stealing is ok just because it is easy says to me that they have lost a sense of reality and which in turn distorts their understanding of what is right and wrong.
I think that Brett makes a very good point here, that right and wrong appears to have given way to convenience. He wonders what the motion picture industry might do to better protect their assets, but I wonder what we might do, as an education industry, to help students better understand the ethics of information.
Right and wrong is the core of the issue, but I think that value is where the confusion actually lies. The movie files that these youngsters were talking about, were not left out in plain view from neglect or disregard. It is the technology that makes it so easy to take digital property, not that it got lost. It would actually be easier to walk into someone’s yard and take their outdoor furniture, or even their car. But I doubt that the youngsters Moller overheard would even consider doing this. I think youngsters see information, as property (made of bits), differently from the way that they see an object, as property (made of atoms).
So how do we teach students to value information? I think that we must first come to value information ourselves. Teachers must explicitly and conspicuously practice information ethics every day, and this goes much deeper than merely adding citations to our handouts.
What do we (the education institution) value? We value answers. We value performance. We value achievement. When a student turns in a report, research paper, drawing, or what ever, we mark its level of performance, and then give the work back to the student or throw it away. I think that we need to integrate into our teaching and learning experiences, a value for our students’ information work. As students start to perform more digital work, I think that we should archive those information products into a public digital library, so that other students can visit the work, read it, look at it, listen, and watch it. It shows that there is value in their information.
Beyond that, I would suggest one more analogy for these students. Admittedly, it is a difficult place to get a good foot hold, because our children are not trying to make a living. They are not responsible for generating income to support themselves and their families. So it is hard for them to understand. But I would ask them, “If you are using an MMORPG (Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game), and have built a dwelling with the resources you earned in the game, and someone comes along and steals that home — would that be right or wrong?”
technorati tags:literacy, ethics, education, warlick, technology
Blogged with Flock
I agree with you. Discussing the issue of digital theft last year with the kids in my class when we were in the middle of looking at issues of copyright and Creative Commons, many of them said thay they didn’t consider downloading to be illegal because if you can download everything else from the net, why should movies or music be any different? If it is online, basically to them it was available.
The attitude expressed above concerning intellectual property is not limited to students. I’ve been retired for a few years now, but as a school librarian I fought a similar battle with teachers. They had no qualms about making multiple copies of things that they felt they could not otherwise afford to purchase. And they could not understand my objections to this illegal activity.
This discussion of values transcends technology…although technology as a cornerstone of progress probably plays a vital part.
In Our Future: Consumerism or Humanism, Kapur concludes that schools must “emphasize ethically and morally-oriented culture and entertainment.” He sees “higher levels of consciousness through spiritualism as a factor of restraint.” Might fly in Indian schools, but the reality of American public schools is separation of church and state. The clarion call, though, is for values.
Kapur: “These are not values to be created. They are an integral part of most religious traditions, and they are even more deeply ingrained in indiginous and tripbal cultures.The evolution of technological society into it present state has taken place in an expanding ‘value-vacuum’…Values are now measured in monetary terms…thus upstaging” traditional values. He continues, “an entire generation is being subjected to mindless violence and sex. Children are being tranformed from citizens into computer-programmed consumers of good and services.”
Harsh reality, huh? But it may help explain the “rip and burn” culture we have created…
Imagine if end-of-course tests were required for philosophy and ethics?
I think that in your last paragraph, you might have hit on it… the notion that students won’t really be able to value someone else’s intellectual property until they can see the value of some intellectual work of their own. This goes to all aspects of intellectual property rights, including copying of movies, songs, software, etc. as you noted, and also citing sources in print and electronic formats [side note: I have used your online citation form for several years with my students].
As the other commenters have mentioned, this is really ethics at its essence. I continue to search for the most developmentally appropriate way to share ethical concepts with elementary and middle school students.
You write, “I think youngsters see information, as property (made of bits), differently from the way that they see an object, as property (made of atoms). So how do we teach students to value information? I think that we must first come to value information ourselves.”
But this is exactly what’s wrong. You *shouldn’t* value information like atoms – the commodification of bits as though they were atoms is *itself* unethical. The kids know this, which is why they refuse to recognize the open internet as a retail space, as though it were some kind of privately owned mall.
The presumption is always that file sharing is theft. But this is never proven. I argue that the *publishers* are the thieves. Until this case is made, it is premature to talk about ‘teaching ethics’ – and to simply ignore the alternative point of view is arrogent and presumptuous.
Oh, I get it now! The ninth grader who downloads a term paper from SchoolSucks.com is merely being resourceful.
I’m with Stephen. Your analogy is unfair – the stealing of an online home takes something away from the original owner. The copying of a track doesn’t take anything away from the owner of the original CD. It does take away potential copyright earnings from an artist, and profit from the record company, but that’s rather different. I don’t recall the record companies offering to refund me copyright money when I rebought all my vinyl on CD.
Here’s a book that explains it nicely:
http://www.dustrunners.com/dl/Pig_and_the_Box.pdf
Dave,
The sentiment expressed by those kids in Starbucks Australia is not unique and certainly has implications to the teaching profession. As I posted recently, students do not see “copy & paste†from the Web as plagiarism. Many (correctly) illustrate that the questions that we ask our students affect the ease at which they can find content to plagiarize. I suggest that we all need to include discussions of ethics into our curriculum and educate our students as to why digital property is as real as physical property.
I like your suggestion of having students publish their work to help them have a sense of ownership. But something pointed out to me yesterday is worth considering.
I am at the “Future of Web Apps†conference in San Francisco. In a presentation by Mike Davidson of Newsvine titled “User-driven content – is it working†suggested that the idea of posting your photos on Flickr should have failed. In the traditional world of photography, your masters (digital or negatives) are your prized possession and should be protected at all costs. The idea of posting these hi-res images on a site for anyone to view, download, use, etc. is crazy. But today’s generation(s) view digital content totally differently. They relish the chance to share and make their content (photos in the case of Flickr, videos in the case of YouTube, ideas in the case of LiveJournal and blogs) available to all!
This need to share (or at least make public) affects one’s view of other content on the web. It is this attitude/view that we need to consider as we help our students understand that just because something is available does not imply permission to use it in any unrestricted way.
Hi Dave, Well I guess the conversation just caused me to blog and there is some more thought on this topic. I was thinking of doing some work on it and maybe presenting it to NECC 2007 as a paper for the conference next year. I plan on getting to Atlanta next year.
A bit of information for you and your readers…. Our Prime Minister has called for religion to be taught in all public schools so youngsters can start to get an idea of right and wrong as well as our values. I am not sure if that will work but it is interesting to see that the powers of the land at least recognise that we have an issue needing to be addressed.