The Digital Parent’s Terms Of Service
My friend Jim Storer brought up a really great topic of conversation on his blog recently about online transparency and whether lifestreaming presents offline threats to those who frequently disclose their whereabouts. While I could go into a number of ways that I could easily stalk a stranger (use of IP addresses, public records, physical following, etc) the reality of the situation is that today’s digital natives don’t have many options in terms of erasing points of entry into their personal lives.
I know a lot of people who are up in arms over the most recent Terms of Service modifications on Facebook because they worry about not having ownership over content that is uploaded online. While it’s a relevant conversation to today’s Internet world, I can’t help but look ahead towards future Internet users who have no say in the matter at all.
The Digital Parent’s Dilemma
There are times when I see pieces of user-generated content floating around my timeline – Flickr photos of families, Saturday soccer games, Twitpics of birthday parites, Qik videos of toddlers running around in their diapers. All the while, I keep thinking about the kids being documented and I just tell myself, “Thank goodness my parents didn’t have access to this stuff when I was three.”
There are betamax videos of myself taken when I was little that will never be on Youtube. There are awkward school photos of myself that will only ever be displayed on my family’s fireplace mantle. Lucky for me, I became an adult before the Internet gave rise to the social web. Consequently, I always had the ability to choose when I would create an online presence for myself and what that would consist of.
For many children of the digital age, they simply won’t have the choice.
Parental Terms of Service in a Web 2.0 World
As the child of a digital immigrant, you are subject to the following Terms and Conditions (upon birth):
“You hereby grant your parents an irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive, transferable, worldwide license (with the right to sublicense) to (a) use, copy, publish, stream, store, retain, publicly perform or display, transmit, scan, reformat, modify, edit, frame, translate, excerpt, adapt, create derivative works and distribute (through multiple tiers), content featuring you. This content may be (i) Posted on or in connection with the websites and social networks that will (a) enable other users to post on other properties and (b) to use your name, likeness and image for any purpose, including commercial or advertising, each of (a) and (b) on or in connection with the services or the promotion thereof.
[modified from Facebook's new terms of service]
Realistically, I don’t think many kids will care when they see that they’re Google-able before age five, but this raises important questions regarding the future of parenting and privacy. Is it okay for parents to share their kids online without their consent? I know tons of parents who have already made this choice (some even pick baby names based on domain name availability) and I often question whether kids will grow up feeling a little bit violated. I went through my phases of teen angst in middle school and I can only imagine what kind of backlash parents are going to feel when their teens come locked and loaded with statements like, “You put me on Youtube and my friends found the video! I hate you!”
With sites like baveo and totspot, which both offer social features for expecting parents, the rise of the digital fetus is certainly upon us. Hopefully for parents, it won’t mean the rise of the angry teen.
Are you a digital parent? If so, how do you decide what goes up on the web and what doesn’t?
The ROI of an Email
These days, everyone talks about the power of Twitter or Facebook, the wonders of Web 2.0 and its ability to connect the masses. However, what most people don’t realize is that the tools don’t do anything unless people have the guts to use them. More importantly, connections mean nothing unless you have the heart to cultivate them into relationships. For me, the real challenge is taking relationships and transforming them into community.
* * * * * *
Here’s an email that means more to me than any wall post, tweet, digg, or LinkedIn connection ever could or would (click to see it larger). 
Exactly one year ago from today, I met Maria Thurrell on the 66 bus going to Innman Square. I emailed her the night before on a whim, because something in me said I should find a new friend (not a Facebook friend, not a meet you once and never keep in touch friend, but a real friend, someone with an open heart, an active mind, and a compassionate ear).
Lucky for me, Maria is a compulsive email checker, and at 12:53 AM, the night before my first ever Social Media Breakfast, she agreed to meet me.
In a year, Maria has become one of my best friends. She’s a wonderful roommate, a loyal confidante, a fantastic shopping partner, an honest adviser, and a great source of support when I need it.
Looking back at the photos, check out the speakers I met for the first time that day: Laura Fitton, Doug Haslam, Jim Storer, and Scott Monty. Even better, check out who the sponsor was.
I’m sharing this anecdote not only because it happened a year ago from today, but because it actually demonstrates the real ROI of being social (yes, just social, no media).
On February 13, 2008, I met Maria, Laura, Doug, Jim, Scott, Aaron Strout, Bryan Person, Steve Garfield, Sandy Kalik, Shannon DiGregorio, Dave Fisher, Colin Browning, Susan Piver, Matt Searles, Andrea Mercado, and a whole slew of others that I don’t see in these photos. While they might not remember meeting me that day, I certainly remember meeting them all.
It should be noted that combined, @mathurrell (1,185) @pistachio (18,624), @dough (8,995), @jstorerj (2,323), @scottmonty (11,396), @aaronstrout (4,661), @bryanperson (4,812), @stevegarfield (8,927), @skalik (843), @sdigregorio (110), @tibbon (1,265), @crbrowning (1,620), @spiver (1,023), @mattsearles (854), and @andreamercado (1,057) have a combined Twitter following of 67,695. This means that I have the opportunity to reach out to each of these folks and ask them to retweet something I say or share. If all 15 retweet what I say, I just reached 67,695 people.
- Thought #1: Do we need to start measuring the value of our offline friendships if we consider them professional colleagues in the online space?
- Thought #2: Will businesses ever start taking into account the power of their employees’ networks?
- Thought #3: If we went into every social setting, looking to measure the online value of people we’re interacting with, wouldn’t we all just be assholes? (I’ve seen people do this at events and conferences was they approach “rock stars” in the industry. It’s actually nauseating. Lack of authenticity is always opaque in my eyes.)
As one lasting thought, as much as we can praise new technologies for their pretty UI’s and ability to scale our relationships, there are still some things like personal emails at 12 AM that do more for individuals than anyone could ever imagine. These things will never be measurable and they will never have a place in business. However, it doesn’t mean that they don’t matter. It’s these quiet moments, the ones that no one ever sees that I’ve concluded, are the real building blocks to creating community.
