The Lifeworld of Youth in the Information Society (Youth & Society 2011, 43:549)

Morimoto and Friedland suggest that the lifeworld of youth is media saturated. That you cannot separate media related activities, with everyday activities. Their friends, family, and mediated networks are not neatly divided in "real life" and "virtual" social activities. Media is integral to their lives, and this can have far reaching consequences.

"Through life increasingly mediated and lived online, the pressures of a risk society lead young people to attempt to mitigate their risk. Accordingly, young people individually seek increased information in ever faster cycles, with steadily decreasing structural support from government and social support through traditional groupings of family and friends ... Moreover, this generates a cycle where networked life makes individual resources and information increasing exposure to risk of all sorts. These forces emerge in tension creating an important paradox: the simultaneous risk of too much information (overload) and too little information (fragmented or incomplete information)" (Morimoto and Friedland, Youth & Society 2011, 43:557).

What the authors are trying to say is that the Internet and media make information easily accessible on the one hand, but at the same time these individual resources have become so important that if you lack them - you are at a serious disadvantage. This disadvantage can play out when negotiating economic risk, and is also related to race relationships. In the article they discuss this in-depth. I would like to focus on a related argument they make, which is relevant to my work with youth.

"Because youth are networked, structural barriers seem less constraining and communities are formed more fluidly. At the same time, however, young people (of all races) are less likely to engage in conventional political causes, promote social change, or join social movement organizations ... This leaves young people to forge their own opportunities within networks where obstacles are difficult to see." (ibid:561).

Hmmm... so does this mean that the online communities have become barriers to "traditional" social/political groups? But at the same time these online communities provide a means to create their own social change movements within these mediated networks. A paradox, again.

This summer, thirty youth will travel across the country doing community work and activities related to diversity, conflict & resolution, human rights, and sustainability (find us on facebook: CISV C2C Peace Bus). During this 36-day trip I, as a leader, would like to explore this paradox with my participants. How can we use social media to inform, inspire, and educate people about what we do? How can we do it so we do not end up spending more time in the virtual world, rather then connecting with the communities and people we visit? How do we integrate media in our lives so it becomes an organic part of our networks? How do we prevent our accomplishment in peace education being dependent on social media? Or is it too late for that?

Do we measure our success in the facebook group page visits we get? Or does our sense of fulfilment originate in meaningful conversations we have with strangers-turned-friends?

"Those concerned with youth have a special interest in finding and stimulating new modes of developing boundary-spanning behavior on the web." (ibid:562).

Tell me about it...