MediaSmarts is a Canadian not-for-profit charitable organization for digital and media literacy. Provides children and youth with the critical thinking skills to engage with media as active and informed digital citizens. Includes Privacy Pirates and other digital citizenship interactives.
Users forfeit the ownership of their user data to Google.
Google’s purpose was clearly to “provide identity in a commerce-ready way. And to give them information about what you do on the Internet, without obfuscation of pseudonyms.
obvious search-related rationale for launching a social network like Google+, since indexing and mining that kind of activity can help the company provide better “social search” results. But the real-name issue has more to do with Google’s other business: namely, advertising.
The growth of Google+ provides a reason for people to create Google profiles, and that data — along with their activity on the network and through +1 buttons — goes into the vast Google cyberplex where it can be crunched and indexed and codified in a hundred different ways
excludes potentially valuable viewpoints that might be expressed by political dissidents and others who prefer to remain anonymous. In effect, Schmidt said Google isn’t interested in changing its policies to accommodate those kinds of users: if people want to remain anonymous, he said, then they shouldn’t use Google+.
the reason Google needs users with real names is that the company sees Google+ as the core of an identity platform it is building that can be used for other things:
n identity service, so fundamentally, it depends on people using their real names if they’re going to build future products that leverage that information
YouTube's policies
How to report content on YouTube
How to protect their privacy online
How to be responsible YouTube community members
How to be responsible digital citizens
“Our purpose is to remove the friction in the deployment of technology in the classroom,” CEO Iwan Streichenberger told me at the conference. “It’s not very exciting, but if you don’t have plumbing you can’t have appliances.”
In July, 2011, the AASL Board approved the Position Statement on Labeling Books with Reading Levels. The AASL position statement defines standard directional spine labels and compares them to reading level labels (associated with computerized reading programs) as they are often applied in school libraries. The statement also offers suggestions for concerned librarians to be aware not only of the possible negative effects of these labels on children as they browse, but also offers suggestions for voicing those concerns.
There are proponents and opponents to how computerized reading programs are implemented in schools and their effects on school library collections and students' free access to books of their choice. A school librarian (name withheld) shares this story of how labels affect students' choices in her school.
"Recently I helped a student who came to me while his class was in the library browsing. As the librarian of a middle school library, I often see situations such as this one. The boy had been most recently reading about George Washington and Ben Franklin. His class assignment that day was to checkout two computerized reading program books within his tested reading level and thus was "allowed" only one free choice book. "But I'd rather not have to check out labeled books and there are some books I'd like today that don't have the dots or reading level labels on the backs of the books. Does that mean Ican't check them out?" he asks me.
The boy went on to say that he'd rather be allowed to check out three books on his favorite non-fiction topics, regardless of reading level. As he expresses his frustration, he lowers his voice and moves toward a corner of the library where there are no other students. "I'm a pretty good reader," he said quietly, "and I really like reading about the American Revolution. But I have to stay within a certain range. I can't find many books in my reading level that are really interest