Example Of Online Risk And Harm Article Review

Definition and explanation of the key themes and concepts from the article. Include important concepts related to the issue.
The major theme the authors talk about is that of Internet skills or experience. According to them, this issue is multifaceted with many factors affecting the level of skill for children in different countries. They point out that apart from the original digital divide that sets apart countries with or without the sufficient internet services; there is also a concept of digital inequalities also referred to as the second-level digital divide. The divide is seemingly closing in terms of hardware devices and internet connections, but widening in inequalities in skills and usage. These differences trickle down to the relationships between skills and online risks experienced by children. The different types of internet skills such as instrumental skills, structural skills, and strategic skills are also touched on.
The concept of risk as far as the internet is concerned is a major issue in the article. The authors point out that online events and their consequences can be easily magnified with access to new contacts made easy. These characteristics are responsible for the online risks facing the children with an increased possibility of the risks leading to negative experiences.
The concept of harm is explained to occur when children using the internet get exposed to risks, which can sometimes produce harm. This possibility is limited in its extent since it is only a small percentage of children, for instance, who meet their online contacts personally.

What do the authors want us to know/learn? What is the author's purpose? Who is the intended audience?

The issue of children encountering online risks such as seeing sexual images, receiving sexual messages, meeting online contacts and being bullied online are on the rise. A limited extent of harm is reported to result from this. This is an issue the author sheds light on and seeks to explain the reasons behind its occurrence. The audience is wide, ranging from parents with children to school administrators, online servers and players in the child welfare sector.
Is the information in the article fact or opinion? (Facts can be verified, while opinions arise from interpretations of facts.) Does the information seem well-researched or is it unsupported?
The basis of their research is made up of facts as shown by the numerous numbers of citations, quotes and figures. This gives the information they give credibility due to the fact that it is not due to interpretation but from secondary sources that can be checked.
In their research, the authors have employed the required scientific method of data collection, analysis and presentation of the information. Their findings are given and supported by sensible tables and formulae. Therefore, the findings have and hence the information they give have facts and figure behind them.

What are the author's central arguments or conclusions? Are they clearly stated? Are they supported by research evidence and analysis?

The general view of the article was that internet skills were affected by a myriad of factors ranging from individual to parental and national issues. When these different characteristics taken into consideration during the analysis, some effect was felt on the relationships. Without controlling them, a negative relationship between self-reported digital skills and the degree of online risk experience was observed. But on controlling them, a positive relationship was observed between self-reported digital skills and the degree of online risk experience. This went on to prove the author's belief that that children with a higher level of self-reported internet skills encountered more internet risks.
Is the article lacking information or argumentation that you expected to find? What is lacking? If you agree with the authors, what do you agree on and why?
It is my view that the article has exhaustively covered the issue it was planned to. The authors have given extensive information on the issue of inequality of digital knowledge. This is evident in Europe, where studies show that children in Finland are most informed while those in Turkey have fewer skills.
Given the relationships and correlations between variables that the authors have given, I agree with their point of view that the level of internet skills has an effect on the nature and magnitude of risks and harm the online children face.

Is the author's language objective or charged with emotion and bias? Does the writer's style suit the intended audience?

It is my view that the author has maintained a desirable level of objectivity in the article. This is evident in the setup of the statements. Each argument is supported by facts and figures with a number of citations used.
In presenting the findings, they too are supported by figures and facts. The author does not show any kind of bias since the statements made are as a result of the analysis done on the collected data.
The article has been written well with the message being clear in the findings. The author makes reasonable relationships that can help the audience easily make out the meanings or the implications of the findings.
Does the article raise questions and issues that require discussion? Raise these with the class. Class involvement (e.g. questions and discussions, group work etc.)
The first issue the authors raise is that of methods to measure digital skills among people. This was a limitation to their study, and they go on to champion for the use of experimental tests instead of self-reports. According to them, this would reduce the levels of under- and overestimation that may lead to faulty conclusions about the actual impact of skills.
Another issue is the idea of empowerment through digital skills. This is an approach being championed for by many quarters and seen as a positive in many aspects. The problem though as the authors point out; lie in the findings that show skilled children are not necessarily safer in an online environment than less skilled children. Skepticism about that approach, therefore, increases.
Additionally, the author brings up the debate of benefits of increased internet skills versus s risks involved in the same. On one side, it is easy for children to be informed and take advantages of opportunities that come up online. The other side is the harms that await online children such as sexual abuse and bullying. The debate about which side to take, therefore, is up for discussion. Some may choose to concentrate on the benefits of internet skills and argue that they outweigh the risk. Others may argue that the risk are too much to be ignored and that they overshadow the benefits. It all depends on the outlook of the individual.

References

Sonck, N., & de Haan, J. (2013). How The Internet Skills Of European 11-To 16-Year-Olds Mediate Between Online Risk And Harm. Journal of Children and Media, 7(1), 79-95.