-
People have been using media
to talk about sex for a long time.
-
Love letters, phone sex, racy Polaroids.
-
There's even a story of a girl who eloped
with a man that she met over the telegraph
-
in 1886.
-
Today we have sexting,
and I am a sexting expert.
-
Not an expect sexter.
-
Though, I do know what this means --
I think you do too.
-
[it's a penis]
-
(Laughter)
-
I have been studying sexting since
the media attention to it began in 2008.
-
I wrote a book on the moral
panic about sexting.
-
And here's what I found:
-
most people are worrying
about the wrong thing.
-
They're trying to just prevent
sexting from happening entirely.
-
But let me ask you this:
-
As long as it's completely consensual,
what's the problem with sexting?
-
People are into all sorts of things
that you may not be into,
-
like blue cheese or cilantro.
-
(Laughter)
-
Sexting is certainly risky,
like anything that's fun,
-
but as long as you're not sending an image
to someone who doesn't want to receive it,
-
there's no harm.
-
What I do think is a serious problem
-
is when people share
private images of others
-
without their permission.
-
And instead of worrying about sexting,
-
what I think we need to do
is think a lot more about digital privacy.
-
The key is consent.
-
Right now most people
are thinking about sexting
-
without really thinking
about consent at all.
-
Did you know that we currently
criminalize teen sexting?
-
It can be a crime because
it counts as child pornography,
-
if there's an image of someone under 18,
-
and it doesn't even matter
-
if they took that image of themselves
and shared it willingly.
-
So we end up with this
bizarre legal situation
-
where two 17-year-olds
can legally have sex in most US states
-
but they can't photograph it.
-
Some states have also tried
passing sexting misdemeanor laws
-
but these laws repeat the same problem
-
because they still
make consensual sexting illegal.
-
It doesn't make sense
-
to try to ban all sexting
to try to address privacy violations.
-
This is kind of like saying,
-
let's solve the problem of date rape
by just making dating completely illegal.
-
Most teens don't get arrested for sexting,
but can you guess who does?
-
It's often teens who are disliked
by their partner's parents.
-
And this can be because of class bias,
racism or homophobia.
-
Most prosecutors are,
of course, smart enough
-
not to use child pornography charges
against teenagers, but some do.
-
According to researchers
at the University of New Hampshire
-
seven percent of all child pornography
possession arrests are teens,
-
sexting consensually with other teens.
-
Child pornography is a serious crime,
-
but it's just not
the same thing as teen sexting.
-
Parents and educators
are also responding to sexting
-
without really thinking
too much about consent.
-
Their message to teens is often:
just don't do it.
-
And I totally get it --
there are serious legal risks
-
and of course, that potential
for privacy violations.
-
And when you were a teen,
-
I'm sure you did exactly
as you were told, right?
-
You're probably thinking,
my kid would never sext.
-
And that's true, your little angel
may not be sexting
-
because only 33%
-
of 16- and 17-year-olds are sexting.
-
But, sorry, by the time they're older,
odds are they will be sexting.
-
Every study I've seen puts the rate
above 50% for 18- to 24-year-olds.
-
And most of the time, nothing goes wrong.
-
People ask me all the time things like,
isn't sexting just so dangerous, though?
-
It's like you wouldn't
leave your wallet on a park bench
-
and you expect it's gonna get stolen
if you do that, right?
-
Here's how I think about it:
-
sexting is like leaving your wallet
at your boyfriend's house.
-
If you come back the next day
-
and all the money is just gone,
-
you really need to dump that guy.
-
So instead of criminalizing sexting
-
to try to prevent
these privacy violations,
-
instead we need to make consent central
-
to how we think about the circulation
of our private information.
-
Every new media technology
raises privacy concerns.
-
In fact, in the US the very first
major debates about privacy
-
were in response to technologies
that were relatively new at the time.
-
In the late 1800s,
people were worried about cameras,
-
which were just suddenly
more portable than ever before,
-
and newspaper gossip columns.
-
They were worried that the camera
would capture information about them,
-
take it out of context
and widely disseminate it.
-
Does this sound familiar?
-
It's exactly what we're worrying about
now with social media and drone cameras,
-
and, of course, sexting.
-
And these fears about technology,
-
they make sense
-
because technologies
can amplify and bring out
-
our worst qualities and behaviors.
-
But there are solutions.
-
And we've been here before
with a dangerous new technology.
-
In 1908, Ford introduced the Model T car.
-
Traffic fatality rates were rising.
-
It was a serious problem --
it looks so safe, right?
-
Our first response
was to try to change drivers' behavior,
-
so we developed speed limits
and enforced them through fines.
-
But over the following decades,
-
we started to realize the technology
of the car itself is not just neutral.
-
We could design the car to make it safer.
-
So in the 1920s, we got
shatter-resistant windshields.
-
In the 1950s, seat belts.
-
And in the 1990s, airbags.
-
All three of these areas:
-
laws, individuals and industry
came together over time
-
to help solve the problem
that a new technology causes.
-
And we can do the same thing
with digital privacy.
-
Of course, it comes back to consent.
-
Here's the idea.
-
Before anyone can distribute
your private information,
-
they should have to get your permission.
-
This idea of affirmative consent
comes from antirape activists
-
who tell us that we need consent
for every sexual act.
-
And we have really high standards
for consent in a lot of other areas.
-
Think about having surgery.
-
Your doctor has to make sure
-
that you are meaningfully and knowingly
consenting to that medical procedure.
-
This is not the type of consent
like with an iTunes Terms of Service
-
where you just scroll to the bottom
and you're like, agree, agree, whatever.
-
(Laughter)
-
If we think more about consent,
we can have better privacy laws.
-
Right now, we just don't have
that many protections.
-
If your ex-husband or your ex-wife
is a terrible person,
-
they can take your nude photos
and upload them to a porn site.
-
It can be really hard
to get those images taken down.
-
And in a lot of states,
-
you're actually better off
if you took the images of yourself
-
because then you can
file a copyright claim.
-
(Laughter)
-
Right now, if someone
violates your privacy,
-
whether that's an individual
or a company or the NSA,
-
you can try filing a lawsuit,
-
though you may not be successful
-
because many courts assume
that digital privacy is just impossible.
-
So they're not willing
to punish anyone for violating it.
-
I still hear people
asking me all the time,
-
isn't a digital image somehow blurring
the line between public and private
-
because it's digital, right?
-
No! No!
-
Everything digital
is not just automatically public.
-
That doesn't make any sense.
-
As NYU legal scholar
Helen Nissenbaum tells us,
-
we have laws and policies and norms
-
that protect all kinds
of information that's private,
-
and it doesn't make a difference
if it's digital or not.
-
All of your health records are digitized
-
but your doctor can't
just share them with anyone.
-
All of your financial information
is held in digital databases,
-
but your credit card company can't
just post your purchase history online.
-
Better laws could help address
privacy violations after they happen,
-
but one of the easiest things
we can all do is make personal changes
-
to help protect each other's privacy.
-
We're always told that privacy
-
is our own, sole,
individual responsibility.
-
We're told, constantly monitor
and update your privacy settings.
-
We're told, never share anything
you wouldn't want the entire world to see.
-
This doesn't make sense.
-
Digital media are social environments
-
and we share things
with people we trust all day, every day.
-
As Princeton researcher
Janet Vertesi argues,
-
our data and our privacy,
they're not just personal,
-
they're actually interpersonal.
-
And so one thing you can do
that's really easy
-
is just start asking for permission before
you share anyone else's information.
-
If you want to post a photo
of someone online, ask for permission.
-
If you want to forward an email thread,
-
ask for permission.
-
And if you want to share
someone's nude selfie,
-
obviously, ask for permission.
-
These individual changes can really
help us protect each other's privacy,
-
but we need technology companies
on board as well.
-
These companies have very little
incentive to help protect our privacy
-
because their business models
depend on us sharing everything
-
with as many people as possible.
-
Right now, if I send you an image,
-
you can forward that
to anyone that you want.
-
But what if I got to decide
if that image was forwardable or not?
-
This would tell you, you don't
have my permission to send this image out.
-
We do this kind of thing all the time
to protect copyright.
-
If you buy an e-book, you can't just
send it out to as many people as you want.
-
So why not try this with mobile phones?
-
What you can do is we can demand
that tech companies add these protections
-
to our devices and our platforms
as the default.
-
After all, you can choose
the color of your car,
-
but the airbags are always standard.
-
If we don't think more
about digital privacy and consent,
-
there can be serious consequences.
-
There was a teenager from Ohio --
-
let's call her Jennifer,
for the sake of her privacy.
-
She shared nude photos of herself
with her high-school boyfriend,
-
thinking she could trust him.
-
Unfortunately, he betrayed her
-
and sent her photos
around the entire school.
-
Jennifer was embarrassed and humiliated,
-
but instead of being compassionate,
her classmates harassed her.
-
They called her a slut and a whore
-
and they made her life miserable.
-
Jennifer started missing school
and her grades dropped.
-
Ultimately, Jennifer decided
to end her own life.
-
Jennifer did nothing wrong.
-
All she did was share a nude photo
-
with someone she thought
that she could trust.
-
And yet our laws tell her
-
that she committed a horrible crime
equivalent to child pornography.
-
Our gender norms tell her
-
that by producing
this nude image of herself,
-
she somehow did the most
horrible, shameful thing.
-
And when we assume that privacy
is impossible in digital media,
-
we completely write off and excuse
her boyfriend's bad, bad behavior.
-
People are still saying all the time
to victims of privacy violations,
-
"What were you thinking?
-
You should have never sent that image."
-
If you're trying to figure out
what to say instead, try this.
-
Imagine you've run into your friend
who broke their leg skiing.
-
They took a risk to do something fun
and it didn't end well.
-
But you're probably
not going to be the jerk who says,
-
"Well, I guess you shouldn't
have gone skiing then."
-
If we think more about consent,
-
we can see that victims
of privacy violations
-
deserve our compassion,
-
not criminalization, shaming,
harassment, or punishment.
-
We can support victims
and we can prevent some privacy violations
-
by making these legal,
individual and technological changes.
-
Because the problem is not sexting,
the issue is digital privacy.
-
And one solution is consent.
-
So the next time a victim
of a privacy violation comes up to you,
-
instead of blaming them,
let's do this instead:
-
Let's shift our ideas
about digital privacy
-
and let's respond with compassion.
-
Thank you.
-
(Applause)