Jessica Haney | Jan. 28, 2010
 |
| Photo by Jessica Haney |
| Assistant professor Hans Ibold explained his current research at a colloquium Wednesday. He’s exploring the implications of technology and media literacy on citizenship and participation. |
Assistant professor Hans Ibold presented his latest research, “Tracking the Moving Target of New Media Literacy: A Concept Explication,” Wednesday in the Ernie Pyle Lounge as a part of the School of Journalism Research Colloquium series. He is the second researcher to share his work this semester in this new project to provide a venue to present current work for the feedback of colleagues.
Ibold discussed the conceptual meanings of new media literacy and the implications it has on society, emphasizing the role of youth, citizenship, and participation.
But what is media literacy?
“I don’t think we know exactly what we mean when we say media literacy,” said Ibold, adding that the rapid change in the way information is interpreted means that the definition is subject to change, too. The 1992 National Leadership Conference on Media Literacy called it the ability to access, analyze, evaluate and communicate messages in a variety of forms.
“We don’t have to be just passive receivers,” said Ibold. “The integration of all this media requires new skills.”
Younger generations have been particularly apt to harness these skills through social networking, viral videos and constant use of mobile devices. Ibold said it is important to pay attention to how young people use the Internet to negotiate their identities.
“The purpose of media literacy should encourage young people in particular to jump into the participatory culture,” said Ibold.
New media literacy is no longer just a response to media, but an engagement with the information.
“Participation is crucial,” said Ibold, and it brings up a whole new discussion about citizenship. “These tools are changing the way groups come together.”
Nicky Lewis, a telecommunications graduate student, was interested in Ibold’s talk because of her experience educating 8- to 18-year-old workshop campers about new media.
“In looking at the youth perspective, I think he’s on the right track,” said Lewis, “There’s a whole generation of kids who don’t know how to put their cell phones away.”
Lewis sees a potential problem with this.
“The concept of authority may become blurred,” she said, but that’s why her camp aimed to educate young people about the power and consequences of media before they create it.
Ibold said that new media has not had much leeway in the classroom because it clashes with some core journalistic principles, like credibility.
“On one hand it’s a blessing, and on the other hand, it’s a curse,” added Ralph Winslow Visiting Professor Jim Bright.
Ibold still is refining his research. For one, he wants to explore how these conceptual meanings of new media literacy connect to actual operational use. And he wants to further his discussion on whether new media literacy is more focused on citizenship or cultivating an identity.
“We need to start thinking, as journalism educators, what new media literacy is,” said Ibold. “It’s an exciting and important area.”
Check out the listing for the rest of the colloquium speakers.
Questions? Comments? Email the Web editor.
