Now, how do you define “media literacy?”

The definition, and our associated opinions, no doubt vary widely, based on our own experiences, knowledge and prejudices:

Specifically what kind of literacy is being measured? Let’s see the effect on SAT reading and writing scores. Let’s see book sales data demographically.

On the one hand, I believe distractions were always an issue, and the internet has shifted, rather than created them. But on the other, to say it is a benefit, well let’s just see who the sponsors of this study were. It may be a little bit like the medical studies spouting the benefits of chocolate that were found to be funded by Hershey’s and the like.

— Dennis L, New York City (courtesy of NYT community comments)

There is a major disconnect occurring between those who understand the value of the web, media literacy and the future of technology; and those who don’t. This is clearly depicted by the comments made in response to the recent NYT article, Teenagers’ Internet Socializing Not a Bad Thing.

For those of us who are informed, we have a responsibility to aid in the guidance of youth as they navigate the array of skills they are accumulating, but who’s going  to guide the adults?

And better yet, how? Media literacy curriculum for parents is dramatically different then media literacy for kids, and education for scholars and corporations are other potentially independent categories. In order to cultivate understanding we must encourage this ever-increasing group of digital natives to think critically and participate mindfully, but that only gets us halfway there; we need to equally allocate literacy among a much broader, and feasibly more challenging, group of constituents.

For more of the community comments, click here.