The Pew Internet Research Center has just released results from a study they did on sexting behavior.

"The desire for risk-taking and sexual exploration during the teenage years combined with a constant connection via mobile devices creates a 'perfect storm' for sexting," said Lenhart. "Teenagers have always grappled with issues around sex and relationships, but their coming-of-age mistakes and transgressions have never been so easily transmitted and archived for others to see."

In this article on cyber-bulling and sexting, the author speaks straight from the socio-technical school of thought:

There are two schools of thought about how to treat sexting and its more broadly defined cousin, cyber-bullying, which covers everything from hate e-mail to nasty MySpace postings. One is that it's a mistake to focus on the technology at issue, because the hype about it obscures the underlying, long-term trouble: Kids can be incredibly cruel to each other in all kinds of ways. The Internet and the cell phone are just their latest tools. The tactics for addressing cyber-bullying should be the same as the tactics for reducing bullying of all kinds: teach kids to empathize and make sure they have a trustworthy adult to talk to if trouble is brewing.

This makes sense to me. But it's also clear that e-mails and texts and social media have some traits of their own, as the writer danah boyd explains. The bar for becoming a cyber-bully, or even a cyber-bully's accomplice, is much lower than the bar for becoming an actual bully. To torment a girl with a nude photo via sexting, you don't have to Xerox her photo and pass it around, or yell a taunt in the cafeteria, or even whisper about it over the phone, explains Robert King, a psychiatrist at the Yale Child Study Center. You can just press one button and forward the message to lots of other kids. And then those kids, one more step removed from the human being at the center of the flaying, can catch the contagion and spread it.

In other words, it's both the social context <i>and</i> the physical properties of the technology that matter.

Cory Doctorow has an excellent take on the hype surrounding cloud computing.  Doctorow's analysis shows that technological determinism remains alive and well in popular discourse about technology:

The tech press is full of people who want to tell you how completely awesome life is going to be when everything moves to "the cloud" - that is, when all your important storage, processing and other needs are handled by vast, professionally managed data-centres.

Here's something you won't see mentioned, though: the main attraction of the cloud to investors and entrepreneurs is the idea of making money from you, on a recurring, perpetual basis, for something you currently get for a flat rate or for free without having to give up the money or privacy that cloud companies hope to leverage into fortunes.

The Wall Street Journal online edition has an article about how parents are using Facebook and other social networking websites to track their childrens' activities, how children respond to that form of surveillance and even create a term "helicopter parents."

As a social informaticist I find the article interesting as an example of how the use of technology is socially shaped, and how all technologies come with unintended consequences.

As a parent I'm a little creeped out.

Exploring the web, I came across this website. The site is dedicated to hawking the wares of a Marcus P. Zillman and he's co-opted the term 'social informatics' for precisely that purpose.  An obvious reason to exclude Mr. Zillman from your consideration as a commentor on social informatics is that there is not a single bona fide social informatics resource listed on his social informatics resource page.

If you're curious about social informatics research, two better places to start are The Rob Kling Center fo Social Informatics and Wikipedia