I thought this article had a lot of good and relevant points that were communicated very well.  I liked the way that Jenkins used real world examples to illustrate the points he was making; it helped solidify his ideas.

I think Jenkins’ argument for why we should teach students how to use the media is very compelling and thorough, but one of my biggest questions that arose from reading the article has to do with the laizze faire approach Jenkins seems to points his finger at. Are the problems Jenkins points out really caused by a laizze faire approach?  I’m not sure I agree with him.   Is educating students about media literacy the same thing as imposing regulations?  Maybe I am just being nit-picky with his word usage and am taking it to far, but I feel like he is being a little biased.

In my opinion, the ethics problem Jenkins discusses is one of his most compelling points.  I think there are many similarities between the use of the Internet and driving. While driving we feel safe in our cars, and protected from all the strangers we are driving next to; this create a sense of isolation.  Because of this isolation we feel more anonymous; we are more likely to cut someone off or tailgate them.  In a face-to-face situation I think that most people would act in a much more polite and civilized manner because they are not isolated and anonymous from one another.  I believe the Internet causes this same dilemma. People become more anonymous under screen names, which seems to blur the lines of what ethical behavior should be.

I think it is important to help students understand this problem, as well as understand how to act in an ethical and civilized manner in a place where the appropriate actions are sometimes vague.