Addressing youths’ digital agency with internet technologies: discourses and practices that produce inequalities

ABSTRACT

This study approached the issue of youths’ digital agency by analyzing the ways in which youths talk about their use of Internet technologies for recreational purposes outside of school. Using interview data from young people (n = 28) born in 2005 and 2006, this paper approaches youths’ speech as culturally embedded discourses that express their strategies for making their digital practices understandable and acceptable to adults. By doing so, the paper addresses the need for ongoing research that explores youths’ digital engagement with Internet technologies within a wider social context that positions them as ‘digital natives’. The study results were organized into 11 discourses under four themes: benefits, harms and risks, person-based networking, and Internet skills. The identified discourses reflect the ways in which young people articulate and negotiate their digital agency with social norms, assumptions and expectations of them as tech-savvy youths. By focusing on youths’ speech and discourses, this study advances current research on digital inequalities among young people. It also highlights the need for young people to be supported and empowered in developing skills that enable critical and safe engagements with Internet technologies.

KEYWORDS:

• Digital agency
• digital natives
• youths
• discourses
• Internet technologies
• gender inequalities

Introduction

The Internet, smartphones and social network websites have significantly changed society and everyday life in a short period of time, creating a new environment for young people to participate in novel activities, interact, influence and network with each other, build their identity, and stimulate social change. Youths’ relationship with Internet technologies has always been complex (boyd 2014), marked by intergenerational conflict (Prensky 2001) and so-called moral panic (Drotner 1999). Young people have been labelled ‘digital natives’ due to their supposed innate tech-savviness, anchored in their widespread exposure to Internet technologies (Prensky 2001). Even though this label has been criticized due to its weak empirical foundations (see, e.g. Bennett and Maton 2010; Bennett, Maton, and Kervin 2008; Helsper and Eynon 2010), the discussion about youths’ relationship with Internet technologies is still pervaded by the assumption that they are technological pioneers and that a digital divide exists between them and older generations (Mertala et al. 2024).

This study combined the so-called ‘digital natives’ debate with research on socio-digital inequalities to draw attention to the importance of studying youths’ speech about their uses of Internet technologies in order to advance our understanding of their differential experiences of digital learning, networking, and associated benefits, as well as their exposure to online risks. Finland serves as an excellent research context for examining youths’ digital agency in recreational pursuits outside of school, as Finnish youths have a remarkable capacity to acquire, produce and evaluate information, according to international comparisons (Leino et al. 2019). Furthermore, Internet technologies are firmly embedded in the everyday life of Finnish children and young people, with the vast majority having access to a smartphone or computer at an early age (Salasuo 2021; Salasuo, Merikivi, and Myllyniemi 2019). Compared to other European countries, in Finland, children and youths are considered to be more experienced in online social networking (see Helsper, Kalmus, and Hasebrink 2013). Yet, even amongst Finnish youths, socio-digital inequalities persist, specifically related to gender and socio-economic status (Leino et al. 2019).

The ‘digital natives’ debate and socio-digital inequalities

The concept of ‘digital natives’ (Prensky 2001) has given rise to a debate over the existence of a presumed tech-savvy generation of youths whose expertise in online communication, interaction and networking has been attributed to being raised during an era in which the Internet and social media have become nearly ubiquitous. The second aspect of the debate has been centred around the intergenerational gap between ‘digital natives’ and older generations, who are considered to be less technologically literate (Prensky 2001). This intergenerational gap has lent credibility to fears and anxieties expressed by adults – often defined as moral panic – about the pace and scope of technological change and its perceived negative impact on children and young people (Drotner 1999). Moral panic, which, in this context, can be characterized as moralizing reactions to youths’ use of technologies, is often used by adults to exercise social control over their children in order to guide them towards a preferred behaviour (Drotner 1999, 614–615). Mackinnon and Shade (2020) argued that moral panic about youths’ presumed problematic relationship with Internet technologies detracts from discussions about technology producers and their responsibility for persuasive design, such as push notifications, ‘like’ buttons, and streaks.

Most importantly, the perception of youths as ‘digital natives’ has failed to recognize and address the complex variations in young people’s abilities to benefit from Internet technologies and protect themselves from potential online risks (Helsper 2021; Helsper and Eynon 2010). Yet, research indicates that even among youths, the skills necessary to fully draw on opportunities offered by Internet technologies are not evenly distributed (Hargittai and Micheli 2019; Helsper, Kalmus, and Hasebrink 2013; Selwyn 2009). Socio-economic and demographic factors continue to impact distinct variations in skills and Internet usage patterns among young people, resulting in digital inequalities often mirroring existing social stratifications (Helsper 2021; Leino et al. 2019).

Specifically, gender is an important factor that shapes the way young people engage with Internet technologies. Notably, girls and boys often exhibit gender-specific interests in their online activities. Many boys use the Internet for fun, gaming and sports-related content, whereas many girls tend to focus on following celebrities and exploring topics related to fashion and cosmetics (Borca et al. 2015). Boys also often engage in content creation and online posting, while girls typically demonstrate a preference for communication-oriented platforms, emphasizing social relationships (Livingstone and Helsper 2007). Concerns about privacy and online safety are important for both girls and boys, yet managing online safety and privacy is challenging, especially due to the tendency for social network sites to favour public sharing (boyd 2014, 54–76; Marwick and boyd 2014). Furthermore, while boys are more likely to engage in risky online activities (Notte and Nikken 2016), girls are more likely to be targeted for their weight, appearance or sexuality in online spaces (Berne, Frisen, and Kling 2014).

The abovementioned gender inequalities are important in light of the transformative impact of Internet technologies on communication and networking, which have shifted from being anchored in physical locations or social membership to being more personalized and networked. This change has cultivated what Rainie and Wellman (2012) called ‘networked individualism’, according to which individuals are expected to function as networked individuals, managing and maintaining various connections, relationships and resources independently amidst the constantly evolving landscape of Internet technologies. This shift towards ‘networked individualism’ has empowered individuals with greater autonomy to satisfy their social needs through access to online communities with like-minded others and to build peer networks flexibly drawing on online and face-to-face networks and activities. However, embodying the role of networked individuals also presents challenges, including possible anxieties related to continuous connection and the substantial requirements of time, skills and energy needed to cultivate positive digital experiences (Rainie and Wellman 2012, 6–11).

Building upon the aforementioned research, this study underscores the importance of youths’ discursive resources in comprehending the nuances of their digital agency and the accompanying inequalities related to the challenges and benefits of ‘networked individualism’ for youths. In this article, ‘discourse’ (Foucault 1972) is conceptualized as a socio-culturally produced way of talking through which individuals imbue reality with meaning. Youths internalize discourses and actively produce them in social interactions. Drawing on earlier work on digital agency (see, e.g. Passey et al. 2018), digital agency is defined here as the capacity to critically and safely navigate the Internet, enabling youths to express themselves, seize opportunities offered by Internet technologies, and safeguard themselves against potential online harm, often negotiating and challenging existing social norms and structures. Thus, this article focuses on youths’ speech to identify the discourses they use to articulate, negotiate and confront widespread assumptions and expectations of them as ‘digital natives’ in order to create space for and acceptance of their own digital engagement with Internet technologies.

Methodology

This article is based on a research project focused on studying digital inequalities among 9th-grade Finnish students aged 15-16.¹ These youths belong to Generation Z (born 1995–2012) – the first generation with widespread access to Internet technologies at a very young age – and were therefore considered to be exposed to the cultural perception that they are ‘digital natives’. The findings presented in this article were based on an analysis of the interview data, which were collected in 2021–2022, and comprised 6 pair interviews, 16 individual interviews and 2 group interviews. Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, all of the interviews were conducted on a digital platform. Thematically, the interviews focused on a range of topics related to young people’s use of digital devices and services.

In total, 28 interviewees were interviewed in locations representative of a growing city (n = 9) or a small industrial town (n = 19). Of the interviewees, 14 identified themselves as women, 13 as men and 1 as other gender. The interviewed youths represented a relatively privileged segment of the Finnish youth population in terms of their urban upbringing, socio-economic status, access to Internet technologies and skills. The social network sites and instant messaging applications most favoured by the interviewees were Snapchat, YouTube, TikTok, WhatsApp, Discord and Instagram. All of the interviewees admitted to engaging in content and sharing activities, such as posting photos and liking or commenting on others’ posts, although the majority admitted to doing so on an irregular basis.

Thematic discourse analysis was conducted on the data (Braun and Clarke 2006) and was guided by two research questions: (1) How do young people, in their speech, make their use of Internet technologies understandable and acceptable, and (2) What manifestations of digital agency and inequalities are conveyed in youths’ speech? The data analysis began by inductively reading and coding the interview data. This resulted in a three-level coding structure, encompassing overarching themes of Internet use, utilized digital devices and their respective purposes, along with an extensive array of codes delineating various styles of talking. Following this, the coded material was examined with respect to the theoretical framework, leading to the identification of four facets of digital agency: awareness of potential benefits, harms and risks, person-based networking and Internet skills. These emerged as the dominant overarching themes, with other, secondary codes classified as discourses nested within them. Subsequently, a focused thematic discourse analysis was performed, focusing specifically on the second – and third-level codes, to identify and discuss the prevailing discourses. Particular attention was paid to what the interviewees said and how they said it, as well as how their speech was related to broader cultural assumptions, structures and meanings linked to youths. Finally, the content of the identified discourses was evaluated for insights into digital agency and socio-digital inequalities.

Findings

The study underscored the importance of four facets of digital agency – (1) benefits, (2) harms and risks, (3) person-based networking, and (4) Internet skills – that were prominently featured in the youths’ speech. These facets are further detailed through the exploration of 11 overlapping discourses that highlight the youths’ abilities to critically engage with Internet technologies and to safely navigate the Internet.

I benefits

Three discourses – namely that of usefulness, entertainment and rest, and safety – illustrate the youths’ multifaceted engagement with Internet technologies, which follows culturally accepted and valued forms of digital interaction, as perceived not only by the youths themselves but perhaps, more importantly, by their parents. This theme underscores the youths’ deliberate, proactive and purposeful efforts to capitalize on the opportunities created by Internet technologies, all within the presumably accepted norms surrounding screen time.

Usefulness

The discourse of usefulness highlighted the interviewees’ subjective use of Internet technologies to engage in activities perceived as culturally valued and expected of youths by themselves or by their parents. This discourse emerged during reflections by the interviewees on their own digital practices or on comments directed at them by their parents. In this discourse, emphasis was placed on purposeful and goal-oriented acts of properly using Internet technologies for capital-enhancing activities (see also Kimm and Boase 2021).

‘I have been playing [a game] where I can learn languages. I’ve used it quite a lot, because I’ve wanted to use the social media time for something useful’. Helena

‘If I do something from which I can learn something when, for example, I search for information, then this is useful’. Joel

The discourse of usefulness also underscored the increased importance of the Internet and its technologies amongst youths in general (see also boyd 2014; Salasuo 2021, 59–69). The interviewees, including Helena and Joel, mentioned a wide range of activities they considered to be ‘useful’, which were related to schoolwork or self-studying (e.g. learning foreign languages), acquiring information about current or future educational or professional plans, keeping up with the news and world events, assisting relatives in using digital devices, communicating with schoolmates, relatives and friends, as well as making new friends and finding online communities.

‘In my opinion, any kind of online educational materials are useful activities, and, if you just browse videos from somewhere, then these perhaps are not so useful’. Risto

‘My parents always emphasize that I should be doing something useful if I do it on the Internet’. Tessa

Even though these useful activities were sometimes time-consuming, they were not perceived as burdensome nor accompanied by a bad conscience. Useful activities were also often contrasted with less useful, purposeless or wasteful activities, such as browsing the Internet or social network sites. At times, the interviewees’ accounts were imbued with a defensive or moralizing tone, suggesting that they had internalized adults’ moral panic about useful and sensible uses of Internet technologies (see also Drotner 1999).

Entertainment and rest

This discourse covered the interviewed youths’ justification of their use of Internet technologies for online activities focused on entertaining, enjoyable content, escaping from offline life, and cultivating or propagating a positive mood. This discourse was free of the pressure to be efficient or purposeful.

This discourse also included online activities such as watching programmes, series and movies, chatting with friends through various instant messaging apps, showcasing creative work, listening to music, discussing hobbies, playing online games, and following politicians, celebrities or other interesting people, groups or topics. It was also characterized by rather neutral language about smartphones as fully equipped hubs of entertainment. Focus was placed on positive emotions and relaxation, such as laughter, fun and joy, as one interviewee explained:

‘If I find something funny online, then I just want to share it with probably 10 people to show how funny it is’. Jimi

Additionally, for some interviewees, the Internet represented another universe to which they could escape from difficult or burdensome responsibilities of the offline environment. In this sense, the Internet might serve as a means to kill time, fill emotional voids and feel comfortable. For example, Tessa and Jarkko described how they relied on the Internet to escape from the empty, troublesome or boring moments of everyday life, to find excitement and to fulfil their social needs:

‘I have several friends online. It is maybe an escape from real life (…) at the moment, it [online world] is an escape from coronavirus and other things, so that I can shift my thoughts somewhere else, so that I do not have to worry all the time’. Tessa

‘Well, it is a sort of other universe where you can escape if reality is a bit of a miserable place; then there is this other place, sort of another universe where you talk to people and meet new people’. Jarkko

Listening to music for entertainment and rest was also common. Yet, much like radio for older generations (Alasuutari 1996, 110), listening to music was frequently paired with offline activities and was therefore regarded as a secondary activity by the interviewees.

Safety talk

This discourse emerged in only a few interviews and was related to a feeling of safety provided by either carrying a smartphone or being included and respected in online communities in which the interviewees’ sense of belonging and acceptance was fulfilled.

A few interviewees, such as Alina and Tessa, regarded phones as providing safety in case of an emergency when they were away from home. This perspective was also reported in previous studies to be an important motivator for parents to give their children smartphones despite their concerns over the potentially negative consequences associated with these devices (Noppari 2014, 24).

‘Sometimes I feel insecure [without a phone] as it enables me to be in touch with others in case of emergency. Thus, when I go hiking, it is with me just for safety reasons’. Tessa

‘Well if I go out to the yard, I do not take it [the phone], but if I go little further, then I do take it just for safety reasons’. Alina

Another element of safety attributed to Internet technologies in this discourse pertained to access to online communities, which were viewed as an isolated, private and thus safe ‘cocoon-like-environment’ (Ito, Okabe, and Anderson 2009, 70–76). In such online communities, the feeling of safety was linked by the interviewees to experiences of equal treatment, respect and acceptance.

‘It’s [Internet] a really safe place when you can find people who are really important to you (…) At the moment, I feel really safe with these people as they know that I am a minor and they respect all my boundaries’. Lea

This aspect of the safety discourse appeared to be particularly important for those who, due to their ethnicity, sex or atypical interests, faced challenges finding their place and a sense of belonging in their current offline environment.

II Harms and risks

Three discourses, specifically online bullying and social pressure, waste of time and generational gap, served, for the interviewees, as a way to highlight their knowledge of the imagined, observed or experienced dangers and hardships of Internet technologies. This theme also emphasizes youths’ awareness of moral panic over their presumed problematic relationship with Internet technologies and their ability to capitalize on moral panic to increase acceptance of their own uses of Internet technologies.

Online bullying and social pressures

This discourse evoked the youths’ familiarity with online bullying through either their own experiences or, more often, others’ experiences (or both), or via their observations of hostile online behaviour or communication (see also, e.g. Salasuo 2021, 88–89). This discourse was, however, accompanied by a discourse of building resilience, one through which the interviewees sought to present themselves as resilient to the abovementioned dangers.

A few interviewees stressed that when an individual does not align with prevalent perceptions of normality in terms of, for example, gender, behaviour, ethnicity or appearance, they can become the target of online bullying or hostile communication. However, these interviewees refrained from elaborating on their own personal experiences, instead talking about the phenomenon in general, attributing it at least partly to the greater anonymity afforded by the Internet. As Onni explained:

‘If you look and talk about some basic stuff, no one labels you as different. But if you go there and talk all sorts of weird stuff and do something that makes you stand out from the crowd, then you might end up being bullied’. Onni

Furthermore, the interviewees also highlighted distorted – although popular – perceptions of normality, especially in terms of appearance or lifestyle, on the Internet, with many people seeking to only showcase the best aspects of themselves. The female interviewees, including Ira and Outi, were also more likely to admit experiencing these social pressures even though they were aware that many photos on the Internet were edited (see also, e.g. Sirén, Leino, and Nissinen 2018).

‘Of course, I received different remarks about my flaws (…) On the Internet or on social media in general, there is always just one accepted form of look considered as perfect’. Ira

‘There is a strong beauty ideal on Instagram – you need to be slim, so this is a beauty ideal. Sometimes it does cause me some pressures. But then again, I feel I have grown up and realized that many of the pictures are edited’. Outi

Interestingly, for the interviewees in this study, online bullying was viewed as being predominantly related to hostile communication characterized by negative or rude comments. By emphasizing such undesirable communication, the interviewees were also expressing their desire for more positive communication and behaviour on the Internet.

Waste of time

This discourse was very popular and was often mentioned when the interviewees contrasted useful and aimless uses of Internet technologies. Much like the discourse of usefulness, the waste of time discourse covered the youths’ reflections on their own Internet use as well as their parents’ comments on such use, which was perceived to deviate from culturally valued norms of use. In contrast to the discourse of entertainment and rest, this discourse focused on Internet technology use that did not yield positive outcomes, such as learning or networking. It also highlighted the addictive aspects of Internet technologies and the harmful consequences of heavy screen time for youths’ well-being and health. Consequently, this discourse also included the interviewees’ desire to reduce their screen time to improve their physical and mental health.

This discourse was specifically value-laden; it judged time-consuming digital practices as addictive and wasteful, making them a moral issue just as the consumption of traditional media once was (for more, see Alasuutari 1996). The central focus of this discourse in the youths’ moral talk was their excessive screen time, immoderate digital media consumption, shortage of downtime and distraction from offline activities, which were depicted as being accompanied by a bad conscience, headaches or otherwise bad feelings or general concerns. This was illustrated in Jarmo’s speech:

‘I noticed that the less I was on my phone during the day, the better I usually felt in the evening (…) otherwise I can get a headache sometimes when I spend too much time on it’. Jarmo

Some interviewees expressed the intention or need to reduce their use of Internet technologies; others admitted to having difficulty detaching from such media even though they regarded it as bad or unhealthy. Still others pointed out that Internet technologies distracted them from other, more useful offline activities that were culturally valued or regarded by their parents as more productive or sensible, such as cleaning, studying or organizing their wardrobe.

‘When you’re on the phone, then you often want to avoid other things even though there is something else to do (…) For example, I know I should clean or do something like that, but then I just immerse myself in watching TikTok’. Helena

‘Using a phone is so addictive (…) even though you know that you should reduce it, most of the time it feels too complicated to think of doing something else (…) my mum is continuously telling me that I should be doing something else like taking rubbish out or something else’. Irja

While boyd (2014, 78–80) argued that the term ‘addiction’ should be avoided when describing children’s and young people’s use of digital media in order to avoid pathologizing or provoking a moral panic about their relationship with technology and social media, here it was the interviewees themselves who depicted their own or their peers’ screen time as excessive – a judgement that aligns well with adults’ portrayals of ‘digital natives’ as being addicted to or overly reliant upon Internet technologies.

The critical manner in which the youths talked about their allegedly excessive screen time indicated that they may have been accustomed to a wider moral hierarchy around appropriate and inappropriate uses of Internet technologies. Their critical evaluation of their screen time was typically accompanied by uneasy laughter, which seemingly lent approval to such criticism as culturally shared and acceptable. This laughter could serve as a way to create an abstract idea of normality and a shared idea of the prevalence of addictive or excessive use of Internet technologies.

Generational gap

This discourse revealed the intergenerational divide regarding digital practices and the digital environment in general. It appeared to represent a way for the interviewees to distance themselves from the moral panic about their own generation and instead redirect it towards even younger generations and their digital practices.

‘When I was younger, I did not have a phone and I spent much more time outside then. But today, technology has developed so fast, so now preschool-age children have such big smartphones and they just play on them and do everything else with them. Then, they are not with their friends, they are just on the phone with others, and they just stare at the screen and not at the person’. Ira

‘When I was younger and posted something on Instagram, I did not think about it, but nowadays I think about what to share and what not to share’. Irja

For instance, Ira made a distinction between her childhood and that of current children who, in her opinion, did not have the opportunity to grow up without smartphones. In her speech, she framed her own generation as holding a proper social location in terms of the social and digital environment as they had the opportunity to grow up without smartphones.

Additionally, some other interviewees, such as Irja, depicted themselves as becoming more conscious and literate users of Internet technologies as they have aged. They admitted to posting about themselves and their life more regularly before and being less critical towards their own social media posts.

III Person-based networking

Two discourses – namely new acts of belonging and acceptance as well as new avenues for connecting with like-minded people – capture the ways in which the Internet functions as a natural environment for young people to keep in touch with family members and friends living in and outside Finland as well as to both seek and build a sense of belonging and community. This theme further underscored the youths’ heightened sense of responsibility for crafting their ‘cocoon-like-environments’ (see more Ito, Okabe, and Anderson 2009, 70–76) to satisfy their social needs or solve encountered problems.

New acts of belonging and acceptance

This discourse evoked new ways of maintaining already existing social relationships through the new and unique communicative practices offered by Internet technologies, practices which have also been rewriting social etiquette.

Research has shown that memes and emojis in particular have become efficient tools for instantly communicating meanings and values (see, e.g. Shifman 2019). This finding was also evident in the interviews. For example, the interviewees highlighted that acts of caring, belonging and acceptance are now demonstrated through tagging, liking others’ posts and photos, sending and accepting friendship invitations, sharing funny photos or videos, and sending each other streaks, memes or emojis, such as a thumbs up, hearts or smiles.

‘If you had a fun evening or day together, then someone will tag the people with whom it was fun and this way it is communicated that someone cares about me. Because otherwise you would not be mentioned if you are not liked’. Ira

‘If it [receiving “likes”] is important for others, then I do like my friends’ photos’. Pilvi

‘I do not like to post much, but the only place I do it on daily basis is through Snapchat to send one message a day. (…) I just take photos from something like homework or the outdoors and then I send them with a comment like “goodnight”’. Sonja

Here, some gender differences were visible in these acts. While the boys mentioned playing games, sharing funny content and updating their whereabouts, the girls emphasized how they sought to be positive in their online communication by cheering each other up through beautiful photos and positive posts and comments (see also Noppari 2014, 84). They also admitted to making the deliberate choice to cultivate positivity in their communicative acts and interactions on the Internet (see more Korjonen-Kuusipuro and Tuuva-Hongisto 2023). A few female interviewees criticized social media for its negativity and opted to instead engage in positive interactions in an effort to counteract online bullying and the perceived toxicity of others in online spaces.

Texting appeared to be the predominant method of communication and conversation with peers, friends and relatives regardless of physical location. For instance, the interviewees frequently mentioned their capacity to engage in instant social interaction through smartphones and online spaces in various offline settings. It also seemed acceptable to use smartphones while spending time with close friends when they felt comfortable just being together without needing to talk continuously and instead engaging in the same activity online. For instance, Markus and Joel explained that they could be physically together, but their interactions were taking place online.

‘Usually it is so that if we are on our phones, then everyone is on the phone and does their own stuff or we play together online or chat’. Markus

‘Well, on the phone, you can play games in a group’. Joel

Here, the interviewees’ digital practices were in line with ‘networked individualism’ (Rainie and Wellman 2012), with youths switching between multiple instant messaging applications and social network sites while being physically with others. It seems that, for young people, social etiquette might be changing, with so-called ‘present absence’ (Rainie and Wellman 2012, 102–103) – i.e. when youths’ attention and communication are elsewhere and focused on the fulfilment of their individual needs – becoming increasingly accepted and practised.

New avenues for connecting with like-minded people

This discourse highlighted the interviewees’ experience of having increased opportunities to seek for and find like-minded communities online. The Internet was perceived as a medium through which youths can find support for their own growth and have positive experiences by meeting and getting to know like-minded people, joining online communities, participating in discussion forums and playing online games, among other activities.

Overall, the interviewees considered it to be rather easy to expand their circle of friends via the Internet. It was not necessarily about replacing face-to-face interactions, but instead about expanding and diversifying them with online communities, acquaintances and friendships as well as seeking help to solve problems. Jorma and Kimmo explained their online networking experiences as follows:

‘And then I participated in all kinds of groups around the world, and in some I am still a part. So I get help from there when, for example, I am fixing my moped [laughter]’. Jorma

‘There are communities about everything, and I am quite active, and you can also have conversations with people there [on the Internet] so you get to know each other quite well. (…) However, the good thing about the Internet is that if you find a good group of people, everyone is equal’. Kimmo

This goal appeared to be particularly important for those who had hobbies or interests that were atypical for their age or physical environment, as Lea explained:

‘I was able to find more people like myself online than ever I did at school or anywhere else. It’s [Internet] a really safe place when you can find people who are really important to you (…) At the moment, I feel really safe with these people as they know that I am a minor [underaged] and they respect all my boundaries’. Lea

These individuals in particular benefited from Internet technologies as they helped them overcome the limitations of social interactions in their current offline environment. In their search for like-minded people, the interviewees emphasized the individualistic manner of building online relationships that were person-centric (for more, see Rainie and Wellman 2012), allowing them to move among loosely knit online communities, networks and individuals when seeking to satisfy their need to feel safe, respected and equal. Interestingly, such online friendships and interactions rarely shifted to the offline world. Instead, they co-existed with face-to-face interactions.

IV Internet skills

Three discourses – specifically those of the competent self-learner, managing privacy and building resilience – addressed issues central to the concept of Internet skills (Hargittai and Micheli 2019) as they were related to the individual capacity and responsibility of youths to develop skills and strategies needed to navigate critically and safely on the Internet. This theme highlights the youths’ inflated responsibility for digital learning and protecting their well-being and health from the negative repercussions of Internet technologies.

Competent self-learner

This discourse specifically evoked the youths’ self-development of abilities to recognize fake news, trolling or online adds. Like in previous studies (Leino et al. 2019, 35; Noppari 2014, 110), the interviewees, such as Lea and Venla, presented themselves as media literate – a portrayal that aligns with the claim that ‘digital natives’ develop Internet skills on their own while browsing the Internet rather than at school.

‘I’ve learned almost everything I know from the Internet’. Lea

‘I myself have grown up into this [media literacy] and later, at school (…) But I have learned it myself’. Venla

School as an environment for developing media literacy was only mentioned when asked about it separately. This finding raises concerns, particularly in light of research on Finnish 8th-grade students, which underscores the critical role of schools in mitigating the negative effect of lower socio-economic status on youths’ programming skills and overall multiliteracy (Leino et al. 2019). Media education at home was mentioned in a few cases, typically by remarking about parents warning or reminding the interviewees about the importance of being careful on the Internet by, for instance, checking information sources and protecting personal information. As Eetu explained:

‘A bit at school [developed media literacy] but for real on my own. (…) and then also at home. My mum often says to check everything twice on the Internet’. Eetu

Yet, none of the interviewees mentioned discussing issues such as news content or their whereabouts on the Internet with their parents. Indeed, earlier research pointed out that media education in Finnish homes seems to primarily concern restrictions and instructions about online privacy and avoiding suspicious websites (Noppari 2014, 111–115).

Managing privacy

This discourse accentuated youths’ concerns about privacy and skills to manage it while interacting online. The interviewees appeared to be continually remaking boundaries between public and private spaces within the publicly shared world of the Internet and social network sites. In their online interactions, the interviewees claimed that they continuously considered privacy concerning what personal information they posted, who could view their updates, what kinds of updates they created and shared, and what reactions to their posts they received.

‘Actually none of my friends puts anything on TikTok. And then, they have this type of policy that they are not on digital platforms where you cannot manage who sees your stories or other content’. Eetu

‘I am pretty careful about what I put on the Internet, and I noticed that others are too. Not to put anything stupid there’. Jarmo

The issues of privacy and cautious self-presentation were intertwined in the interviewees’ speech, which indicates that at least some young people genuinely care about their privacy and, further, use online communities to interact free from surveillance by their peers and parents (see also boyd 2014, 56).

Some of the interviewees also admitted to leaving online environments after having unpleasant experiences. An essential concern of the interviewees revolved around avoiding or limiting their activities on social media sites to prevent negative repercussions from displaying photos of themselves or their personal lives (see also Marwick, Fontaine, and boyd 2017). This was especially relevant for the female interviewees, who felt uncomfortable sharing photos of themselves, particularly when they experienced strong pressure to appear or dress in a certain way.

‘I never publish anything where I am visible’. Martta

‘I think carefully about what I put there [social media] – is it a photo I can get some criticism for? Then, if I know that a person who wants to follow me is perhaps a bit nasty, I do not accept it’. Venla

The interviewees also admitted that, as they have aged, their concern over privacy and the level of attention they give to self-presentation in online environments have increased (Noppari 2014, 124). Overall, in their efforts to ensure their privacy in online spaces, the interviewees aimed for self-control of both their content and its visibility among carefully selected groups of people, but also when they made the deliberate decision to limit their social media use or posting to protect themselves from unwanted attention, social pressures and online bullying.

Building resilience

This discourse captured the interviewees’ resilient attitude towards the dangers of social media in particular, especially online bullying, social pressures and instant gratification, such as collecting ‘likes’ on social media and excessive screen time. In the interviewees’ speech, this discourse seemed to supplement the discourses on online bullying and social pressures as well as waste of time; here, the interviewees stressed their individual capacity to overcome or resist these dangers, including the deterioration of health due to addictive aspects of Internet technologies.

Overall, the interviewees initially responded by denying having experienced almost any emotional damage from the dangers of social media. Male interviewees, such as Kimmo and Joel, tended to present themselves as being psychologically immune to such phenomena.

‘You are expected to fit in [in social media] but I myself do not feel that it would affect me in any way. I know how to stand up for myself and be myself’. Kimmo

‘Well, it is fun there [in social media] and it is a kind of dopamine rush when someone likes my posts, but it is not important for me to talk about my own life there and have others like it’. Joel

By contrast, the female interviewees admitted to occasionally being concerned with, for example, the number of ‘likes’ on their posts or possible criticism of posted photos.

‘Well, I guess I sometimes check it just to see whether it was successful or not, so it does affect what I post’. Minna

‘Well yes (…) I sometimes think what I would do to a photo if it would not get any likes. I guess I would delete it or I would think what was wrong with it’. Olivia

Those who admitted to having witnessed or experienced bullying talked about it in a very mature and resilient way, explaining how they had grown from these unpleasant experiences. A few interviewees, however, admitted to having decided to avoid some social network sites, to reduce posting or to be more cautious about whom they accepted as friends or followers – these efforts were intended to protect themselves from the negative repercussions of social media (see also Marwick, Fontaine, and boyd 2017).

Some interviewees emphasized their desire to reduce their screen time, or the concerted efforts they had made to do so, to adhere to accepted norms surrounding screen time. Others, such as Alina, went so far as to evaluate the quality of each day in terms of screen time – namely that good days meant less screen time.

‘On average, I spend maybe four hours a day on social media, and, on good days, only two hours’. Alina

‘When I noticed that my screen time decreased, it felt nice (…) I sometimes envy people who are really able to stay away from their phone for a really long time’. Helena

Some interviewees even claimed to experience liberation and a heightened mood after deleting time-consuming social network sites from their phones or occasionally reducing their screen time. A few interviewees expressed their intention to remove themselves from social network sites or stop using particular social media sites after carefully contemplating the benefits of doing so.

Discussion and Conclusions

This article brought together two research areas, specifically the ‘digital natives’ debate and research on socio-digital inequalities, to advance our understanding of youths’ digital agency for recreational purposes outside of school, specifically with regard to their abilities to critically interact with Internet technologies and navigate safely on the Internet. The identified discourses indicate youths’ rather rich discursive resources, such as a defensive or moralizing tone around culturally presumed unproductive uses of Internet technologies or framing their digital engagement in ways that align with societal expectations, emphasizing the educational or skill-enhancing aspects of online activities. The identified discourses demonstrate the diverse ways in which youths utilize discursive resources to shape and communicate their experiences with Internet technologies but also their capacity to strategically leverage language to negotiate their Internet skills and digital experiences, fostering social acceptance for their use of Internet technologies. The results highlight four themes central to youths’ digital agency, specifically youths’ differential opportunities to benefit from Internet technologies, experience and protect themselves from online risks, as well as build and maintain supportive online networks. Overall, the study makes four contributions.

First, in line with previous research on both Finnish and international youths (Borca et al. 2015; boyd 2014; Noppari 2014; Salasuo 2021; Salasuo, Merikivi, and Myllyniemi 2019), this study demonstrated that youths’ uses of Internet technologies are markedly mundane. The Internet and social media have become an integral part of youths’ everyday life, permitting them to engage in a networked society. As this study indicated, for contemporary youths, the Internet serves as an extension of the offline social environment in which they are being raised – an environment in which they engage purposefully in activities that build their identity, sense of community and social skills (see also, e.g. Borca et al. 2015; boyd 2014; Salasuo 2021). Internet technologies also offer opportunities for crafting ‘cocoon-like-environments’ (Ito, Okabe, and Anderson 2009), safe spaces where youths can retreat to have moments to themselves, insulated from the fears and burdens of the offline world. This contribution, although not ground-breaking, retains its significance, especially in the face of persistent public outrage over youths’ potentially addictive and harmful use of Internet technologies, a concern prevalent even in highly digitalized societies like Finland.

Second, the study demonstrated that youths who are well-versed in the social norms surrounding the accepted and valued uses of Internet technologies find their digital agency immersed in adults’ moral panic. Still, this panic provides them with discursive resources to negotiate these norms. This was evident in the interviewees’ critical and value-laden evaluations of their own or their peers’ use of Internet technologies, their uneasy laughter and their intention to reduce their presumed excessive screen time. A certain cultural awareness of the inadequacy of Internet technologies was omnipresent in their speech just as it was in the past about television (see Alasuutari 1996). Interestingly, a few interviewees sought to redirect this moral panic towards younger generations, aiming to foster more acceptance for their own uses. Consequently, this study suggests that youths often find themselves in a position where they feel compelled to defend their use of Internet technologies and assert claims over possessing the requisite skills they believe are expected of them.

Third, the identified themes and discourses appeared to align strongly with the logic of ‘networked individualism’ (Rainie and Wellman 2012) and the ‘personal responsibility discourse’ (Marwick, Fontaine, and boyd 2017) as, in their speech, the interviewees emphasized their heightened responsibility for digital learning and benefiting from opportunities offered by Internet technologies, along with a keen awareness of online risks and the necessity for individual acts to ensure privacy and foster resilience. The interviewees specifically emphasized the individual efforts and initiatives taken to consciously, actively and purposefully utilize opportunities created by Internet technologies – endeavours that are culturally valued owing to their potential to enhance access to instrumental resources (see also Kimm and Boase 2021). Internet technologies appeared to be specifically supportive in the development of meaningful personal networks for the interviewees from homogenous offline environments or those experiencing them as limited due to their age, gender or ethnicity. These interviewees posited that Internet technologies afforded them expanded opportunities to widen their social networks and overcome obstacles to foster a sense of belonging.

Lastly, the study highlighted notable gender differences, particularly concerning varied experiences of online pressures and dangers, along with corresponding responses. For instance, the female interviewees appeared to be more concerned than boys with online pressures related to appearance (see also, e.g. Borca et al. 2015; Noppari 2014; Sirén, Leino, and Nissinen 2018); they also seemed to engage to a greater degree in disengagement strategies and selective self-disclosure to avoid active posting or to make the deliberate choice to propagate a positive mood on the Internet (see also Korjonen-Kuusipuro and Tuuva-Hongisto 2023; Marwick and boyd 2014; Marwick, Fontaine, and boyd 2017). In contrast, the male interviewees were more likely to demonstrate their psychological immunity to online dangers and the persuasive design of technologies. These findings demonstrate the intricate dynamics surrounding gender inequalities in youths’ digital experiences that shape their online behaviour and are prevalent even in highly digitalized societies. Future research might, therefore, explore more in detail and over a longer period of time how gender differences are formed and possibly change amongst youths as they age.

Overall, this research highlights the importance of integrating the ongoing ‘digital natives’ debate with research on socio-digital inequalities to capture the socio-cultural context and contradictions that today’s youths navigate. The central elements of the portrayal of youths as ‘digital natives’ serve as a discursive resource, enhancing youths’ digital agency and social acceptance of their use of Internet technologies. However, this portrayal also exerts pressure on them to constantly justify their technology use and develop Internet skills they might not possess but they feel compelled to demonstrate. Furthermore, the framework of socio-digital inequalities enables the investigation of youths’ speech to capture both the socially empowering and demanding aspects of acting as networked youths. Given the continuous evolution of Internet technologies and substantial investments by technology providers to engage youths in social network sites, it is imperative for youths to receive stronger and continual institutional support that would equitably empower them to navigate a digital age.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Academy of Finland [grant number: 29310001041].

Notes

1 The article is a part of the project DEQUAL (2020–2024), which is being carried out in cooperation with the University of Eastern Finland (UEF) and the South-Eastern Finland University of Applied Sciences (XAMK). I want to thank to the project researchers, Kristiina Korjonen-Kuusipuro and Sari Tuuva-Hongisto, who have planned the collection of interview data and conducted the interviews in Finnish. I translated the research material to English. I also warmly thank all young people who agreed to be interviewed for this project.