Digital Inclusion in Early Childhood in Brazil

by Cláudia Cinara Locateli[1]

Vinícius Almada Mozetic[2]

?

[1] Doctorate in Law from the University of Western Santa Catarina - Unoesc; Master's in Law from the Federal University of Santa Catarina - UFSC; Professor at the Community University of the Chapecó Region - Unochapecó and at the University of Western Santa Catarina - Unoesc; Lawyer. Mediator. Participates in the research group: Interculturality, Intersubjectivity, and Personality: Gender, Sexual Orientation, Race, and Ethnicity (Unoesc). Conducts research in human and fundamental rights through decolonial and intersectional epistemologies, focusing on themes intertwined with motherhood, care, and parental responsibilities. ORCID registration: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5225-194X.

[2] Member of the Coordination of Technology and Innovation of the Brazilian Bar Association. Vice-President of the Commission on Digital Law of the Brazilian Bar Association – Santa Catarina Section. Member of the SCOTLIN Research Network of the Royal Society of Edinburgh (Scottish Law and Innovation Network); Member of the Scientific Network of the International Observatory on Vulnerable People in Data Protection; Member of ISLC – Center for Law of the Information Society – University of Milan. Research Member of the Center for Studies in Civil Law and New Technologies of the Legal Grounds Institute – Brazil. Member of the Observatory for the Protection of Personal Data at NOVA School of Law. Professor in the Master's and Doctoral Program in Fundamental Rights at the University of Western Santa Catarina – UNOESC. Post-doctorate in Public Law from the University of Vale do Rio dos Sinos UNISINOS-RS. Doctorate in Public Law from the University of Vale do Rio dos Sinos UNISINOS-RS. [email protected]

The information and knowledge society has imposed rapid transformations due to the numerous social and legal impacts it promotes. Since the mid-1970s, a new social characterization marked by communication has emerged. This new society has had effects on all activities and areas, and today occupies a place that favors the development of information and communication technology. Sensitive to these new dynamics, Mozetic and Babaresco (2020, p. 209) affirm that "There is a revolution[1] technology in law, centered on information technology, that is concerning because it is changing the material basis of society and of law itself at an accelerated pace."

In this society, there is a pursuit for democratized and universal access to information and knowledge, through technology. The expectation is to expand the use of the digital environment through the process of democratizing the right to access the internet. According to Rankine (1987, p. 292), facilitating this access allows "[...] the development of an until then unimaginable capacity to expand the human intellect". The ability to store information is expanded, which will provide a use aimed at progress and human well-being. Aware of the benefits, comparative law, particularly European, and the guidance of the United Nations stimulated the presentation of bill no 6/2011, which foresees the inclusion of the right to internet access in the role of fundamental social rights. The infraconstitutional recognition is already present in Law no 12.965/14, the Civil Internet Framework - MCI, which guarantees internet access to all, as it is essential for the exercise of citizenship.

In early childhood, the recognition of internet access as a fundamental right will promote digital inclusion, bringing with it fascinating challenges that must be faced from the perspective of normative and procedural guarantees, as well as appropriate public policies aimed at care, integral protection, absolute priority, and the best interest of the child, without losing sight of special needs in different age groups and phases of child development. The challenges of digital inclusion may require more than just a normative adjustment, the regulation of the architecture and design of the virtual environment, they will need a systemic interpretation of the rules that make up the regulation as a strategy that benefits the different phases and intercultural experiences of childhood in the country.

In terms of concepts, digital inclusion is not a consensus due to the ambiguities that the term itself presents. Inclusion can be considered as the democratization of access to new technologies, combined or not with training for the use of technological resources available in the virtual environment. It seems inadequate that expanding access to material resources, without considering cognitive processes, may not be sufficient to promote true digital inclusion. The PNPI 2020-2030, in line with the guidelines of Unicef and ECLAC (RNPI, 2020; UNICEF, 2017), recognizes the right to access the internet and addresses the challenge of digital inclusion of children who, in some way, may be or remain excluded. However, the Plan does not delve technically into understanding and strategies to confront intersectional inequalities that obscure childhood experiences.

The dualism of digital inclusion and exclusion, especially in the context of public policies, seems to approach the category of "social exclusion", maintaining dangerous gaps in technical terms that can have implications in the implementation of protective norms that neglect the dimensions of inequalities. The concept of social exclusion, and its respective stigmas, may perpetuate asymmetries and deprivation of rights, creating obstacles to the effectiveness of the PNPI 2020-2030 guidelines, which sees the democratization of access to new technologies as the key to breaking intergenerational reproduction of inequalities.

Access to and training for the use of digital tools, when considered in isolation, are insufficient and face great challenges, such as lack of income, geographic location, cultural inadequacies, skills and capacities, autonomy, preferences, and desires. These factors may be insufficient to guarantee opportunities in the information society, even though they can be seen as emancipatory elements that, under certain circumstances, can allow prosperity (Selwyn, 2008).

For children who can interact daily with internet-related technologies, such as mobile phones, computers, games, and electronic toys, there are benefits generated by familiarity with the use of these technologies. Over time, this can contribute to the construction of a culture more suited to the digital world. Frequent access to the internet can enhance the ability to connect people and cultures from around the world (Castells, 2003), allowing access to a wide range of knowledge and broadening opportunities for professional, educational, cultural, and economic interactions.

The National Early Childhood Plan (PNPI) 2020-2030, in harmony with the guidelines of the Pediatric Medical Society and the World Health Organization, suggests moderation in the early and intensive exposure of children, especially those aged between zero and three years, to media and the use of digital screens. Excessive interaction with the virtual environment by children in this age range can pose risks[2] for learning, memory, superficial thinking, and cognitive structure. Children run the risk of becoming captives of a dislocated and persuasive virtual environment that shapes their subjectivities. The immediacy and fluidity of this environment can cause serious damage to child development.

A significant part of these risks comes from the digital architecture that is oriented towards the Internet of Things (IoT), as well as from operability standards, which value connectivity and strongly encourage consumption and the appreciation of appearances. This condition can engender personalities that show insensitivity to differences and values of alterity, driving a feeling of social need to belong that can incite intolerance and hate speech (Lacerda and Lima-Marques, 2015). Thus, the PNPI 2020-2030, while promoting digital inclusion and internet access as a primordial right, also signals the importance of a balanced and cautious approach to ensure the healthy development of children.

In addition, Escudero (2020, p. 52) expresses concern about the fact that the consequences of widespread access to information on the internet can go beyond the role of mere receivers, transforming children into autonomous centers of content generation. The absence of filters and the immaturity of children exposed to digital platforms may, due to the ease of persuasion, reiterate false information and facilitate the replication of actions that incite violence through repetition. The apprehensions about the digital inclusion of children in early childhood should not provoke panic. Instead, they should stimulate a perspective of emancipation through democratic access to the digital environment and the use of safe tools that provide digital educational content in harmony with various cultures, both traditional and digital, in order to develop discernment through a gradual autonomy in decision-making.

To reach such a goal of emancipation, the time devoted to the internet should be carefully mediated by parents or guardians, who should establish a balance between usage choices and minimizing the paradox between the present and the future, allowing the child to live and "be a child", play, contemplate nature, have contact with animals, outside the virtual environment. Thus, the restriction of valuable early childhood time to dedicate it exclusively to the development of digital skills focusing only on the projection of a prosperous future, full of incentives to tasks and achievements, standards of stability and income, is both economically fascinating and reductionist. The guidelines for mediating internet access recommend that caregivers have strict control, given the lack of adequate supervision and the preeminent interest in regulating the use of digital platforms by young children, particularly those in the birth to three-year-old stage, due to the proven evidence of the harm that excessive screen exposure can cause.

The task of educating children in the digital environment, just as it is in the physical world, is complex and requires informed and attentive caregivers. The guarantee of children's rights in the digital environment should not be seen solely as a matter of regulating internet access, but also as an issue of child protection that involves the government, educators, parents, and the entire society to ensure a safe and beneficial use of the internet. It is necessary to respect the pace of each child, giving them the space to learn, make mistakes, and develop autonomy, always with guidance and support. Only in this way can we ensure that the digital inclusion of children in the early years is truly beneficial, protecting them from risks and contributing to their development in all aspects of life.[3]

In light of the arguments presented, it becomes crucial to reassess regular public policies that account for the distinct stages of childhood and phases of child development, always prioritizing the best interests of the minors. It is essential, as far as possible, to give these children a chance to have their voice heard in this process, so as to prevent resolutions that impact them from being exclusively determined by adults (Livingstone and Bulger, 2014). This immense challenge associated with the right of access to digital inclusion requires joint actions and practices from parents or guardians, the State, and other segments of society, guided by the principle of comprehensive and collective care, as well as co-responsibility.

The search for balance between comprehensive protection, care, and the best interest of children in their early childhood requires a cultural transformation, which can be facilitated through educational campaigns promoted by public policies, as well as the creation of a new digital media design architecture more suitable for childhood.

[1] According to Pérez Lu?o (2012, p. 31), "the technological revolution has reshaped the relations of man with other men, the relations between man and nature, as well as the relations of the human being with himself. These mutations continued to affect the area of Law".

[2] Risks are situations that can compromise the physical and psychological conditions of children, and generate impact in life, in terms of social, physical, and emotional aspects.

[3] Among the harms of excessive screen exposure, the PNPI 2020-2030 highlights bodily illiteracy, body desensitization, perception of flat spaces due to the absence of the three-dimensionality of experiences, lack of human interaction, replacement of the imposition of limits by screen use, the phenomenon of the engrossed child, absence of reciprocity of affection and love (RNPI, 2020).

References

Castells, M., A galáxia da internet: reflex?es sobre a internet, os negócios e a sociedade (Rio de Janeiro: Zahar, 2003).

Conselho Nacional de Justi?a, 2020, “Pacto pela primeira infancia. Fundo de defesa dos direitos coletivos”. Available at: https://www.cnj.jus.br/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Pacto-Nacional-pela-Primeira-Infancia_2020-09-01_ WEB.pdf.

Escudero, R. A., “Los derechos de la personalidad de ni?os, ni?as y adolescentes en el entorno digital una aproximación de su protección en el ámbito de las relaciones paterno – filiales – referencia al sistema chileno” in: R. Judith Solé and M. Vinícius Almada, Protección de los menores de edad en la era digital (Juruá: Curitiba, 2020).

Instituto Brasileiro de Georgrafia e Estatística (IBGE), 2020, “Popula??o. Proje??o para 2020”. Available at: https://www.ibge.gov.br/apps/populacao/projecao/.

Lacerda, F. and Lima-Marques, M., “Da necessidade de princípios de arquitetura da informa??o para a internet das coisas”, Perspectiva em ciências da informa??o 2015(20(2)),158-71. DOI: 10.1590/1981-5344/2356.

Livingstone, S. and Bulger, M., “Uma agenda global de pesquisa para os direitos das crian?as na era digital”, Journal of Children and Media 2014(8), 317-35.? DOI: 10.1080/17482798.2014.961496.

Mozetic, V. A. and Babaresco, D. V. G. S., “LGPD e a obrigatoriedade do consen- timento na coleta de dados de crian?as e adolescentes no Brasil”, in: R. Judith Solé and M. Vinícius Almada, Protección de los menores de edad en la era digital (Juruá: Curitiba, 2020).

Organiza??o das Na??es Unidas (ONU), 2020, “Objetivos do desenvolvimento sustentável”. Available at: https://brasil.un.org/pt-br/sdgs.

Pérez Lu?o, A.-E., “El derecho ante las nuevas tecnologías”, in: R. Marcelo Bauzá and M. Federico de Bueno (coords.), El derecho em la sociedad telemática: estudios en homenaje al profesor Valentín Carrascosa López (Santiago de Compostela: Andavira, 2012).

Rankine, L. J., “A emergente era da informa??o: sem limites significativos”, Diálogo 1987 (16(3)), 2-7.

Rede Nacional Primeira Infancia (RNPI), Plano nacional pela Primeira Infancia 2010-2022 / 2020-2030 (PNPI). 2. ed. rev. e atual (Brasília, DF: RNPI/ANDI, 2020).

Selwyn, N., “O uso das TIC na educa??o e a promo??o de inclus?o social: uma perspectiva crítica do Reino Unido”, Educa??o e Sociedade 2008 (29(104)), 815-50. DOI: 10.1590/S0101-73302008000300009.

United Nations Children’s Fund and International Telecommunication Union (UNICEF), The state of the world’s children 2017. Children in a digital world (New York: UNICEF, 2017).

?

?