T

he youth of 2011 are a posse of Adam Ant-alike hipsters in so-tight-they-could-be-painted-on trousers, geek-pie haircuts and Day-Glo stripes on their faces. They are sullen, moody and misunderstood. So far, so James Dean.

But is there actually something different going on? These kids get their culture, gossip and attitudes from Google and Facebook. They are constantly on, constantly promoting themselves and constantly connected. They think filming their mates slapping strangers and then putting the videos up on YouTube is hilarious. And, if you believe the reactionary headlines, this generation of digitally enabled, computer savvy youth is a menace to society, hacking into the mainframes of the most hallowed institutions in the world.

OK, take a step back and try to recall your own generational transgressions. Youth culture, superficially dominated by musical tastes, slang, fashion and objectionable hairstyles, is nothing but an artefact of growing up. Sociologists have documented these little rebellions since the 19th century when, as author Jon Savage describes in Teenage: The Creation of Youth 1875-1945, the notion of "youth as a separate, stormy, rebellious stage of life began".

Advertisement

Psychologically, "youth culture" is the outcome of the process that kids, navigating the tortured period of adolescence, go through as they seek a community that's distinct from that which has come before. It is a period rich in self-expression, catalysed by the negotiation of social boundaries. And, according to the UN, it is a culture that is currently being added to and subtracted from by the 1.1 billion people around the world between the ages of 15 and 24.

What makes them now unique is that they have a (mostly) open communication platform at their fingertips that allows them to connect on a global scale with people going through the same biological, psychological and social changes. So instead of creating a group identity in the playground or at the mall, they have the potential to do it on social networks, in networked computer games and via SMS. And, as anyone who's observed kids in action knows, those who have the means are constantly connected.

"The web has become the place where young people most find their opportunity to explore and express their identities and their social relations, and navigate their way through the values that are on offer around them," says Sonia Livingstone, professor of social psychology and head of the department of media and communications at LSE.

Professor Livingstone has studied media and its effects on young people for two decades. The greatest transformation she sees with the web compared with television, radio and print is that the technology puts the kids in the centre as culture creators rather than culture consumers. Not only does this upset traditional top-down marketing models but it also means that a single youth culture is now almost impossible to pin down. "Historically there has been a trigger – a music change or style change – that's prompted a variety of different youth adaptations," says Danah Boyd, co-author the MacArthur-funded research project book, Hanging Out, Messing Around, and Geeking Out. But now, with so many technological touch points and interest-driven groups, there's no single social change that catalyses them. Boyd, who has been studying kids' activities on networks like Facebook and MySpace for almost a decade, believes it's now easier to define "youth" by looking at how we use technology. If it's for gossip and socialising, you're probably a teen. If it's for dating, you're likely to be in your 20s. And, Boyd observes, other life stages use it in other ways.

"What young people are doing on Facebook when they gossip and socialise is intensively monitoring what everyone else is doing and what everyone else is saying," says Livingstone. "It keeps them constantly updated on what other young people are thinking and doing. It is the height of reflexivity." The constant awareness of the peer group conversation is a cultural shift away from opting in to opting out. Young people are now living in a much more anxious, self-judging way than previous childhoods. "It would be interesting to talk with young people about silences," Livingstone says. "About the pursuit of personal hobbies."

What is most surprising about the findings of the research in this field is that, despite the much-hyped global network, there is very little evidence for a common global youth culture. Boyd argues that the way media is used by kids actually reinforces local connections. "Most young people interact with people they know in their everyday environments," she says.

This has implications for kids' development. "When you go on to Facebook with teenagers, they live in a world where they think everybody thinks like them," she says. Livingstone concurs. "We ever more surround ourselves by people like us who share the same beliefs and values, thoughts and anxieties," she says. "There's much less time spent muddling along with people who are really quiet different." So rather than a globally homogenised youth culture, there a lots of little tight-knit, homogeneous fragments.

Fundamentally, the processes that go into the development and expression of youth culture are the same, but the tools the kids use – whether they're social networks, blogs, games or YouTube – create more intensive feedback loops than have been experienced before. The effects of this are unknown. "Something transformative is happening," says Livingstone of the new media. "I don't think it's happened yet."

We are at a period in which our societies are coming to grips with the new technology. In many ways, we are experiencing a technological adolescence ourselves. Part of the process is watching how people who have never experienced anything else push the boundaries. The kids and their youth culture, constrained by our fundamental social and psychological processes, are our canaries in the digital coalmine.