Another point where it is relevant is that educating young people is only half the job. The other half is educating parents and grandparents and the general public. That's definitely a role the federal government can play.
Our own research showed that one of the reasons parents and young people both tended to accept the idea of surveillance—even though young people were doing a lot of things to escape surveillance, they accepted the idea that they would be subject to it—was they all subscribed to a number of inaccurate notions about online risks. There was still a sense, even though this has been thoroughly debunked by research, that anyone online is constantly subject to the risk of assault by online predators.
Parents told us they felt a pressure to spy on their kids. If young people are being spied on by their parents, if they grow up their whole lives being spied on by their parents, by their schools, they're going to accept this as normal and they're not going to question corporate or other forms of surveillance. They're going to come to believe that surveillance is normal, and rather than use above-ground tools, the tools that are effective, they're going to use a variety of other tools that are less effective—and we know a few of them from our research—to try to subvert this surveillance rather than control their information.