Conclusion

The purpose of this edited collection is to bridge two gaps: firstly, between children, young people, and adults, regarding the nature and lived experiences of online harms; and secondly, between research, policy, and practice regarding online safety for children and young people. As the introduction of the collection outlines, there exists an unnecessary constructed conflict between online protection, participation, and provision rights for children and young people (see Livingstone & O'Neill, 2014). While we do not suggest that children and young people should be left to navigate the 'wild west' of an unregulated or unmanaged online environment, we do contend that adult-centric and simplistic narratives of opportunities/benefits versus risk/harm, reduce the scope of the debate and discussions and clearly do not capture the nuance and heterogeneity of children's and young people's online lives, not least the very motivations-and, indeed, social and cultural pressures-to be online, to engage in online conduct, or to participate in online spaces in the first place. Indeed, chapters by Mace and Pescott speak to this conundrum-Mace found that imaginative 'self-play' may appear disingenuous but be highly beneficial for (inter)personal identity exploration and development and, therefore, should not be pathologised as 'malicious trickery' enabled by online platforms. Yet, Pescott's chapter examined how self-presentation online is structured by wider sociocultural imperatives whereby gendered pressures may have oppressive or dysfunctional effects on children and young people. Taking these chapters together, we suggest that self-presentation online involves co-existing risks and opportunities that may act 'in tension' with one another rather than being solely harmful or beneficial (Malvini Redden & Way, 2017).