Back to school time is an excellent time for kids, parents and teachers to think and talk about the safe and approprite use of the Internet and social networking tools.

My message to parents and teachers is simple. Embrace the technology that kids use, recognize that whatever you may lack in technology knowledge you make up in wisdom. And remember that you, too, were once a kid. Your first reaction to kid activity that may be a bit disturbing shouldn’t be to freak out and shut down access but to take a deep breath, talk with (and listen to) the kids and do everything you can to encourage dialog.

And try to become familiar with the technology your kids use. That doesn’t mean you necessarily have to be their friend on Facebook or MySpace, but before you start trying to control how they use social networking technology, make sure you understand it.

Teachers should attempt to use social networking as part of the educational process. Whether they know it or not, kids are enaged in informal learning through their use of social networking so why not use the same technology for formal learning? And while you’re at it, incorporate digital citizenship and media literacy into your teaching.

As my ConnectSafely co-director Anne Collier pointed out in “Social media literacy: The new Internet safety,” media literacy and critical thinking “is protective against manipulation and harm.” Encouraging kids to practice good digital citizenship helps protect all young people, because “behaving aggressively online more than doubles the risk of being victimized.”

Hemanshu Nigam, MySpace & News Corp Security Chief

Hemanshu Nigam, MySpace & News Corp Security Chief

As per kids, Hemanshu Nigam, the chief security officer at News Corp and MySpace offers some Online Safety and Back to School advice especially suited to youth who use social networking services like MySpace and Facebook (MySpace is one of several companies that provide financial support for ConnectSafely). He starts off with the usual internet safety advice: “Don’t post anything you wouldn’t want the world to know” and “don’t get together with someone you ‘meet’ online unless you’re certain of their identity.” Then, perhaps a bit uncharacteristic of his background as a former federal prosecutor, Nigam also provides advice about the compassionate and kind use of social networking.

  •  Post with respect: photos are a great way to share wonderful experiences. If you’re posting a photo of you and your friends, put yourself in your friends’ shoes and ask would your friends want that photo to be public to everyone. If yes, then you’re uploading photos with respect.
  • Comment with kindness: compliments are like smiles, they’re contagious. When you comment on a profile, share a kind word, others will too.
  • Update with empathy: sharing updates lets us tell people what we think. When you give an opinion on your status updates, show empathy towards your friends and help them see the world with understanding eyes.

ConnectSafely.org, the non-profit website I co-direct, has lots of other advice on the safe and productive use of social media and technology.

When I think about all the possible dangers associated with technology (cyberbullying, sexting, inappropriate material, online and game addiction and even the remote chance of being harmed by a predator), nothing strikes me as scarier than texting while driving.

A recently released study (PDF) by the VirginiaTech Transportation Institute found that truck drivers who were texting were 23 times more at risk of a “crash or near crash event” than “nondistracted driving.” As per talking on a cell phone, the same study found no increased risk for truck drivers and 1.3 times the risk for car drivers. There was considerably more risk associated with dialing while driving. The institute’s Richard Hanowski acknowledges that the numbers are likely to be different with car drivers. As reported by CNET’s Jennifer Guevin, the study also found that “texting took a driver’s focus away from the road for an average of 4.6 seconds–enough time…to travel the length of a football field at 55 mph.”

A December 2007 simulator study by Clemson University found that “text messaging and using iPods caused drivers to leave their lanes 10 percent more often.”

Paul Green, research professor at University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute who has done a decade’s worth of research on driver distraction, said “from the science so far, it’s very clearly a problem. We don’t have exact statistics yet, we have enough information to say that texting shouldn’t be permitted while driving.”

The New York Times has created an interactive game that measures how reaction time is affected by distractions.

Teens at biggest risk

When it comes to texting while driving, teens are a particular risk group considering that, according to Nielsen (PDF), “The average U.S. mobile teen now sends or receives an average of 2,899 text-messages per month” and apparently some of those texts are being sent and read from behind the wheel.

A 2007 study conducted by AAA and Seventeen magazine has been widely misquoted as 46 percent of teens admit to texting while driving. But what the study found is that “61 percent of teens admit to risky driving habits.” Forty-six percent of that 61 percent say that they text message while driving.

This issue is in the news a bit more than usual these days because of a shocking video created by a police department in the UK. It depicts a teenage girl texting while driving followed by a terrible crash with gruesome results for her friends in her car and the family whose car she hit. Before viewing the video (scroll down) please be aware that it is graphic and very disturbing. And before forwarding it to a teenager, also be aware that many youth risk prevention specialists question the effectiveness of videos that try to use shock value to change teen behavior.

Shock videos can backfire

Russell Sabella, professor of counseling in the College of Education, Florida Gulf Coast University, says that “While there is some research that shows that some students can be sensitized to potential consequences from videos like it, there is also evidence that students get emotionally aroused in the short term but desensitize in the long term. He said “some students get reinforced by the message that this happens to others but ‘it won’t happen to me.’”

Professor Sabella “would rather see a video with more positive role modeling such as someone who turns off their phone before they drive or perhaps uses a “designated texter”–someone else in the car who can do the texting for you.” If a shock video is going to be used, he said “is has be of a comprehensive effort which includes kids, parents, teachers, legislators, and authorities.”

“A more effective approach,” said Patti Agatston from the Marietta, Ga.-based Prevention/Intervention Center, “might be to have teens involved in creating a public service announcement that include positive messages about looking out for themselves and the people they care about by not texting and driving.” Agatston says that it’s “helpful for youth to receive consistent and repeated messages from a variety of sources, including their peers and parents or guardians.”

Don’t just forward this to your kids

Indeed, if you are going to show this video to your kids, I suggest you watch it with them or, better yet, assemble a group of teens to watch it together and discuss it among themselves. What their peers say will have a bigger impact than what you say. You can view the video here:

While I can’t comment on the entire suit, it’s clear to me that parts of the just-filed privacy lawsuit against Facebook represent a lack of understanding of how social networks like Facebook work as well as how best to protect children and adults on the Internet. I’m especially baffled by the allegation that Facebook violated the rights of an 11-year-old child because he disclosed that he had swine flu.

The suit, brought by five plaintiffs in Southern California, alleges that Facebook violates California privacy laws.

The child who said he had swine flu is identified as “Xavier O.” The complaint says he “has a Facebook account that was opened without the knowledge or consent of his parents.” He allegedly “uploaded personal information, videos and photographs, including swimming and/or partially clothed photographs of children ages 5 to 11.” It further says that he posted information that he had swine flu and asked people to “Please pray for me…God Bless.” The complaint says that “upon learning of the Facebook account and the posting of an uncertain medical condition,” the child’s parents “removed the medical condition postings from Facebook” and that “Xavier O. and his parents have been unable to learn where the minor’s medical information may have been stored, disseminated or sold by Facebook.”

(Disclosure: I’m co-director of ConnectSafely.org, a nonprofit organization that receives financial support from Facebook as well as other companies.)

I don’t know where to begin parsing young Xavier’s case. First, by simply having a Facebook account he was violating Facebook’s terms of service. And why did his parents only remove “the minor’s medical information?” They should have deleted his entire account.

Like all reputable social networking sites, Facebook complies with the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) by not allowing children under 13 to have accounts (COPPA does make provisions for accounts for children under 13 but imposes certain conditions including parental consent). The only way for this young man to obtain a Facebook account would be to lie about his date of birth.

Facebook makes reasonable efforts to remove accounts of children where there is evidence they are under 13, but it’s not possible to catch every violator of these terms and its attempts to validate the ages of members are consistent with industry practices. While it could be argued that they should be using some type of age-verification technology, an exhaustive investigation of those technologies by the Harvard Berkman Center led Internet Safety Technology Task Force (of which I was a member) determined that such technologies, at the current time, are neither effective nor necessarily desirable.

Once on Facebook, anything a person posts can, by default, be seen only by his friends or people in his network. If Xavier’s profile was available to additional people, it was because he changed his default privacy settings. But, even if he hadn’t, there is always the possibility that a friend or anyone with access to his profile could copy any text or images posted and disseminate them. So of course it’s possible that such information could have been stored, or disseminated. In an e-mail interview, Facebook spokesman Barry Schnitt said, “There are no circumstances under which we would have sold that information.” He further points out that the plaintiffs in the suit “make many assertions about mining data and selling it, but never say who is buying.”

What I find very strange is the statement that the 11-year-old had posted “swimming and/or partially clothed photographs of children ages 5 to 11.” Could they be implying he was posting child pornography images? If so (and I doubt it), this kid could find himself in juvenile court.

Another strange allegation comes from a college student who joined Facebook in 2005 back when it was for college students only. Somehow she is shocked that Facebook is now open to anyone–a change that Facebook made with great fanfare in 2006. If she’s so unhappy about the change, why doesn’t she just close her account?

Santa Clara University Law Professor Eric Goldman told me that he considers the complaint to be “a jumbled mess.” “There is a style of complaint that lists every single possible gripe you have with a company,” he said. “This one listed all sorts of random gripes about Facebook including insignificant items like their acquisition of FriendFeed.” He added, “lawyers sometimes do that, hoping that if you throw those against the wall, the judge will find something that sticks.”

Tags: ,

The first things you need to know about cyberbullying are that it’s not an epidemic and it’s not killing our children. Yes, it’s probably one of the more widespread youth risks on the Internet and yes there are some well publicized cases of cyberbullying victims who have committed suicide, but let’s look at this in context.

Bullying has always been a problem among adolescents and, sadly, so has suicide. In the few known cases of suicide after cyberbullying, there are other contributing factors. That’s not to diminish the tragedy or suggest that the cyberbullying didn’t play a role but–as with all online youth risk, we need to look at what else was going on in the child’s life. Even when a suicide or other tragic event doesn’t occur, cyberbullying is often accompanied by a pattern of offline bullying and sometimes there are other issues including long-term depression, problems at home, and self-esteem issues. And the most famous case of “cyberbullying”–the tragic suicide of 13-year-old Megan Meier–was far from typical. Cyberbullying is almost always peer to peer, but this was a case of an adult (the mom of one of Megan’s peers) being accused of seeking revenge on a child who had allegedly bullied her own child.

And, as per “epidemic,” it depends on how you define cyberbullying.

The most commonly recognized definition of bullying includes repeated, unwanted aggressive behavior over a period of time with an imbalance of power between the bully and the victim. In theory, that also covers cyberbullying, but some have taken a broader approach to cyberbullying to also include single or occasional episodes of a person insulting another person online. Indeed, because of the possibility of it being forwarded, a single episode of online harassment can have long-term consequences. “‘Power’ and ‘repetition’ may be manifested a bit differently online than in traditional bullying, Susan Limber, professor of psychology at Clemson University, said in an interview that appeared in a publication of the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools. She added, “a student willing to abuse technology can easily wield great power over his or her target just by having the ability to reach a large audience, and often by hiding his or her identity.”

Manifestations of cyberbullying include name calling, sending embarrassing pictures, sharing personal information or secrets without permission, and spreading rumors. It can also include trickery, exclusion, and impersonation.

Fuzzy numbers

Partly because there is no single accepted definition of cyberbullying, the extent of the problem is all over the map. I’ve seen some reports claim that up to 80 percent of online youth have experienced cyberbullying, while two national studies have put the percentage closer to one-third. A UCLA study conducted in 2008 found that 41 percent of teens surveyed reported between one and three online bullying incidents over the course of a year.

A recent study by Cox Communications came up with lower numbers, finding that approximately 19 percent of teens say they’ve been cyberbullied online or via text message and 10 percent say they’ve cyberbullied someone else.

One thing we know about cyberbullying is that it’s often associated with real-world bullying. The UCLA study found that 85 percent of those bullied online were also bullied at school.

Signs of cyberbullying

It’s not always obvious if a child is a victim of cyberbullying, but some possible signs include: suddenly being reluctant to go online or use a cell phone; avoiding a discussion about what they’re doing online; depression, mood swings, change in eating habits; and aloofness or a general disinterest in school and activities. A child closing the browser or turning off the cell phone when a parent walks in the room can be a sign of cyberbullying, though it can also be a sign of other issues including an inappropriate relationship or just insistence on privacy.

Preventing and stopping cyberbullying

After struggling with a school-wide bullying problem, Aaron Hansen, principal of White Pine Middle School in Ely, Nev., told Fox News that he asked the kids to fill out a survey indicating when the bullying took place and who the bullies were. He then invited the alleged offenders into his office to tell them “your peers feel that like you’re not very nice to people at times and they feel like sometimes you’re a bully.” Based on working with those kids and working with their needs–including problems at home–the school was able to reduce the problem.

Not every situation will resolve itself quite so easily, but identifying the reasons kids are acting as bullies can go a long way toward preventing it as can educational programs that stress ethics and cyber citizenship (”netiquette”). It also helps kids to know what to do if they are victims of bullying. At ConnectSafely.org (a site I help operate) we came up with a number of tips including: don’t respond, don’t retaliate; talk to a trusted adult; and save the evidence. We also advise young people to be civil toward others and not to be bullies themselves. Finally, “be a friend, not a bystander.” Don’t forward mean messages and let bullies know that their actions are not cool.

If your child is a victim of cyberbullying, don’t start by taking away his or her Internet privileges. That’s one reason kids often don’t talk about Net-related problems with parents. Instead, try to get your child to calmly explain what has happened. If possible, talk with the parents of the other kids involved and, if necessary, involve school authorities. If the impact of the bullying spills over to school (as it usually does), the school has a right to intervene.

Be careful what we legislate

There are lots of state laws that focus on cyberbullying, some requiring schools to provide educational resources. While I’m all for education, I think we need to be careful about any legislation that outlaws cyberbullying. U.S. Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.) has proposed H.R. 1966, well meaning legislation that could imprison for up to two years, “whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person, using electronic means to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior.” On the surface, it seems fine but as UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh has pointed out, it could also be used to punish political and other forms of speech. “I try to coerce a politician into voting a particular way, by repeatedly blogging (using a hostile tone),” he writes, “I am transmitting in interstate commerce a communication with the intent to coerce using electronic means (a blog) “to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior.” Professor Volokh said that if the law is passed, he expects it to be “struck down as facially overbroad.”

Tags: , ,

by Larry Magid

One problem with most of today’s Internet safety messaging campaigns is that there is only one set of messages for the entire population of youth and parents. But, an extensive literature review conducted by the Internet Safety Technical Task Force Research Advisory Board found that “not all youth are equally at risk” and that “those experiencing difficulties offline, such as physical and sexual abuse, and those with other psychosocial problems are most at risk online.”

To be effective, the Internet safety community has to find ways tailor its messages based on particular risk factors. Not to do so would be like inoculating an entire population for a disease that affects only a small number of people while not inoculating the very people of are most at risk. I’ve often worried that most of the teens and parents who are consumers of safety messages are the very people who least need to hear them.

Broader expertise needed

In addition to redefining online safety, we also need to expand the discussion. When online safety advocates gather at conferences, the room is typically filled with public policy professionals, technology experts, lawyers and sometimes representative of law enforcement.

But the cadre of professionals needs to also include psychologists, physicians, counselors, social workers, youth workers, clergy, tech educators and others involved in the lives of young people. And young people themselves need to be part of the discussion, not just to listen and parrot what adults tell them to say, but to help think through the issues, help adults understand the difference between real and imagined dangers and come up with messages that will resonate with other youth.

Internet safety and the “sexually toxic culture”

We must also look at behavior in light of the culture in which youth are being raised. I would never suggest that society should be prudish or suppress sexuality, but I am concerned by the extent to which overt sexuality–starting at a very young age–is being promoted by the media, fashion industry, music, TV, movies, everywhere. Young people are growing up in what sexual abuse prevention specialist Cordelia Anderson has referred to as a “sexually toxic culture.”

Anderson chairs the National Coalition to Prevent Child Sexual Exploitation that has drawn a connection between commercial and individual sexual exploitation with youth risk and even child sexual abuse. Kids posting or sending sexually provocative photos (sexting) according to Anderson, “is behaviorally consistent with what kids see all around them.”

Overcoming this larger cultural issue is not going to happen overnight nor will all stakeholders agree with Anderson and other members of the Coalition that it’s a contributing factor to teen risk. But there are plenty of studies to show that risky teen behavior is influenced by the media, social, and cultural environment around them.

The one thing I am sure about is that kids’ use of the Internet doesn’t take place in a vacuum. Technology doesn’t put kids in danger nor will it prevent them from danger.

An Internet safety study (PDF) just released by Cox Communications shows that teens may be a bit more safety conscious than previously thought.

The survey, which was done by Harris Interactive, asked 655 13 to 18 year olds about their online and cell phone behavior, specifically addressing issues of cyberbullying and sexting. The study was in partnership with the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children and America’s Most Wanted Host, John Walsh.

(Credit: Cox Communications Teen Online & Wireless Survey)

For the purposes of the study, cyberbullying was defined as “harassment, embarrassment or threats online or by text message” while sexting referred to “sending sexually suggestive text or emails with nude or nearly-nude photos.”

Not surprisingly, the vast majority of teens (72%) have a social networking profile while 73% use cell phones and 91% have an email address.

What they “know” vs. what they do

The study raises an interesting contradiction. 59% of the teens say that posting personal information or photos on public blogs or social networking sites is either “somewhat unsafe” or “very unsafe.” Only 7% say it’s “very safe” while 34% say it’s “somewhat safe.” Yet, when asked about their own behavior, 62% of the kids post photos of themselves, 50% share their real age, 45% the name of their school and 41% the city where they live. When it comes to more private information, only 4% post their address, 9% “places where you typically go” and 14% post their cell phone number.

The study’s executive summary explains, “Though they are aware of the risks, many teens expose personal information about themselves online anyway.”

That revelation appears alarming but after looking at other research about teen online risk, I actually find it reassuring.

What kids say they “know” about online risks appears to be what adults have been telling them for years. But when you look the real risk factors, their behavior isn’t nearly as dangerous as even teens say they think it is.

An in-depth and academically rigorous 2005 study from the University of New Hampshire’s Crimes Against Children Research Center found that posting personal information online does not, by itself, correlate with risk. As all of the studies show, millions of kids engage in this practice and very few encounter any serious problem as a result. Let’s face it, the whole premise behind sites like Facebook and MySpace is to share that type of information and despite some of the hysteria, there have been very few reported problems of young people being victimized as a result of them putting this type of information online.

Of course, nothing – including attending school – is 100% safe but the 34% who said that posting personal information online is “somewhat safe” are getting it right.

Cyberbullying and sexting numbers not as bad as thought

The cyberbullying numbers are also quite reassuring, especially when you compare them to some earlier studies.

The summary points out that “Cyberbullying is widespread among today’s teens, with over one-third having experienced it, engaged in it, or know of friends who have who have done either.” But that one-third is cumulative of bullies, people who have been bullied and even people who know someone who’s been bullied.

The survey found that approximately 19% of teens say they’ve been cyberbullied online or via text message and that 10% say they’ve cyberbullied someone else. The largest group, 27% say they have “seen or heard of a friend who was bullied” online and while 16% say they’ve “seen or heard of a friend who’s bullied others online or by cell phone.

Of course any amount of bullying is unacceptable but the numbers from this survey are lower than several previous studies.

There is also good news about sexting. The most widely quoted study on sexting from the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy reported (pdf) that 20% of teens “say they have sent/posted nude or semi-nude pictures or video of themselves.” But the data from the Cox survey showed that while 20% of teens “have engaged in sexting” that number, too, is cumulative. Only 9% “sent a sext” while 17% received one and 3% forwarded a “sext.” Again, that 9% number is too high but it’s less than half the 20% figure commonly used. And 90% of the kids who sent sexts said that nothing bad happened, even though 74% of the kids agreed that sexting is “wrong.” 23% felt that it’s OK if both parties are OK with it and only 3% said “there is nothing wrong with it.”

This survey, said Center for Safe and Responsible Internet Use Executive Director, Nancy Willard, “clearly demonstrates that the overwhelming majority of young people have not engaged in risk-taking online behavior or been harmed online. Also, it appears that teens are sensitive to the potentially damaging implications of the material they post online.

Tags: , ,

The Internet and the way young people use technology are constantly evolving, but the safety messages change very slowly, if at all.

Like technology itself, Internet safety has to evolve. Back in 1994, when I wrote the first widely disseminated Internet safety publication, I advised parents not to let kids put personal information or photos online and — because of what turned out to be an exaggerated fear of predators — I urged them to avoid online conversations with strangers. Back then, along with trying to keep kids away from porn, Internet safety was mostly about protecting children from dangerous adults.

But starting around 2005, a new phase of the Web — often referred to as “Web 2.0″ — prompted some Internet safety advocates to focus on ways kids could get in trouble for what they post on social networking sites like MySpace and Facebook. It was in that year that Anne Collier and I founded BlogSafety.org (later renamed ConnnectSafely.org) so we could provide a forum for discussing safety issues on the Web. It was also around that time that politicians and the media, especially the TV show “To Catch a Predator,” started whipping up fears of predators trolling the Web for vulnerable children.

But after carefully reviewing available research, statistics show that the likelihood of a young person being harmed by an online stranger is quite rare, and sexual solicitations and harassment are most often from peers. And to the extent it has occurred, it affects teens, not young children. Based on studies by the Crimes Against Children Research Center, the overwhelming majority of crimes against youths continue to take place in the “real world,” mostly by adults known to the child.

But that doesn’t mean that the Internet is a risk-free zone. It’s just that young people are far more likely to be harmed by other youth or the consequences of their own online behavior than by adult criminals.

Their interactions are largely with people they know from the real world. As danah boyd (she prefers a lower case d & b) observed in her doctoral dissertation, Taken Out of Context: American Teen Sociality in Networked Publics (PDF), “teen participation in social network sites is driven by their desire to socialize with peers. Their participation online is rarely divorced from offline peer culture; teens craft digital self-expressions for known audiences and they socialize almost exclusively with people they know.”

This understanding of youth risk led to a whole new phase of Internet safety education focusing on such things as cyberbullying and urging youth to avoid posting material that could be embarrassing or get them into trouble with authorities and potential future employers. Recently, the focus has turned to the emotional and legal consequences of “sexting,” — kids sending nude pictures of themselves via cell phones or the Web. But Anne Collier observed in NetFamilyNews.org, we run the risk of “technopanics” over sexting and bullying.

What we’ve learned from observing how kids use the Net, mobile phones, gaming devices and other interactive technology is that there is really no distinction between online and offline behaviors. Technology is woven into their lives. They don’t go online, they ARE online. So it’s really about youth safety — not Internet safety.

It’s about helping young people make wise choices not just in how they use technology but in how they live their lives. Internet safety is more than just the absence of danger. It also includes finding ways to use technology for learning, collaboration, community building, political activism, self-help and reaching out to others.

These are not just philosophical arguments. They’re pragmatic because preaching about safety or trying lock down the Internet doesn’t protect kid. Trying to instill fear — especially based on myths — actually increases danger because it causes kids to tune out good advice.

Sure, there are technologies that can keep kids from using social networking services or visiting inappropriate Web sites. But, like fences around swimming pools, the use of filters at home and school can’t protect them forever. That’s why we teach kids to swim. Not only does knowing how to swim help prevent drowning, it empowers them to thrive in the water instead of fearing it. The same is true with technology. As kids mature into teens, we must pull back on the technological controls in favor of self-control.

In an email interview,  Dr. Larry Rosen, Professor of Psychology at California State University, Dominguez Hills and author of Me, MySpace and I: Parenting the Net Generation observed, “sadly, too many parents think that using technology to track their children’s keystrokes or restrict access to certain websites is sufficient parenting.  It is not.  Parents must be involved with their children’s virtual lifestyles developing trust, being aware of any potential problems, learning about the technologies they use, and communicating often.”

Tags: , , , ,

WASHINGTON — Last year, Congress passed the Protecting Children in the 21st Century Act,which called for yet another committee to study Internet safety. By statute, the Online Safety and Technology Working Group is made up of representatives of the business community, public interest groups and federal agencies. I’m on the committee as co-director of the nonprofit ConnectSafely.org.  ConnectSafely co-director and NetFamilyNews editor Anne Collier serves as co-chairman along with MySpace cheif security officer, Hemanshu Nigam.

The group, which reports to the Department of Commerce’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration, is totally unfunded. The government wasn’t even able to buy us lunch, let alone plane tickets to Washington. But I’m not complaining. It’s an honor to have even a small role in helping to shape national Internet safety policy.

To be honest, I was a bit skeptical when I first heard about the working group, wondering why we needed yet another committee to look at this topic. In 2000, the “COPA Commission,” created by the Children’s Online Protection Act of 1998, issued a very comprehensive report, and last year I was privileged to serve on the Internet Safety Technical Task Force — created by attorneys general of nearly every state.

The task force issued a report debunking myths about Internet safety, concluding that kids are more at risk from other kids than from so-called Internet predators. That finding was rejected by several of the state attorneys general who received it. South Carolina Attorney General Henry McMaster said the report’s findings were “as disturbing as they are wrong,” adding that “the conclusions in this report create a troubling false sense of security on the issue of child Internet safety.”

But I think the report was both accurate and insightful. It recognized that Internet safety is too complicated to be reduced to sound bites and sensationalist TV shows, and that most of the kids who get in trouble online also get in trouble offline. The Internet may amplify dangers, but it doesn’t create them. › Continue reading…

Tags: , ,

”Sexting” is the practice of taking a sexually revealing picture of yourself, typically from a cell phone, and sending it to someone. Legal consequences aside, it’s a dumb thing to do, especially for younger age groups in which it has become something of a fad.

Even if you are comfortable with the person receiving the image, you never know for sure where else it might land. Digital images are easy to copy and forward and, even if you trust your friend’s discretion, it can be accidentally forwarded or seen by others with access to your friend’s phone or computer. It’s not uncommon for such images to find their way to other people’s cell phones and even Web pages, where they can be seen by anyone, copied, searched for and redistributed, perhaps forever.

For minors, there’s another risk — serious legal consequences. Creating, transmitting and even possessing a nude, semi-nude or sexually explicit image of a minor can be considered child pornography. It can be prosecuted as a state or federal felony and can even lead to having to register as a sex offender.

Crazy as it seems, some prosecutors have gone after kids for taking and sending pictures of themselves. There was a case in Florida a couple of years ago where a teenage boy and girl photographed themselves nude and engaged in “unspecified sexual behavior.” One kid sent the picture to the other and somehow the police got involved. They were tried and convicted for production and distribution of child porn and the teen who received the image had the additional charge of possession. An appeals court upheld the convictions.

In January this year, three teenage girls from Pennsylvania were charged for creating child porn and the three boys who received the images were charged for possessing it. And, according to CBS News, a Texas eighth-grader in October spent a night in jail after a coach found a nude picture on his cell phone, sent by another student. › Continue reading…

Tags: , , , ,

Facebook’s privacy settings, in most cases, don’t permit you to expose your information to everyone on the Web. By default, the settings typically show your profile and other data only to “My Networks and Friends.” While that might include a lot of people, it doesn’t include the entire world.

These settings can be modified, but most of them can only be tightened. With a few exceptions, you don’t even have the option to make a lot of your information available to the public at large. One exception is media files such as photos and videos, which, by default, can be viewed by “everyone.” But you can use privacy settings to restrict who can see your photos all the way down to specific friends or even “only me.”

Video – How to configure settings

Mouse over to privacy settings

Start by hovering your mouse over the “Settings” tab near the upper-right corner and select Privacy Settings. There you’ll find options to control who can see your profile as well as other information about you, such as your “personal info,” status updates, photos, videos tagged of you, and who your friends are. You can control who can see your profile within Facebook and you can turn off access to public search engines such as Google. There are plenty of other settings, including ones to control who can write on your wall and who can comment on notes, photos, or other elements of your site.
Settings vary according to what you’re trying to control and, because of the confusing user interface, you might have to hunt around a bit. For example, to change the privacy settings on your own photo albums within the Privacy Settings area you would have to find the fine print under Photos Tagged of You that says “Edit Photo Albums Privacy Settings” or navigate from the Applications tray at the bottom left corner of your browser. That “privacy wizard” they’re working on can’t come a moment too soon.

Another relatively unknown feature is the ability to create multiple friends lists and assign different privileges to people on different lists. For example, if you want only certain people to know your cell phone number you can create a list like “good friends” and another called “colleagues” to make that information available only to people on those lists. You can create lists by clicking on the Friends tab on the blue navigation bar and then clicking on “Make a New List” in the left column.

Third party applications

Be especially careful when it comes to third-party applications. For example, I use an application from Eye-Fi that automatically syncs my photos to Facebook and Flickr through my Wi-Fi network. When I review cameras, I often take ugly and stupid test pictures and, if I’m not careful, those pictures can be automatically loaded to my Facebook page for everyone to see. But my most embarrassing moment was about a year ago, when I tried out the New York Times Quiz on a day I hadn’t read the paper, only to have my low score posted for all my Facebook friends to see, including my editor at The New York Times.

Regardless of how you configure your privacy settings, there is a reality of the social Web that can’t be configured away. Any digital information that is posted can be copied, captured, cached, forwarded, and reposted by anyone who has access to it. Even if some embarrassing photo or information is up for only a few minutes, there is the possibility that someone might copy it and send it around. And–as many people are painfully aware–friends can become ex-friends. So even if you’re reasonably careful about who you let on your page, you never know what they might do with the information you post.

Tags: , ,
« Previous posts Back to top