The Law is Still Catching Predators -- Just Not on TV

A new report finds that more people are being arrested for sexually soliciting youth online than they were six years ago. However, this is mostly due to "sting" operations, where the number of arrests for soliciting undercover investigators who posed as juveniles increased almost 500%. In contrast, arrests for solicitation of actual children increased 21% from 2000-2006. Although it should be alarming that those crimes involving actual children are increasing, it is important to remember that internet use overall during this time has increased much more than 21%. So, proportionally, these solicitations are on the decline.

According to the report, arrests of online predators comprised only 1% of all sex crimes against minors. By far, the vast majority of sex crimes against minors are within the family or local community -- not by online strangers. On a similar note, the report also noted that there is little to no evidence that minors were being "lured" by adults or found by predators based on personal information they post. Instead, youths were the ones reaching out to people whom they knew to be adults and seeking relationships with them. Unfortunately, some of these adults take advantage of such situations.

Bottom line is that online predation remains a rare occurrence. Minors are more often abused by someone close to them (either a family or local community member), and when they are sexually involved with someone online, it is someone whom they already know to be an adult, and actively have formed a relationship with.

Fear-based Spin

Although I have an earlier blog post about the Internet Safety Technical Task Force report, I came across an article that I must vent over.

To recap, the ISTTF report was published as an official statement of the Task Force regarding their opinions and recommendations regarding online safety for minors, and how to approach this issue going forward. Their main points were (see pages 4 & 5 of the Executive Summary):
1. The use of the internet by adults to abduct minors is very rare. Adult predation cases that incorporated the internet typically involved "post-pubescent youth who were aware that they were meeting an adult male for the purpose of engaging in sexual activity." Random abduction is essentially unheard of.
2. "Bullying and harassment, most often by peers, are the most frequent threats that minors
face, both online and offline." In other words, researchers, policy makers, and other concerned adults should focus on bullying, not predators, when striving to improve online safety.
3. "The Internet increases the availability of harmful, problematic and illegal content, but does
not always increase minors’ exposure."

So, imagine my dismay when I see an article whose headline reads: "Study Proves American Teens are at Serious Risk." This article cries: "Abuse, bullying, hatred and pornography crowd the internet; and no where are they more prevalent, or more dangerous, than on sites geared towards teens." Huh? Did I miss something here?

Unfortunately, I did not. For this is no article, but a press release disguised as news written to promote an online safety service. Too bad the author of the release didn't see the Task Force recommendation that the Attorneys General NOT "endorse any one technology or set of technologies to protect minors online." (p. 6).

Hopefully parents and other adults will notice and act accordingly.

Internet Safety Technical Task Force Carries a Strong Message

It takes great news like this to awaken me from my holiday slumber. The Internet Safety Technical Task Force is releasing their report which concludes that ""actual threats that youth [online] may face appear to be different than the threats most people imagine." The New York Times headline reads: Report Calls Online Threats to Children Overblown.

I feel both happy and vindicated. Happy, because this is an accurate assessment of the experiences of youth online. Vindicated because I set up this blog and have been making presentations with this message for several years now.

Larry Magid, who served on the Task Force, summed it up beautifully by saying: "While the task force found that youth risk from predators is a concern, the overwhelming majority of youth are not in danger of being harmed by an adult predator they meet online."

Instead, according to the Task Force report, the focus of our online safety efforts should lean towards better understanding -- and preventing -- cyberbullying.

Cornfed Citizen Safety

Image by glsims99 via FlickrDr. Kris pointed me in the direction of Net Safe Kansas, a new website based in Kansas looking to protect their state’s Internet users. Maybe it’s a Kansas thing, but apparently Internet users there are ridiculously uneducated and can’t do research for themselves. On top of that, the website creators believe that their oh-so-exiting website will draw children in to read all of their rules. I was bored … what 12-year-old is going to stick around to read these things? (My comments on these "rules" are in italics.)

• Don't believe everything you read online, especially from someone in a chat room. It's extremely easy to lie online and predators will tell you anything to gain your trust. For example the "14-year-old girl" you just met online might actually be a 40-year-old man trying to gain your trust. Or the “14-year-old girl” you just met online might actually be a 160-year-old boy from your neighboring high school fulfilling a dare from his friends.

• Choose a random user name or screen name. Make sure it doesn't reveal your name, age, school, location or interests. For example, the user name "CutieCougar94" might reveal to a predator that this person is likely female, a student at a school with a Cougar mascot and born in 1994." Or people of my generation will think that you’re a cute older woman looking for a younger man and that you quite possibly graduated in 1994.

• Don't respond to messages that are mean or in any way make you feel uncomfortable. It is not your fault if you receive a message like this. Tell your parents right away so they can contact the online service provider. Messages that come to me that make me uncomfortable aren’t always illegal … if it’s not illegal, the online service provider can’t do anything anyway.

• Stick with friends. It's always safer to chat with friends you know in real life. Strangers online are bad news. I was 22, online talking to strangers and met my best friend. Strangers online aren’t always bad news. You can safely meet some incredible people online.

Then they have a “NetSafe Kids Pledge” that made me laugh … and then I felt kinda bad for laughing at the ridiculousness of it … for about 37 seconds.

NetSafe Kids Pledge

1. I will turn off my computer monitor right away and tell a trusted adult if anything makes me feel scared, uncomfortable, or confused. There are TONS of things on the internet that confuse me. If I turned off the monitor every time that happened, I’d never learn anything. (I do understand what they’re getting at, though.)

2. I will tell my parents or guardian if anyone online asks me my name, my address, my telephone number, or the name and location of my school. Or I could just tell them no or ignore them or block them.

3. I will never share personal information such as my address, my telephone number, my parents' or guardian's work address/telephone number, or the name and location of my school without my parents' or guardian's permission. Why would a teenager share their parent’s work number with a stranger online?

4. I will tell my parents or guardian if anyone online asks to meet me in person.

5. I will never meet in person with anyone I have first "met" online without checking with my parents or guardian. If my parents or guardian agrees to the meeting, it will be in a public place and my parents or guardian must come along.

6. I will talk with my parents or guardian so that we can set up rules for going online. The rules will include the time of day I may be online, the length of time I may be online, whom I may communicate with while online, and appropriate areas for me to visit while online. I will not break these rules or access other areas without their permission. Seriously? I was a good kid growing up. Straight-A student, top of the class, blah blah blah, and I wouldn’t have set up rules like this with my parents. Do you know any teenager that has?

7. I will tell a trusted adult if I come across anything that makes me feel scared, uncomfortable, or confused. I will not download anything from anyone without permission from my parents or guardian. Stay away from Wikipedia.

8. I will not use rude or mean language on the Internet. *bites her tongue so she doesn’t say something inappropriate*

9. I will never respond to any messages that are mean or in any way make me feel uncomfortable. If I do get a message like that, I will tell a trusted adult right away so that he or she can contact the online service.

10. I will always remember that people online may not be who they seem. Because I can't see or even hear the person it would be easy for someone to misrepresent himself or herself. For example, someone indicating that "she" is a "12-year-old-girl" could in reality be an older man. Hello stereotypes.


So, it seems that NetSafe Kansas has a good idea … but it almost feels patronizing to go through their website. I am pretty sure that there are Kansan citizens who KNOW better than the website assumes. Also, the fact that their kids & teens pages are still geared towards adults doesn’t make it any more marketable. The bare bones of it might one day be improved, but spreading more “stereotypical” internet information doesn’t help anyone.

Frivolous electrical conversation

irdImage via WikipediaI truly believe that most teens know what they're doing when they begin playing online. They don't get into a chat room, end up on a pornographic site, or visit with strangers without knowing they've done it. However, the media explosion of shows like To Catch A Predator and news headlines reading "Man has sex with girl he met on MySpace" has made it seem as though teens use the internet without knowing what they could get into. After 23 pages of "High Tech or High Risk: Moral Panics about Girls Online" (authors Justine Cassell & Meg Cramer from Northwestern University's Center for Technology and Social Behavior), I wanted to go and hug these women. Finally a well-written, easy-too-read article that I agreed with!

First, some general statements from Cassel & Cramer that I think always need repeating:
- "... family members and friends ... are still the most frequent perpetrators of child sexual abuse."

- "... offenses against children ... numbers have been diminishing ... since the advent of the internet."

- "... the majority of these sexual solicitations ... were not from adult predators, but instead came from other youth."

- "Often, children who do begin online relationships with an abuser fit a particular profile ... 'a greater tendency for conflict or lack of communication with their parents; high levels of delinquency, including committing assault, vandalism or theft; have a troubled personality due to depression, peer victimization, or a distressing life event.'"


Second, some statements regarding the history of "moral panic" with "the compromised virtue of young girls"

- "... the panic over young girls at risk from communication technologies is not new rhetoric in America. There has been a recurring moral panic throughout history, not just over real threats of technological danger, but also over the compromised virtue of young girls, parental loss of control in the face of a seductive machine, and the debate over whether women can ever be high tech without being in jeopardy."

- This is later addressed as the scares the telegraph (yes, the telegraph was apparently scary) created; "Media critics of the time desicribed the telegraph as used by 'talkative women' who had 'frivolous electrical conversations' about inconsequential personal subjects.'" Stories written during telegraph-time were morality tales expressing the opinion that "women's use of men's technology would come to no good end."

- Even the telephone was lambasted for it's use. "Despite companies' efforts to direct how th telephone was used, women nevertheless cultivated their own purposes or 'delinquent activities' as they were thought of - primarily social interaction."

- "... the politics of both the Victorian era and the early twentieth century - of rapid modernization and technical advancements - has many parallels with today's societal response to the advent of the internet."

- With regards to the definition of moral panic "the media relies on bias, exaggeration and distortion to manufacture news." If you read the first four quotes I pulled from the article, you can see how the media exaggerates what studies actually say.

Third, tomorrow: "What girls do online."

To Catch a Predator Settles and Finishes

Though refusing to disclose the amount, NBC has settled a lawsuit filed by the family of a man who committed suicide when confronted with cameras for “To Catch a Predator.” Mr. Conradt, an ADA from Texas, had allegedly engaged in sexually explicit online chats with someone he believed was underage, but actually was and adult volunteer for Perverted Justice, a group dedicated to entrapping potential child sexual predators. The group was a paid consultant for NBC in the “Predator” series.

According to the New York Times, the volunteer masquerading as a child arranged to meet with Conradt as part of "Predator" sting facilitated by a local police department. Quoting the times, "Conradt did not show up at the bait house, so the local police, encouraged by NBC (according to the lawsuit), decided to arrest him at his home. As the police and camera crews entered the home, Mr. Conradt shot himself in the head."

According to the sister, Patricia Conradt, a police officer at the scene of the shooting said “That’ll make good TV.” The LA Times reports that the Texas DA's office "declined to pursue the more than 20 cases related to the “Predator” sting operation related to this case, citing problems with the evidence gathered."

There is no talk of continuing the series at this point.

The dangers of MySpace

Last weekend, I traveled four hours in a mom-van to Wildhorse Canyon, to participate in a young adult church retreat. Over lunch on Saturday, the table of eight talked about what we were doing in school (most of the 320 people that went were students), and what we eventually wanted to do. Since I am in school, am an intern (Hi Dr. Kris!) and am working part-time, I had a lot to say. As I mentioned that I work with how the internet is affecting teens’ sexuality, faces around the table began to turn inside out. As a member of one of the many left-leaning Christian churches in our gorgeous Pacific Northwest city, I was surprised by the reaction of a girl directly across the table from me.

Breathlessly, she almost shouted “the church doesn’t approve of the use of MySpace … by anyone!” and I couldn’t help but laugh. I played devil’s advocate (while at church camp! Oh no!) and asked her to show me in the Bible where that was mentioned “we are a Bible-based church, aren’t we?” I didn’t really mean to embarrass her, but I did, and she didn’t say too much to me the rest of lunch. Oops! Not the way to get conversations going, Sarah.

Another girl eventually started talking to me (while no one was watching … she couldn’t be associated with one of those* girls) about why she believed MySpace was dangerous. “You have a profile on there, and then perverts can find you and stalk you!” I was a little more tactful in explaining to her that you can have a private account; set up controls, keep strangers out (know my last name? only then can we be friends) and that you don’t have to branch out from your main circle of friends if you don’t want to. I think I know 95% of my friends list from in-person relationships.

I was able to talk to another guy at the table about how MySpace is creating positive opportunities for non-profit outreaches. He didn’t realize the positivity that could come from responsible MySpace use, and I felt really great being able to explain this stuff to these kids**. I offered not only the Virtual Mystery Tour’s MySpace address to them, but also my personal address as starting points if any of them ever got over their fear of "all the perverts". And we’ll see if they ever make eye contact with me at church again.

Really though, I was surprised to see such a different reaction to MySpace from people somewhat near my age group. Rather than experimenting with the internet, these 18- and 19-year-old students were acting like my mom; afraid that a misspelled word in Google would yield such wild pornography she'd never be the same. It makes me wonder whether the media is being “effective” in their campaign to scare the younger generation away from the internet. Time will tell. Until then I’ll be searching Leviticus for “If thine daughter maketh a MySpace account, sell her to the Canaanites.”



*aka – one who not only has a personal MySpace account, but also accesses another for school credit
**I later found out my table was mostly college Freshmen … almost a decade younger than me.

To emphasize or de-emphasize danger?

In a battle of the experts, Dr. Amy Tiemann takes issue with David Pogue's New York Times article How Dangerous is the Internet for Children? His answer: not very. Her answer: there are still risks! Of course, both are right. But I still side with Pogue.

Pogue may have gone overboard by writing "I could not find a single example of a preteen getting abducted and murdered by an Internet predator," because Tiemann rebuts with an example of a 13-year-old who was abducted and killed, balking at the idea of an arbitrary age cutoff. Still going to her tragic example's memory page, one still cannot determine the important factor: Did this young girl willingly go off with this man? Sure, the parents state that they knew their daughter would never go off with a man she didn't know and without telling her family, but, do we really know that was the case? Of course this young girl did not ask to be murdered. She wanted only good to come out of her online friendship. But I hesitate to say that a child will ALWAYS tell their parents EVERYTHING.

A horrible story? Yes. But again, we need to ask: How typical is it? The answer, by investigating news stories and research remains the same -- highly unlikely. As Pogue states "The tales of pedophiles luring children out of their homes are like plane crashes: they happen extremely rarely, but when they do, they make headlines everywhere."

It's the nature of the beast: media cover sensational stories and we respond viscerally to them. But the same way I still plan to get on an airplane tomorrow, so should parents allow their children to explore the internet. Should we use precautions? Heck yes. I fasten my seatbelt, fly on professional airlines, and listen to the safety warnings. Internet users can benefit from similar safety precautions. But let's not prevent the journeys they will take from happening at all.

Right and Wrong Ways to "Catch a Predator"

According to Reuters, the US Federal Courts will continue to hear the case dealing with the $100 million lawsuit against NBC. NBC's series, "To Catch a Predator" is being blamed for the suicide of a former Texas prosecutor who was caught up in its popular sting strategy.

Assistant district attorney Louis Conradt shot himself in November 2006 after police officers came to his home in Terrell, Texas, accompanied by an NBC news crew planning to film his arrest for the television show. Conradt was allegedly expecting to meet up with a 13-year-old boy he believed he was communicating with online.

The tension is over the issue of entrapment. Critics of To Catch a Predator say the show does not report news, but rather makes news by luring people into illegal activities they normally would not do. Supporters say this show has done a great service keeping potential child molestors away from our children. The results of the hearing seemed to side with the critics "a reasonable jury could find that NBC crossed the line from responsible journalism to irresponsible and reckless intrusion into law enforcement."

Age of Consent

An article in the Edmonton Sun reports on online grooming by sex traffickers who find victims in Canada and then bring them to Las Vegas under the guise of being wined and dined by good-looking high rollers. Instead, these women (and sometimes men) end up being forced into sex work as "high priced call girls" after being beaten and raped. These sex traffickers tend to target young persons who have MySpace and Facebook profiles and state they are 18 years old "in order to avoid detection by authorities looking for predators after underage kids."

Virginia's Youth Internet Safety Task Force Releases Report

Virginia's Attorney General Bob McDonnell compiled a "rock star lineup" to investigate ways to protect Internet users and prosecute online criminals. The result, is a 100+ page report full of recommendations based on five meetings of three different groups -- The Law Enforcement Working Group, The Parents/Educators Working Group, and The Technology Partners Working Group. Most of the changes suggested consist of strengthening laws regarding access to child pornography and toughening punishments for those caught soliciting minors online. A few pertain to creating educational materials for children and parents about how to be safe online (one of the suggestions is to create a fun video game to teach kids about internet safety -- do these ever work?).

Overall, the report is filled with every message one would expect, with no additional surprises: The Internet is dangerous, we must find a way to stop predators, we must rise to the challenge to save our children. There are also several statistics quoted in the report: some are cited, some are not. One that is cited is the infamous "one in five children is sexually solicited online" from the UNH report of 2000; that number has decreased to 1 in 7 in 2005. One that has no reference, other than United States Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, is “There are as many as 50,000 predators online trolling for child sex victims at any given time.” I have no idea where that number came from or how it was derived.

Many people participated in the Task Force -- judges, law makers, teachers, parents, even teens. But two groups not represented were psychologists and researchers. I wish they were invited to the table to provide a better balance of voice. I think this is a topic worth addressing, but it should be investigated not only with policy in mind, but also a true understanding of what is going on. So little is known about cyberspace when it comes to sex and even less is known about the active role children are playing in it. The fact that the Task Force did not invite people who may have insight into this aspect of the problem either shows that those in charge are completely unaware of this aspect of the issue or are trying to deny it.

Megan's Law goes virtual

According to several news sources, including MSNBC, Virginia Attorney General Bob McDonnell has proposed a bill that would require sex offenders to not only register their physical address with the state, but also their "online identities." In other words, when sex offenders have to register in accordance with Megan's Law, they will have to disclose their email addresses on IM screen names along with all their other personal information, which can include their place of work, make and model of car, and basic physical description.

While I appreciate legislative attempts to increase the safety of our youth, I believe that this is yet another misguided attempt that will not solve the problem of online predators (which, by the way, we really do not have a sense of how big a problem it actually is). I mean, how hard is it to establish new online identities? Heck, you can create several of them in the span of an hour. All a sex offender has to do is register one or two of them with the state, and then simply interact with youth using one of the other 20 they have kept to themselves.

I have a neighbor whose friend, "Steve," pretty much lives with him. In fact, I thought the guy did officially live in this house, but it turns out he doesn't -- he just crashes there all the time. Steve is a registered sex offender, having had been convicted for a sexual encounters with a young boy. But when I go online to look up the names and pictures of the sex offenders in my neighborhood, Steve is not among them. Why? Because he dutifully registered in his official zip code of residence. Nevermind he is never there -- he is always hanging around on our block -- he is obeying the law perfectly. But if he ever does reoffend (I have no reason to believe he will or will not either way) he most likely will do so near me, where he spends most of his time.

Now translate this concept to cyberspace where it is infinitely easier to claim one identity (read: residence) as your real one and then use another one or two or more as you hang out in cyberspace. There are provisions in this bill against this scenario; "To guard against offenders registering one address but using another on MySpace, the penalty would be the same as it would be for not registering or for providing incorrect information, which could result in a misdemeanor or felony charge," states the MSNBC coverage. But you know how it is. A misdemeanor in return for anonymity? Doesn't sound like a bad trade off to me. That is, if you get caught.

Just ask Steve about that.