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.
Monday, December 11, 2006
Monday, December 04, 2006
Couldn't say it better myself
Teens can indeed be the voice of reason. There's an article in the Minneapolis Star Tribune that is essentially a transcript of a focus group where teens are talking about social networking. It's a great piece; the teens are able to articulate the realities of how they and their peers use the Internet to connect with each other. Some of the basic messages:
1. Don't ban your teen from using the Internet because they will just go over to a friend's house and use it there.
2. The media gives MySpace a bad reputation. Learn about what social networking is really about from the people who use it, not report on it.
3. Parent involvement is good as long as the parent and child can talk to each other about what is important to them.
Ryenn says it best:
"I think the Internet is safe unless you make it unsafe."
That about sums it up.
1. Don't ban your teen from using the Internet because they will just go over to a friend's house and use it there.
2. The media gives MySpace a bad reputation. Learn about what social networking is really about from the people who use it, not report on it.
3. Parent involvement is good as long as the parent and child can talk to each other about what is important to them.
Ryenn says it best:
"I think the Internet is safe unless you make it unsafe."
That about sums it up.
Friday, November 17, 2006
99% Pure
According to a study commssioned by the US government, about 1% of sites indexed by Google are sexually explicit. They also found that the strictist Internet filters block 91% of this content while the more lenient ones (that also allow for educational material related to sex to be searched) block about 40%.
The study also debunked the notion that porn or other sex related material is the most commonly searched topics: their study found that less than two percent of searches pertained to sexually related content.
So, are we making a lot of fuss over nothing? Maybe, maybe not. No matter what, parents are going to be concerned about the content that their children encounter. And the 2005 report by Crimes Against Children found that one-third of youth online saw sexual material they did not want to see, compared to one-fourth in 2000.
But how many youth are seeing sexual material that they wanted to see? Or how much of the unwanted sexual material was seen because they were trying to look up information related to sex and simply used the "wrong" words in their queries? We will never know unless we ask.
I am glad that researchers are asking about youth exposure to sexual content. It's also great that they are asking about relationships formed online, and experiences of sexual solicitation. However, we need to know more about purposeful searching for sexual information. Not just sexual health information -- we do know a little bit about teens' searching habits when it comes to looking for information about STDs and pregnancy -- but information about sex, what it is, and what is it like. Without healthy role models and examples of the actual experience of sex, youth will seek out the information and we have no idea what the results and the effects of those results are.
There is no easy solution here. I don't know how we are going to solve the problem of children asking questions and having easy access to all sort of inaccurate answers. But until we start to grasp the extent of the issue, we can't even begin to ask the right questions that will lead us to sensible solutions.
The study also debunked the notion that porn or other sex related material is the most commonly searched topics: their study found that less than two percent of searches pertained to sexually related content.
So, are we making a lot of fuss over nothing? Maybe, maybe not. No matter what, parents are going to be concerned about the content that their children encounter. And the 2005 report by Crimes Against Children found that one-third of youth online saw sexual material they did not want to see, compared to one-fourth in 2000.
But how many youth are seeing sexual material that they wanted to see? Or how much of the unwanted sexual material was seen because they were trying to look up information related to sex and simply used the "wrong" words in their queries? We will never know unless we ask.
I am glad that researchers are asking about youth exposure to sexual content. It's also great that they are asking about relationships formed online, and experiences of sexual solicitation. However, we need to know more about purposeful searching for sexual information. Not just sexual health information -- we do know a little bit about teens' searching habits when it comes to looking for information about STDs and pregnancy -- but information about sex, what it is, and what is it like. Without healthy role models and examples of the actual experience of sex, youth will seek out the information and we have no idea what the results and the effects of those results are.
There is no easy solution here. I don't know how we are going to solve the problem of children asking questions and having easy access to all sort of inaccurate answers. But until we start to grasp the extent of the issue, we can't even begin to ask the right questions that will lead us to sensible solutions.
Monday, November 13, 2006
Breaking up is not so hard to do anymore
You've heard it from several places already I bet, but Britney Spears supposedly broke up with her husband Kevin Federline via a text message. And for extra technological fun, it was captured on YouTube, as poor Kevin was on a talk show when it happened. Just goes to show you that if you check your messages while in the company of others, karma is going to catch up with you.
I was disappointed in the basic story coverage by the US news affiliates. It seems as though they got lazy in their research. The Rueters news article which is the one everyone seems to be using (it's the one I linked to via MSNBC) states that "No U.S. figures were available to track the use of text messaging to dump partners." Although they are correct, there is some US research that is close enough to make it worth mentioning. According to a Pew Internet and American Life survey conducted in 2001, 13% of teens have used IM to break up with someone (to be fair, 17% used it to ask someone out). Given that it's been five years since this research, one can imagine the numbers for breaking up using text messages would be similar. It's also similar to the Swiss figure, which states that 9% of their young population has broken up with someone using a text message.
So Kevin, don't feel so bad. You can get online and IM your friends to let them know how sad you are.
I was disappointed in the basic story coverage by the US news affiliates. It seems as though they got lazy in their research. The Rueters news article which is the one everyone seems to be using (it's the one I linked to via MSNBC) states that "No U.S. figures were available to track the use of text messaging to dump partners." Although they are correct, there is some US research that is close enough to make it worth mentioning. According to a Pew Internet and American Life survey conducted in 2001, 13% of teens have used IM to break up with someone (to be fair, 17% used it to ask someone out). Given that it's been five years since this research, one can imagine the numbers for breaking up using text messages would be similar. It's also similar to the Swiss figure, which states that 9% of their young population has broken up with someone using a text message.
So Kevin, don't feel so bad. You can get online and IM your friends to let them know how sad you are.
Tuesday, October 31, 2006
The 29-Year-Old Virgin
Slightly off topic, but bear with me here. This deserves special notice. The Feds have now expanded the audience of their abstinence-only message to include unmarried adults up to age 29 according to the Kaiser Family Foundation.
I understand that many people -- especially parents -- want their children to refrain from sexual intercourse while they are in high school. But to not engage in sexual activity until age 30? That seems more than a little preposterous to me (and to the rest of America; over 90% of persons in their 20s are sexually active). Currently, the average age of marriage for females is 25 and it's 27 for males. This new policy really shows that the government is serious about its abstinence-only guidelines: that people should remain abstinent until marriage.
As a 38-year-old never married female, I have to admit that this administration would be disappointed in my behavior, so I am more than a little biased here. But I cannot imagine that very many people are going to take this suggestion seriously. And is it even healthy -- not just physically, but emotionally and mentally -- to not engage in sexual activity for such a long period of time?
If this sort of policy takes hold in our educational system, the Internet is really going to have to step up in its role as sex educator. With no information about contraception, STDs, or sexual pleasure reaching anyone before marriage through the schools or community programs (the elephant in the room, of course, is the assumption that somehow people are going to magically get this information on their wedding day), the WWW is going to become more heavily relied on for persons of all ages who want basic sexual health information.
I know a lot of places that are up for the task for teens such as Cool Nurse, Sex Etc., and Teen Wire but what about adults? Hopefully there are some great sites for them too as they are kept in the dark about even the most basic sexual health information.
I understand that many people -- especially parents -- want their children to refrain from sexual intercourse while they are in high school. But to not engage in sexual activity until age 30? That seems more than a little preposterous to me (and to the rest of America; over 90% of persons in their 20s are sexually active). Currently, the average age of marriage for females is 25 and it's 27 for males. This new policy really shows that the government is serious about its abstinence-only guidelines: that people should remain abstinent until marriage.
As a 38-year-old never married female, I have to admit that this administration would be disappointed in my behavior, so I am more than a little biased here. But I cannot imagine that very many people are going to take this suggestion seriously. And is it even healthy -- not just physically, but emotionally and mentally -- to not engage in sexual activity for such a long period of time?
If this sort of policy takes hold in our educational system, the Internet is really going to have to step up in its role as sex educator. With no information about contraception, STDs, or sexual pleasure reaching anyone before marriage through the schools or community programs (the elephant in the room, of course, is the assumption that somehow people are going to magically get this information on their wedding day), the WWW is going to become more heavily relied on for persons of all ages who want basic sexual health information.
I know a lot of places that are up for the task for teens such as Cool Nurse, Sex Etc., and Teen Wire but what about adults? Hopefully there are some great sites for them too as they are kept in the dark about even the most basic sexual health information.
Wednesday, October 25, 2006
My MySpace Messages
Today "AsianPie" sent me a message asking me to join her group called Top Live Web Cams. And "Cool Girl" asked me to join Hot Chicks. Although flattered (how did she know I just turned 38 and realized I am staring 40 head-on?), I declined. Actually, I flagged her as Spam. And then there is poor Kristi. Last week she supposedly sent me an invitation to join Brunettes not Blondes; the message contained a picture of a young woman's backside in a pastel pink thong, lying with legs splayed (I have no idea if the woman in the picture is Brunette, Blonde, or none of the above). Kristi later sent a message apologizing and saying "this is not a real group and I did not message you. some1 got my password and did this."
So, with some sense of satisfaction, I denied AsianPie, Cool Girl and even Kristi the chance to have me as a member of their groups. I even called them SPAM and got to click "yes" when asked if I really thought of them that way. It may indeed be the first time that I got to reject a girl from the sexy crowd. It was fun to think of them as the artificial meat product that sits for years on grocery store shelves.
Maybe there is a lesson to be learned from these young women after all.
So, with some sense of satisfaction, I denied AsianPie, Cool Girl and even Kristi the chance to have me as a member of their groups. I even called them SPAM and got to click "yes" when asked if I really thought of them that way. It may indeed be the first time that I got to reject a girl from the sexy crowd. It was fun to think of them as the artificial meat product that sits for years on grocery store shelves.
Maybe there is a lesson to be learned from these young women after all.
Tuesday, October 17, 2006
Everybody's Doing It...At Least Up North
According to a survey conducted by CampusKiss 87% of its users have had virtual sex, with over half using IM (53%) but almost as many using a Webcam (48%) while 44% stuck to the technologically primitive telephone.
No, this is not the most scientific poll ever conducted, and yes, the 2,484 respondents are Canadian, but this glimpse into the sexual behaviors of young adults is interesting. It shows that cybersex is not uncommon and hardly an activity reserved for deviants. It shows that a heckuva lot of college kids have Webcams and know how to use them.
It shows that the US really needs to get its act in gear and collect similar data from our kids.
No, this is not the most scientific poll ever conducted, and yes, the 2,484 respondents are Canadian, but this glimpse into the sexual behaviors of young adults is interesting. It shows that cybersex is not uncommon and hardly an activity reserved for deviants. It shows that a heckuva lot of college kids have Webcams and know how to use them.
It shows that the US really needs to get its act in gear and collect similar data from our kids.
Monday, October 02, 2006
Just me and my 5,000 closest friends
A recent article in USA Today profles a 17-year-old girl who has over 5,000 friends in MySpace.
It's girls like Brittnie who give MySpace a bad rap. She admits she doesn't know about 90% of the people she befriends. She admits she denies friendship status to anyone with fewer than 150 friends because it means that "no one likes them." Actually, "admit" is probably the wrong word to choose here. In the article, it sounds more like bragging.
No one knows what friend collecting does to a teens' self-esteem, understanding or appreciation of true friendship, or ability to form close relationships in the physical world. My hunch is that social networking can benefit all of these things, but taken to this extreme, it could be harmful. How does having thousands of "friends" who you have never met, and never will, encourage forming true bonds with those who really care about you? To me, it smells of a demise of intimacy in our culture that might impact the youth of our generation for years to come. Maybe I am overreacting -- like I said, we have no data on the effects of social networking on friendships -- but I believe that moderation and selectivity are the keys to successful relationships. Not collecting people as though they were stamps.
It's girls like Brittnie who give MySpace a bad rap. She admits she doesn't know about 90% of the people she befriends. She admits she denies friendship status to anyone with fewer than 150 friends because it means that "no one likes them." Actually, "admit" is probably the wrong word to choose here. In the article, it sounds more like bragging.
No one knows what friend collecting does to a teens' self-esteem, understanding or appreciation of true friendship, or ability to form close relationships in the physical world. My hunch is that social networking can benefit all of these things, but taken to this extreme, it could be harmful. How does having thousands of "friends" who you have never met, and never will, encourage forming true bonds with those who really care about you? To me, it smells of a demise of intimacy in our culture that might impact the youth of our generation for years to come. Maybe I am overreacting -- like I said, we have no data on the effects of social networking on friendships -- but I believe that moderation and selectivity are the keys to successful relationships. Not collecting people as though they were stamps.
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
Be my friend!
Since I talk about it all the time, I thought I would go ahead and do it. I have my own MySpace page. Check it out at here and let me know what you think.
So far, I have added friends and had a couple of people make comments. I have surfed for people who I believe are compatible with me (ususally people and organizations that are interested in teen sexuality) and I have made my page pretty cool -- thanks to the help of a friend.
What I haven't done, is really get into the community of MySpace. And I think that is part of the reason why so many of us adults simply don't get the appeal. True, we are at a disadvantage in that, for the most part, our friends we meet in person do not have pages, so we have to start our communities from scratch. And we were not brought up with the Internet as a main means of communication, so although we may rely on it today, we don't see it as an obvious starting place to socialize and connect. But teens do have friends with pages and they are used to building community online. So, as adults, we need to see the world through that perspective.
So I hunt for friends and figure out ways I can connect with them. So far, I haven't really come up with any solid ideas. So, I will do what the teens do. I will start leaving comments on my friend's pages so they know I am thinking about them. I will send bulletins so that everyone knows what I am doing. I will continue to surf for friends.
So, won't you be my friend? See you in MySpace!
So far, I have added friends and had a couple of people make comments. I have surfed for people who I believe are compatible with me (ususally people and organizations that are interested in teen sexuality) and I have made my page pretty cool -- thanks to the help of a friend.
What I haven't done, is really get into the community of MySpace. And I think that is part of the reason why so many of us adults simply don't get the appeal. True, we are at a disadvantage in that, for the most part, our friends we meet in person do not have pages, so we have to start our communities from scratch. And we were not brought up with the Internet as a main means of communication, so although we may rely on it today, we don't see it as an obvious starting place to socialize and connect. But teens do have friends with pages and they are used to building community online. So, as adults, we need to see the world through that perspective.
So I hunt for friends and figure out ways I can connect with them. So far, I haven't really come up with any solid ideas. So, I will do what the teens do. I will start leaving comments on my friend's pages so they know I am thinking about them. I will send bulletins so that everyone knows what I am doing. I will continue to surf for friends.
So, won't you be my friend? See you in MySpace!
Wednesday, August 30, 2006
"The Truth About Tweens"
According to a story in the British newspaper "The Independent," a new research study conducted by Dr. Joan Atwood reveals that 10% of girls between the ages of 8-13 had been asked intimate sexual questions in chatrooms and more than a third have had sexually explicit messages, photos and/or videos on their phones.
The study involved youth from Britain, Canada, Australia, and the US who were recruited in chatrooms. It appears to be the first study that asks younger girls about sex-related activities online.
Two things about this study come to mind. First, it was not conducted in the US. This is most likely because the US is not willing to consider the fact that children not even into their teens are being exposed to sexual messages to the extent that they are.
Second, playing off this theme of denial, this story was not reported in any US-based publication that I am aware of (I subscibe to several news alerts and like to think I scan the Internet extensively, actively seeking this information). It appears that no news is good news.
We can only hope that our country will be able to investigate issues such as these from a national perspective. There is no use pretending young people are not exposed to sexual material -- there is no pretending that young people are not the creators of this sexual material. But how will we know what is really going on if we are not allowed to ask?
The study involved youth from Britain, Canada, Australia, and the US who were recruited in chatrooms. It appears to be the first study that asks younger girls about sex-related activities online.
Two things about this study come to mind. First, it was not conducted in the US. This is most likely because the US is not willing to consider the fact that children not even into their teens are being exposed to sexual messages to the extent that they are.
Second, playing off this theme of denial, this story was not reported in any US-based publication that I am aware of (I subscibe to several news alerts and like to think I scan the Internet extensively, actively seeking this information). It appears that no news is good news.
We can only hope that our country will be able to investigate issues such as these from a national perspective. There is no use pretending young people are not exposed to sexual material -- there is no pretending that young people are not the creators of this sexual material. But how will we know what is really going on if we are not allowed to ask?
Wednesday, August 09, 2006
Warning: This blog may soon have a warning label
According to various news sources including Yahoo News there is a provision to a House appropriations bill floating around Congress that, if it passes, would require all web sites with "sexually explicit 'depictions'" to have a warning label. The reasoning is that if these sites have warning labels, then it would be easier for filtering software to block access to all such sites.
Like obscenity, there doesn't seem to be a clear definition of what a "sexually explicit depiction" actually is. But one thing is for sure: this web site would have a warning label. So would YouTube, MySpace, and all other diary-based URLs. So would all photo sites, unless they were carefully monitored for pictures of bachelor(ette) parties and such. Other sites with warning labels would include TeenWire and Sex Etc. and, oh yeah, the Center for Disease Control.
Does anyone in Congress see this slippery slope?
Like obscenity, there doesn't seem to be a clear definition of what a "sexually explicit depiction" actually is. But one thing is for sure: this web site would have a warning label. So would YouTube, MySpace, and all other diary-based URLs. So would all photo sites, unless they were carefully monitored for pictures of bachelor(ette) parties and such. Other sites with warning labels would include TeenWire and Sex Etc. and, oh yeah, the Center for Disease Control.
Does anyone in Congress see this slippery slope?
Wednesday, August 02, 2006
Another breath of fresh air!
Last week the House passed the Deleting Online Predators Act (DOPA) by a lopsided vote of 410-15. As a politician, how can you say you are against deleting online predators? I would love to hear the dissenters on that one. They are brave souls!
Although well-intentioned I'm sure, the bill was not well conceived and doesn't solve the problem it addresses. Larry Magid in his editorial eloquently points out the flaws of this bill.
DOPA attempts to get rid of online predators by requiring "recipients of universal service support for schools and libraries to protect minors from commercial social networking websites and chat rooms." Putting the onus on schools and libraries to protect minors? How, do tell, does this get rid of predators? All this does is drive the problem further underground as teens will have to be more secretive of their online use. And, as Magid points out, prevents social networking sites from being a positive teaching tool.
It would take a miracle, but let's hope each and every Senator sees the fundamental flaws in this bill before raising his or her hand to say "aye."
Although well-intentioned I'm sure, the bill was not well conceived and doesn't solve the problem it addresses. Larry Magid in his editorial eloquently points out the flaws of this bill.
DOPA attempts to get rid of online predators by requiring "recipients of universal service support for schools and libraries to protect minors from commercial social networking websites and chat rooms." Putting the onus on schools and libraries to protect minors? How, do tell, does this get rid of predators? All this does is drive the problem further underground as teens will have to be more secretive of their online use. And, as Magid points out, prevents social networking sites from being a positive teaching tool.
It would take a miracle, but let's hope each and every Senator sees the fundamental flaws in this bill before raising his or her hand to say "aye."
Saturday, July 29, 2006
A mom with common sense
I just wanted to share an article that was in the Seattle Times today. For every editorial like this one there are unfortunately 100s of others that create panic in the hearts of every parent. Linda Kanpp, a parent herself, wanted to know more about MySpace and did so from her objective, open, journalist mind.
The result? She learned about some bad stuff and also some good stuff. And she advocates for parents to get more involved with their children's online activities. So simple, yet so absent in the media today.
The result? She learned about some bad stuff and also some good stuff. And she advocates for parents to get more involved with their children's online activities. So simple, yet so absent in the media today.
Wednesday, July 19, 2006
Have you read your SPAM today?
Like many people I am sure, I don't take the time to read my SPAM. Thankfully, most of it goes into my Junk mail folder, and when I compare the amount I get to how much my partner gets, I consider myself one of the lucky ones.
But today, I decided to read some of it. Out of the eight (yes, only 8) messages I received, three were about sex.
1. One provided a link to where I could get Viagara for cheap. Remember, this medication requires a prescription from a doctor.
2. One told me about a fantastic product that could increase my penis size by 4 inches (10 cm). Needless to say, that didn't really interest me.
3. Finally, I got an email boasting about a product that would stop my "premature creaming."
What SPAM did your child get today? Ask him or her about it. It will help you learn what messages youth are bombarded with on a daily basis and potentially help start a conversation about sex. The one you have been meaning to have, but haven't gotten around to yet.
But today, I decided to read some of it. Out of the eight (yes, only 8) messages I received, three were about sex.
1. One provided a link to where I could get Viagara for cheap. Remember, this medication requires a prescription from a doctor.
2. One told me about a fantastic product that could increase my penis size by 4 inches (10 cm). Needless to say, that didn't really interest me.
3. Finally, I got an email boasting about a product that would stop my "premature creaming."
What SPAM did your child get today? Ask him or her about it. It will help you learn what messages youth are bombarded with on a daily basis and potentially help start a conversation about sex. The one you have been meaning to have, but haven't gotten around to yet.
Tuesday, July 11, 2006
It's official! MySpace is #1
According the the Internet tracking company Hitwise, MySpace was the most visited web site last week, reports USA Today. So it appears that MySpace is weathering all its negative press (or perhaps it is thriving because of it).
Although I do not doubt this statistic, I do have a problem with this brief article; USA Today misleadingly refers to MySpace as an "online teen hangout." While it is true that many users of this site are teens, adults still make up the vast majority of its members. Let's not let the press fuel the myths and culture of fear that is surrounding the phenomenon of social networking. An accurate portrayal of MySpace can help parents and others obtain a better understanding as to how it and other social networking sites work to help connect people to each other. While some may say I am nitpicking and/or arguing semantics, I believe that every piece of information can help create either a true -- or false -- concept of something. Something that is completely foreign to many whose only knowledge of social networking sites comes from the media.
Although I do not doubt this statistic, I do have a problem with this brief article; USA Today misleadingly refers to MySpace as an "online teen hangout." While it is true that many users of this site are teens, adults still make up the vast majority of its members. Let's not let the press fuel the myths and culture of fear that is surrounding the phenomenon of social networking. An accurate portrayal of MySpace can help parents and others obtain a better understanding as to how it and other social networking sites work to help connect people to each other. While some may say I am nitpicking and/or arguing semantics, I believe that every piece of information can help create either a true -- or false -- concept of something. Something that is completely foreign to many whose only knowledge of social networking sites comes from the media.
Sunday, June 25, 2006
MySpace caters to the concerns
Maybe it took a multi-million dollar lawsuit, but MySpace has created some new rules in order to protect the safety of minors.
MySpace users who are 18 or over will no longer be able to request to be on a 14- or 15-year-old's friends' list unless they already know either the youth's e-mail address or full name. This is to prevent prowlers from scoping for youth in MySpace, but will allow parents, relatives and other adults to be able to befriend a child -- IF they know his or her email address. This policy will not remove those adults who already are on minors' pages, so those with ill intent could be working overtime to befriend as many minors as possible before this rule goes into effect.
One of the major limitations to this regulation is that MySpace currently has no mechanism for verifying that users submit their true age when registering. I know many people who are supposedly 99 years old. And if someone wants to choose an age closer to their real one, it doesn't take a math genius to figure out what date of birth you need to register under in order to become an 18 year old and completely available to the public eye.
Another limitation is that this may encourage teens to become more secretive with their MySpace accounts. They may create one account with their real age for their parents to monitor: I'm sure it will be full of school events and some cool new music. And then a teen can have his or her "real" space, using a different email address, where they learn about parties, crushes, and other assorted gossip.
MySpace does need to increase its regulations. But don't think that there are not easy work arounds for teens who want to have a public profile.
MySpace users who are 18 or over will no longer be able to request to be on a 14- or 15-year-old's friends' list unless they already know either the youth's e-mail address or full name. This is to prevent prowlers from scoping for youth in MySpace, but will allow parents, relatives and other adults to be able to befriend a child -- IF they know his or her email address. This policy will not remove those adults who already are on minors' pages, so those with ill intent could be working overtime to befriend as many minors as possible before this rule goes into effect.
One of the major limitations to this regulation is that MySpace currently has no mechanism for verifying that users submit their true age when registering. I know many people who are supposedly 99 years old. And if someone wants to choose an age closer to their real one, it doesn't take a math genius to figure out what date of birth you need to register under in order to become an 18 year old and completely available to the public eye.
Another limitation is that this may encourage teens to become more secretive with their MySpace accounts. They may create one account with their real age for their parents to monitor: I'm sure it will be full of school events and some cool new music. And then a teen can have his or her "real" space, using a different email address, where they learn about parties, crushes, and other assorted gossip.
MySpace does need to increase its regulations. But don't think that there are not easy work arounds for teens who want to have a public profile.
Monday, June 19, 2006
Every parent's nightmare
By now you have read about the 16-year old girl from Michigan who was on her way to Jericho to marry a man she met on MySpace. She was an honor student, a "good girl" who somehow managed to convince her parents to get her a passport (she said she wanted to go to neighboring Canada to see a friend -- so much for the beefing of security post 9/11 making her life SAFER: before 9/11 passports were not needed to get to Canada...). Then she snuck out of her house and boarded a plane to meet her future husband.
Yup -- husband. Apparently the 21-year-old native of the West Bank and the Michigan girl were going to get married after she was to williningly converted to Islam and signed a marriage contract.
This story is about as prototypical (possibly stereotypical) when it comes to explaining parent fears about MySpace as any story can be. The girl in question was not really considered a "trouble-maker" and yet she boarded a plane for a war-ridden region to marry someone 5 years old who she had never met face to face without her family knowing can make anyone believe it could happen to their child.
But could it have been avoided? Possibly. The parents could have been a little more inquisitive about the trip to Canada -- where exactly was she going? Who would she be staying with? Her lies could have unraveled at that point. Adults can also check in with their children about their friends and who they are talking to and spending most of their time with. Given that she wanted to marry this guy, I am going to assume that they had interacted extensively online. Would his name ever come up if asked? Maybe, maybe not.
Meanwhile, the scorned husband-to-be is heartbroken on the other side of the world. He resents being labeled a predator and really believed that he had truly found love online. His parents knew about his relationship with the American girl and were supportive of the union.
The girl turns 17 this week, which means she is a year away from being able to unite with this young man without anyone being able to stop her legally. Will they still be together then? Probably not, as I would imagine that many precautions are being taken to keep them apart. But the internet is a place where one can create many identities and have many contact sources. If the two really do love each other, they can wait a year and become a true modern-day Romeo and Juliet.
Yup -- husband. Apparently the 21-year-old native of the West Bank and the Michigan girl were going to get married after she was to williningly converted to Islam and signed a marriage contract.
This story is about as prototypical (possibly stereotypical) when it comes to explaining parent fears about MySpace as any story can be. The girl in question was not really considered a "trouble-maker" and yet she boarded a plane for a war-ridden region to marry someone 5 years old who she had never met face to face without her family knowing can make anyone believe it could happen to their child.
But could it have been avoided? Possibly. The parents could have been a little more inquisitive about the trip to Canada -- where exactly was she going? Who would she be staying with? Her lies could have unraveled at that point. Adults can also check in with their children about their friends and who they are talking to and spending most of their time with. Given that she wanted to marry this guy, I am going to assume that they had interacted extensively online. Would his name ever come up if asked? Maybe, maybe not.
Meanwhile, the scorned husband-to-be is heartbroken on the other side of the world. He resents being labeled a predator and really believed that he had truly found love online. His parents knew about his relationship with the American girl and were supportive of the union.
The girl turns 17 this week, which means she is a year away from being able to unite with this young man without anyone being able to stop her legally. Will they still be together then? Probably not, as I would imagine that many precautions are being taken to keep them apart. But the internet is a place where one can create many identities and have many contact sources. If the two really do love each other, they can wait a year and become a true modern-day Romeo and Juliet.
Monday, June 12, 2006
Will Dateline put itself out of business?
For the past several months, Dateline has been targeting online predators. Although the TV-viewing audience continues to be enthralled week after week, each time the episode is the same thing over and over again: A man shows up to a random house expecting to hook up (inappropriately) with an underage girl and instead comes face to face with a news reporter and a camera crew. Each time, the man in question tries to make some plausible excuse as to why he is even there, nevermind with fast food in hand and sometimes only partially clothed.
My question is this: Why would anyone risk picking someone up on the Internet -- a child no less -- given even the slightest chance of not only getting caught but also caught on camera? And even if you don't become as infamous as those on Dateline, there are news stories cropping up all over the place, like this one from the Chicago Tribune about police setting up their own stings to catch pedophiles. And then there is the web site Perverted Justice who started this whole thing -- and whose 27-year-old founder recently signed a six-figure contract with Dateline, proving that this fascination isn't going away any time soon.
Obviously, I am over-simplifying this issue. There are some people out there who are compulsive, mentally ill, and cannot help themselves. But even then, the idea of finding "prey" online seems a high risk strategy. Maybe by showing people getting caught time and time again, Dateline and Perverted Justice will put themselves out of business? One can hope, but not count on it.
My question is this: Why would anyone risk picking someone up on the Internet -- a child no less -- given even the slightest chance of not only getting caught but also caught on camera? And even if you don't become as infamous as those on Dateline, there are news stories cropping up all over the place, like this one from the Chicago Tribune about police setting up their own stings to catch pedophiles. And then there is the web site Perverted Justice who started this whole thing -- and whose 27-year-old founder recently signed a six-figure contract with Dateline, proving that this fascination isn't going away any time soon.
Obviously, I am over-simplifying this issue. There are some people out there who are compulsive, mentally ill, and cannot help themselves. But even then, the idea of finding "prey" online seems a high risk strategy. Maybe by showing people getting caught time and time again, Dateline and Perverted Justice will put themselves out of business? One can hope, but not count on it.
Tuesday, May 23, 2006
Oprah gets in on the act
I always want to hear what Oprah has to say about a particular issue because she has power. A lot of power. So, when I came home early from work and turned on her show, I was excited to see that she was going to talk about online safety. I patiently waited through the Anderson Cooper interview, only to be met with disappointment.
First of all, the "segment" was two three minute bits separated by a commercial break as long as the piece itself. The opener was an update on some adults that had been convicted of rape and other violent and sexual behavior of children. These adults had been apprehended thanks to Oprah viewers. While I am glad that these adults are behind bars facing long sentences, I did not like the implication of leading the online safety piece with this. All these criminals had prior relationships with their victims and lived in the same neighborhoods. Despite all the press about the evil that lurks online, most pedophiles have a prior relationship with their victims. Many are family members. It is important not to lose sight of this fact, lest we succumb to the myth that those who are most dangerous to our children are complete strangers. It hurts to think of the truth, but the fact of the matter is that children who are victimized most likely know their assailant and that assailant is likely a member of, or close to, the family -- NOT a stranger from the online world.
Then the actual online safety portion is featured. It consists of a New York Times reporter going online, finding a girl between 13 and 16 who lives in Texas using some unknown search engine (it clearly comes from a social networking site, but is not MySpace, but I can't identify it), learning her high school and IM screen name and attempting to contact her. He accomplishes this all in 2 and a half minutes and ends his story stating that if he had "ill intentions" he would be at a state where "now I can do whatever I want" [with her].
While it is true that he COULD theoretically go to her high school and kidnap her, this story leaves out the control the girl could have in this situation. Although she made some poor choices by making her high school and IM screen name easily accessible, there are other ways she can foil this man's "ill intentions." She can not respond to his IM and even block him from being able to contact her again. If she believed that he was up to no good, she could report him to her ISP or to a cyber tipline. She could tell her parents that some creep tried to contact her and they could call the police. There are many things a child can do to stop predators. I only wish Oprah had focused on what people can do to stop them instead of sensationalizing what could happen if no one did anything.
First of all, the "segment" was two three minute bits separated by a commercial break as long as the piece itself. The opener was an update on some adults that had been convicted of rape and other violent and sexual behavior of children. These adults had been apprehended thanks to Oprah viewers. While I am glad that these adults are behind bars facing long sentences, I did not like the implication of leading the online safety piece with this. All these criminals had prior relationships with their victims and lived in the same neighborhoods. Despite all the press about the evil that lurks online, most pedophiles have a prior relationship with their victims. Many are family members. It is important not to lose sight of this fact, lest we succumb to the myth that those who are most dangerous to our children are complete strangers. It hurts to think of the truth, but the fact of the matter is that children who are victimized most likely know their assailant and that assailant is likely a member of, or close to, the family -- NOT a stranger from the online world.
Then the actual online safety portion is featured. It consists of a New York Times reporter going online, finding a girl between 13 and 16 who lives in Texas using some unknown search engine (it clearly comes from a social networking site, but is not MySpace, but I can't identify it), learning her high school and IM screen name and attempting to contact her. He accomplishes this all in 2 and a half minutes and ends his story stating that if he had "ill intentions" he would be at a state where "now I can do whatever I want" [with her].
While it is true that he COULD theoretically go to her high school and kidnap her, this story leaves out the control the girl could have in this situation. Although she made some poor choices by making her high school and IM screen name easily accessible, there are other ways she can foil this man's "ill intentions." She can not respond to his IM and even block him from being able to contact her again. If she believed that he was up to no good, she could report him to her ISP or to a cyber tipline. She could tell her parents that some creep tried to contact her and they could call the police. There are many things a child can do to stop predators. I only wish Oprah had focused on what people can do to stop them instead of sensationalizing what could happen if no one did anything.
Monday, May 15, 2006
Where the control lies
All this talk about how to monitor kids' internet use is going to become moot pretty soon. According to the LA Times on May 11, MySpace now comes in a cellphone version. Although this feature is an exclusive to a few elite phones produced by a company called Helio, as we all know, it won't be long before everyone will be able to access this version of MySpace.
And yes, these phones are being aggressively marketed to teens.
What this article brings is an underlying message: It isn't enough for parents to simply monitor their child's computer use. Soon it will be necessary to monitor phone use. But then what next? As technology becomes more and more complex it won't be long before the use of some other device will need monitoring.
It boils down to the need for parents and children to communicate with each other in order to build trust between them. This can only happen if adults become familiar with the world their children live in. Grownups don't need to -- nor should they -- adopt youth culture (lest they want to be ridiculed by people of all ages), but they should try to understand it so that they can draw boundaries and set limits based on an educated opinion, not fear or the latest news story or talk show feature. Adults need to ask their children questions and share concerns. Then they need to listen to the other side of the story. The positive aspects of online social networks as seen through youths' eyes. The best rules are set when all sides of the story are heard.
And yes, these phones are being aggressively marketed to teens.
What this article brings is an underlying message: It isn't enough for parents to simply monitor their child's computer use. Soon it will be necessary to monitor phone use. But then what next? As technology becomes more and more complex it won't be long before the use of some other device will need monitoring.
It boils down to the need for parents and children to communicate with each other in order to build trust between them. This can only happen if adults become familiar with the world their children live in. Grownups don't need to -- nor should they -- adopt youth culture (lest they want to be ridiculed by people of all ages), but they should try to understand it so that they can draw boundaries and set limits based on an educated opinion, not fear or the latest news story or talk show feature. Adults need to ask their children questions and share concerns. Then they need to listen to the other side of the story. The positive aspects of online social networks as seen through youths' eyes. The best rules are set when all sides of the story are heard.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)