Saturday, 11 October 2008
NEW UCLA report
that 72% of 12-to-17-year-olds they surveyed were "bullied online at least once during a recent 12-month period," "only one in 10 reported such cyber-bullying to parents or other adults," and 85% "also experienced bullying in school." The harassment most frequently took the forms of "name-calling or insults" and "most typically took place through instant messaging." A bit more on frequency of incidents: The study found that 41% of teens surveyed reported 1-3 "bullying incidents" during those 12 months, 13% 4-6 incidents, and 19% seven or more. About two-thirds of the harassment victims knew their harassers and half knew them from school. The authors reinforced this finding with the point that "the Internet is not functioning as a separate environment but is connected with the social livesof kids in school."
Saturday, 4 October 2008
A new survey of 40.000+students by the Rochester Institute of Technology
'Startling New Reality' of Cybercrime Revealed in RIT Research
Children frequently utilize technology to prey on friends and classmates online
Helvetica, sans-serif; TEXT-DECORATION: none" href="http://www.bcybersafe.org/">The major difference is that children have a sense that they’re anonymous and invincible online. Therefore, they seem to lash out in ways that they may not in person.
Rochester, NY (Vocus/PRWEB ) June 18, 2008 -- There’s a new cyber enemy for parents to worry about—and it’s not the stereotypical middle-aged stranger that has long been feared. This new threat lurks not only in cyberspace but in the school yard, the classroom and, at times, the home.A Rochester Institute of Technology study of more than 40,000 adolescents reveals that 59 percent of cyber victims, in grades 7-9, say their perpetrators are a 'friend' that they know personally. That perpetrator, according to the survey, is also significantly more likely to be a fellow student than an adult.
"Most people have long thought the perpetrators of cybercrime to be some 'boogey man' holed up in his attic, searching the Internet for children to prey on," says Sam McQuade, who led the research effort and is the graduate program coordinator in RIT's Center for Multidisciplinary Studies. "While that is certainly something to be feared, the startling new reality is today’s children are most frequently preying on each other online—and their parents rarely have any idea it's happening."
McQuade’s research was designed to determine the nature and extent of cybercrime abuse and victimization by and among adolescents. The survey was administered to students in Kindergarten-through-12th grade, varying by grade level, in 14 different school districts.
Cyber bullyingSurvey results indicate that cyber bullying—consisting of sending threatening and nasty messages—begins as early as the second grade, peaks in middle school and sometimes continues through high school. One-in-10 second-and third-graders report having been "mean to someone" online, while one-in-five report that someone online has been "mean to them."
"What has traditionally happened on the playground has now moved into cyberspace," McQuade says. "The major difference is that children have a sense that they’re anonymous and invincible online. Therefore, they seem to lash out in ways that they may not in person."
Unethical and criminal behaviorChildren are utilizing the Internet and other electronic devices to perpetrate unethical, socially deviant and even criminal acts.
Online identity theft is prevalent, even with younger Internet users. Twelve percent of fourth-through sixth-graders report having experienced someone pretending to be them online and 13 percent report someone having their password or account used without their permission.
Illegally downloading music and movies often begins in the fourth grade, as eight percent of fourth-sixth graders admit to the act. Meanwhile, 65 percent of 10-through 12th-graders admit to having illegally downloaded music in the past year, with 34 percent admitting to illegally downloading movies.The research has serious repercussions for the classroom as well. Twenty-one percent of 10th-through 12th-graders admitted using a computer or electronic device to cheat on a school assignment within the last school year. Twelve percent admitted using technology to commit plagiarism and nine percent admit using an electronic device to cheat on an exam.
Dangerous and disturbing behaviorsAdolescents, as young as kindergarteners, frequently come in contact with content that may be sexually oriented. Forty-eight percent of kindergarteners and first-graders reported viewing online content that made them feel uncomfortable. One-in-four students did not report the incident to a grown up.
Survey questions varied depending on the age group, therefore, older students revealed more specific information. Of the seventh-through ninth-graders surveyed, 14 percent reported they had communicated online about sexual things. Eight percent had been exposed to nude pictures and seven percent had been asked to reveal nude pictures of themselves online.
Within the past year, 10th-through 12th-graders indicated that the used the Internet to interact with strangers in a variety of ways, including chatting (48 percent), flirting (25 percent), providing personal information (22 percent), talking about private things (17 percent) and engaging in sexually oriented chat (15 percent).
McQuade attributes much of the research data to the fact that many young people are more technologically astute than their parents and teachers.
"Kids today grow up with this technology and are knowledgeable about it in ways that many of their parents and teachers, through no fault of their own, simply are not," McQuade says.
Fifty percent of students at the kindergarten and first-grade level report that their parents don’t watch them when they use a computer. Only 32 percent of second-and third-graders surveyed report being watched by their parents when they go online.
That’s why McQuade and RIT have formed partnerships with more than 20 Rochester area school districts, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, Time Warner Cable, the Information Systems Security Association and the InfraGard Member Alliance to form The Cyber Safety and Ethics Initiative. The goal of the initiative is to utilize the survey results to determine a comprehensive, community-wide approach to tackling this increasing problem.
"This is not a problem that can be solved by parents and educators alone," McQuade says. "This is a societal problem that requires a societal solution. That’s why The Cyber Safety and Ethics Initiative is comprised of representatives from higher education, K-12 education, community groups and members of the business community. We all need to work together."
Media note: For a summary of key research findings, visit http://www.rit.edu/news/?r=46200. For a list of tips that will help parents keep their students safe online, visit http://www.rit.edu/news/?r=46201.
Children frequently utilize technology to prey on friends and classmates online
Helvetica, sans-serif; TEXT-DECORATION: none" href="http://www.bcybersafe.org/">The major difference is that children have a sense that they’re anonymous and invincible online. Therefore, they seem to lash out in ways that they may not in person.
Rochester, NY (Vocus/PRWEB ) June 18, 2008 -- There’s a new cyber enemy for parents to worry about—and it’s not the stereotypical middle-aged stranger that has long been feared. This new threat lurks not only in cyberspace but in the school yard, the classroom and, at times, the home.A Rochester Institute of Technology study of more than 40,000 adolescents reveals that 59 percent of cyber victims, in grades 7-9, say their perpetrators are a 'friend' that they know personally. That perpetrator, according to the survey, is also significantly more likely to be a fellow student than an adult.
"Most people have long thought the perpetrators of cybercrime to be some 'boogey man' holed up in his attic, searching the Internet for children to prey on," says Sam McQuade, who led the research effort and is the graduate program coordinator in RIT's Center for Multidisciplinary Studies. "While that is certainly something to be feared, the startling new reality is today’s children are most frequently preying on each other online—and their parents rarely have any idea it's happening."
McQuade’s research was designed to determine the nature and extent of cybercrime abuse and victimization by and among adolescents. The survey was administered to students in Kindergarten-through-12th grade, varying by grade level, in 14 different school districts.
Cyber bullyingSurvey results indicate that cyber bullying—consisting of sending threatening and nasty messages—begins as early as the second grade, peaks in middle school and sometimes continues through high school. One-in-10 second-and third-graders report having been "mean to someone" online, while one-in-five report that someone online has been "mean to them."
"What has traditionally happened on the playground has now moved into cyberspace," McQuade says. "The major difference is that children have a sense that they’re anonymous and invincible online. Therefore, they seem to lash out in ways that they may not in person."
Unethical and criminal behaviorChildren are utilizing the Internet and other electronic devices to perpetrate unethical, socially deviant and even criminal acts.
Online identity theft is prevalent, even with younger Internet users. Twelve percent of fourth-through sixth-graders report having experienced someone pretending to be them online and 13 percent report someone having their password or account used without their permission.
Illegally downloading music and movies often begins in the fourth grade, as eight percent of fourth-sixth graders admit to the act. Meanwhile, 65 percent of 10-through 12th-graders admit to having illegally downloaded music in the past year, with 34 percent admitting to illegally downloading movies.The research has serious repercussions for the classroom as well. Twenty-one percent of 10th-through 12th-graders admitted using a computer or electronic device to cheat on a school assignment within the last school year. Twelve percent admitted using technology to commit plagiarism and nine percent admit using an electronic device to cheat on an exam.
Dangerous and disturbing behaviorsAdolescents, as young as kindergarteners, frequently come in contact with content that may be sexually oriented. Forty-eight percent of kindergarteners and first-graders reported viewing online content that made them feel uncomfortable. One-in-four students did not report the incident to a grown up.
Survey questions varied depending on the age group, therefore, older students revealed more specific information. Of the seventh-through ninth-graders surveyed, 14 percent reported they had communicated online about sexual things. Eight percent had been exposed to nude pictures and seven percent had been asked to reveal nude pictures of themselves online.
Within the past year, 10th-through 12th-graders indicated that the used the Internet to interact with strangers in a variety of ways, including chatting (48 percent), flirting (25 percent), providing personal information (22 percent), talking about private things (17 percent) and engaging in sexually oriented chat (15 percent).
McQuade attributes much of the research data to the fact that many young people are more technologically astute than their parents and teachers.
"Kids today grow up with this technology and are knowledgeable about it in ways that many of their parents and teachers, through no fault of their own, simply are not," McQuade says.
Fifty percent of students at the kindergarten and first-grade level report that their parents don’t watch them when they use a computer. Only 32 percent of second-and third-graders surveyed report being watched by their parents when they go online.
That’s why McQuade and RIT have formed partnerships with more than 20 Rochester area school districts, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, Time Warner Cable, the Information Systems Security Association and the InfraGard Member Alliance to form The Cyber Safety and Ethics Initiative. The goal of the initiative is to utilize the survey results to determine a comprehensive, community-wide approach to tackling this increasing problem.
"This is not a problem that can be solved by parents and educators alone," McQuade says. "This is a societal problem that requires a societal solution. That’s why The Cyber Safety and Ethics Initiative is comprised of representatives from higher education, K-12 education, community groups and members of the business community. We all need to work together."
Media note: For a summary of key research findings, visit http://www.rit.edu/news/?r=46200. For a list of tips that will help parents keep their students safe online, visit http://www.rit.edu/news/?r=46201.
Sunday, 17 August 2008
From the BBC 07/08/08 : Children 'meet online strangers'
One in five British children has met a stranger they first encountered online, a survey suggests.
And as many as one in four 8-12 year olds ignore age restrictions to use social networking sites, such as Facebook, MySpace and Bebo.
The study of 1,030 parents and 1,000 children by online identity experts also found 72% of parents checked their offspring's web surfing habits.
Social networking sites have age restrictions of 13 or 14.
Identity firm Garlik found that a quarter of the parents surveyed said they secretly log into their child's networking page, to check they aren't befriending strangers.
And some 89% of parents interviewed spoke to their children about the dangers posed by social networking sites, and more than half - 58% - said they were more vigilant online now than a year ago.
Busy parents can't be expected to monitor their children's activities all the time Tom Ilube Garlik
More than a quarter of eight to 15-year-olds questioned admitted they have strangers as friends on social networking sites and one in five say they have met up with strangers they first encountered online.
And two-thirds of the youngsters interviewed said they have posted personal information on their pages, including details of the school they attend and their mobile telephone number.
Tom Ilube, chief executive officer of Garlik, said "children are at the vanguard of the social networking phenomenon", using such sites such "in the same way other generations used the telephone".
"What you find with young people is that they tend to be a lot looser with their personal information than more canny older people.
"That can be OK if they are in a fairly tightly-controlled environment, but when they are in an environment where they're mixing with people much older than them, then that's something to be quite cautious about."
He said the summer holidays meant children will be spending hours on the internet, adding: "Busy parents can't be expected to monitor their children's activities all the time. What are Facebook, Bebo, MySpace and the others doing to help?"
Story from BBC NEWS:http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/technology/7546482.stmPublished: 2008/08/07 03:44:31 GMT© BBC MMVIII
And as many as one in four 8-12 year olds ignore age restrictions to use social networking sites, such as Facebook, MySpace and Bebo.
The study of 1,030 parents and 1,000 children by online identity experts also found 72% of parents checked their offspring's web surfing habits.
Social networking sites have age restrictions of 13 or 14.
Identity firm Garlik found that a quarter of the parents surveyed said they secretly log into their child's networking page, to check they aren't befriending strangers.
And some 89% of parents interviewed spoke to their children about the dangers posed by social networking sites, and more than half - 58% - said they were more vigilant online now than a year ago.
Busy parents can't be expected to monitor their children's activities all the time Tom Ilube Garlik
More than a quarter of eight to 15-year-olds questioned admitted they have strangers as friends on social networking sites and one in five say they have met up with strangers they first encountered online.
And two-thirds of the youngsters interviewed said they have posted personal information on their pages, including details of the school they attend and their mobile telephone number.
Tom Ilube, chief executive officer of Garlik, said "children are at the vanguard of the social networking phenomenon", using such sites such "in the same way other generations used the telephone".
"What you find with young people is that they tend to be a lot looser with their personal information than more canny older people.
"That can be OK if they are in a fairly tightly-controlled environment, but when they are in an environment where they're mixing with people much older than them, then that's something to be quite cautious about."
He said the summer holidays meant children will be spending hours on the internet, adding: "Busy parents can't be expected to monitor their children's activities all the time. What are Facebook, Bebo, MySpace and the others doing to help?"
Story from BBC NEWS:http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/technology/7546482.stmPublished: 2008/08/07 03:44:31 GMT© BBC MMVIII
Monday, 26 May 2008
Court rejects family’s suit against MySpace
From Netfamily
A federal appeals court upheld the dismissal of a Texas family's $30 million sexual-assault case against MySpace. The court ruled that the Communications Decency Act of 1996 "bars such lawsuits against Web-based services like MySpace," the Associated Press reports <http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5ivBsvDUeL16-pNrwm3NHJjfDC1_AD90N15E81>. The case was dismissed by a federal court in Austin last year (see this item <http://www.netfamilynews.org/nl070216.html#6>). The girl had created a profile on MySpace when she was below the site's minimum age of 14 but characterized herself as 18 and - after meeting a 19-year-old man who apparently got her phone number by claiming he was a high school football player - said she was assaulted by him after she went out on a date with him in 2006 (my original item on this was "Teen sues MySpace" <http://www.netfamilynews.org/nl060623.html#3>).
A federal appeals court upheld the dismissal of a Texas family's $30 million sexual-assault case against MySpace. The court ruled that the Communications Decency Act of 1996 "bars such lawsuits against Web-based services like MySpace," the Associated Press reports <http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5ivBsvDUeL16-pNrwm3NHJjfDC1_AD90N15E81>. The case was dismissed by a federal court in Austin last year (see this item <http://www.netfamilynews.org/nl070216.html#6>). The girl had created a profile on MySpace when she was below the site's minimum age of 14 but characterized herself as 18 and - after meeting a 19-year-old man who apparently got her phone number by claiming he was a high school football player - said she was assaulted by him after she went out on a date with him in 2006 (my original item on this was "Teen sues MySpace" <http://www.netfamilynews.org/nl060623.html#3>).
1. Indictment in Megan Meier case
From netfamily
Lori Drew, the mother who allegedly helped create a fictitious MySpace profile that led to 13-year-old Megan Meier's suicide has been indicted. She has been "charged with conspiracy and fraudulently gaining access to someone else's computer" by a federal grand jury. Drew and some of Megan's peers had set up the profile of a fictitious 16-year-old boy and, through it, developed a relationship between the "boy" and Megan, who her family said had been treated for attention deficit disorder and depression. The profile's creators carried on the "relationship" for months, then faked the "boy's" breakup with Megan, leading to her suicide. Investigators in Missouri, where all this occurred, couldn't find a state law to apply to the case. Later, "federal prosecutors in Los Angeles launched a grand jury investigation ... to determine whether Ms. Drew or others defrauded Beverly Hills-based MySpace by providing false information to the site," the Associated Press reports<http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/nation/stories/DN-cyberbully_16nat.ART.State.Edition1.46035f5.html>, describing an unprecedented way of applying the law ("both Megan and MySpace are named as victims in the case, US Attorney Thomas O'Brien" told the AP).
This is a case and an approach to watch going forward, because in effect it adds "teeth" to social-networking sites' terms of service, which both parents and teens need to be aware of and which sites need to enforce. [Earlier coverage: "Extreme cyberbullying: US case comes to light" <http://www.netfamilynews.org/2007/11/extreme-cyberbullying-us-case-comes-to.html> and "Missouri cyberbullying: Case not closed" <http://www.netfamilynews.org/2008/01/missouri-cyberbullying-case-not-closed.html>.]
Lori Drew, the mother who allegedly helped create a fictitious MySpace profile that led to 13-year-old Megan Meier's suicide has been indicted. She has been "charged with conspiracy and fraudulently gaining access to someone else's computer" by a federal grand jury. Drew and some of Megan's peers had set up the profile of a fictitious 16-year-old boy and, through it, developed a relationship between the "boy" and Megan, who her family said had been treated for attention deficit disorder and depression. The profile's creators carried on the "relationship" for months, then faked the "boy's" breakup with Megan, leading to her suicide. Investigators in Missouri, where all this occurred, couldn't find a state law to apply to the case. Later, "federal prosecutors in Los Angeles launched a grand jury investigation ... to determine whether Ms. Drew or others defrauded Beverly Hills-based MySpace by providing false information to the site," the Associated Press reports<http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/nation/stories/DN-cyberbully_16nat.ART.State.Edition1.46035f5.html>, describing an unprecedented way of applying the law ("both Megan and MySpace are named as victims in the case, US Attorney Thomas O'Brien" told the AP).
This is a case and an approach to watch going forward, because in effect it adds "teeth" to social-networking sites' terms of service, which both parents and teens need to be aware of and which sites need to enforce. [Earlier coverage: "Extreme cyberbullying: US case comes to light" <http://www.netfamilynews.org/2007/11/extreme-cyberbullying-us-case-comes-to.html> and "Missouri cyberbullying: Case not closed" <http://www.netfamilynews.org/2008/01/missouri-cyberbullying-case-not-closed.html>.]
Sunday, 30 March 2008
Is MySpace Good for Society? A Freakonomics Quorum
By Stephen J. Dubner
Two little words — “social networking” — have become a giant buzzphrase over the past couple of years, what with the worldwide march of Facebook and headline-ready stories about Web-assisted suicides. So what’s the net effect of social networking?
We gathered a group of wise people who spend their days thinking about this issue — Martin Baily, Danah Boyd, Steve Chazin, Judith Donath, Nicole Ellison, and William Reader, — and asked them this question:
Has social networking technology (blog-friendly phones, Facebook, Twitter, etc.) made us better or worse off as a society, either from an economic, psychological, or sociological perspective?
Here are their replies.
Nicole Ellison, assistant professor of Telecommunication, Information Studies and Media at Michigan State University:
I believe the benefits provided by social network sites such as Facebook have made us better off as a society and as individuals, and that, as they continue to be adopted by more diverse populations, we will see an increase in their utility. Anecdotal evidence of positive outcomes from these technologies — such as political activities organized via Facebook or jobs found through LinkedIn — is well-known, but now a growing corpus of academic research on social networks sites supports this view as well.
Over the last three years, our research team at Michigan State University has examined the use of Facebook by undergraduate students. Charles Steinfield, Cliff Lampe, and I have used surveys, interviews, and automated capture of the MSU Facebook site to try to understand how and why students use Facebook.
Our original motivation was to better understand why individuals would voluntarily use a site that, based on media reports, offered them only a way to disclose information they shouldn’t disclose, collect hundreds of “friends” they didn’t know, and waste time better spent studying. What we found surprised us. Our survey included questions designed to assess students’ “social capital,” a concept that describes the benefits individuals receive from their relationships with others. Undergraduates who used Facebook intensively had higher bridging social capital scores than those who didn’t, and our longitudinal data show that Facebook use preceded these social capital gains.
Bridging social capital reflects the benefits we receive from our “weak ties” — people we don’t know very well but who provide us with useful information and ideas. These students were using Facebook to increase the size of their social network, and therefore their access to more information and diverse perspectives. Our interview data confirmed these findings, with participants commenting on how the affordances of Facebook helped them maintain or strengthen relationships: they used the site to look up old high school acquaintances, to find out information about people in their classes or dorms that might be used to strike up a conversation, to get contact information for friends, and many other activities.
These aren’t the kinds of Facebook activities you are likely to read about in the media, which have encouraged widespread public concern about Facebook use by young people. Yes, there have been cases in which students have shown poor judgment regarding their profile disclosures. However, tools that enable us to engage in online self-presentation and connect with others will be increasingly part of our social and professional landscape, as social network sites continue to be embraced by businesses, non-profits, civic groups, and political organizations that value the connections these tools support. IBM, for instance, has created an internal social network site, “Beehive,” to encourage more collaboration and communication across teams. In India, Babajob harnesses social networking tools to pair employers with those who seek work. We will continue to see these trends grow as social networking features are employed for fun, profit, and social good.
Social technologies never have predictable and absolute positive or negative effects, which is why social scientists dread questions like these. In considering the effects of social network sites, it is clear that there are many challenges to work through – the increasing commercialization of this space, the need to construct strong privacy protections for users, and safety issues – but I believe the benefits we receive as a society provided by these tools far outweigh the risks.
William Reader, professor of psychology at Sheffield Hallam University and social networking site researcher:
From a psychological point of view, it is difficult to answer the question with any degree of certainty; the technology is simply too new and the research too equivocal. However some (such as Barry Wellman) have suggested that social capital hasn’t really declined, but has simply moved online. As our social networks are becoming increasingly more geographically fragmented, social network sites are a useful way for us to keep in touch and seek social contact with our friends.
Some doom-mongers have suggested that social networking technologies will eventually lead to a society in which we no longer engage in face-to-face contact with people. I don’t see it. Face-to-face contact is, I believe, very important for the formation of intimate relationships (and most of us crave those). The reason for this is that friendships represent a considerable burden on our time, and our physical and emotional resources. Friends are, therefore, a big investment, and we want to be pretty sure that any friend is prepared to invest as much in us as we are in them. We therefore monitor potential friends for signals of their investment in us, and some of the best indicators of people’s investment in us are those that we experience face to face.
Shared attitudes are important for friendship. We know that people like to associate with people who are like them, a predilection termed “homophily” (love of the same). The more similar we are to our friends, the less room there is for conflicts of interest. This is why I believe that social networking will never replace face-to-face communication in the formation of close friendships. Talk is cheap. Anyone can post “u r cool” on someone’s “wall,” or “poke” them on Facebook, but genuine smiles and laughs are a much more reliable indicators of someone’s suitability as a faithful friend.
To return to the notion of social capital, we know that people are increasingly “meeting” people on social network sites before they meet them face to face. As a result of this, when many students begin university, they find themselves with a group of ready-made acquaintances. Given people’s preferences for people who are like them, it could be that friendship networks become increasingly homogeneous. Is this a bad thing? It might be if, by choosing potential friends via their Facebook profiles, it means that folk cut themselves off from serendipitous encounters with those who are superficially different from them, ethnically, socio-economically, and even in terms of musical taste.
So has social networking technology made us better or worse off? My view is neither utopian nor dystopian: social networking technologies are doubtless changing society. But like anything — apart from motherhood and apple pie — whether this is good or bad depends upon what kind of society you value.
Steve Chazin, former Apple marketing director and current chief marketing officer at DimDim.com:
I believe social networking technology has changed our lives for the better, but at a cost. Social networking tools have made it nearly effortless for me to keep in touch with friends, family and colleagues. I can know what’s on their minds (MySpace), who else they know (Facebook/LinkedIn), and even what they are doing at this very moment (Twitter). On the other hand, I’m not sure I need to know any of that.
Instant Messaging, e-mail, and voice-over-Internet-protocol has made it possible for me to be in touch with more people than I will ever meet in person, yet each one of those contacts often requires me to return a call, respond to an e-mail, or reply to an IM. The Outlook “Out of Office” flag doesn’t stop the mail from coming, it just postpones the response. And there will come a time when we’ll hold all our meetings on the Web, have truly immersive face-to-face video conversations, and experience a fusion of our real and cyber worlds when Second Life becomes second nature. We’re just not there yet.
While all humans need to feel connected to each other or to some cause, there are also times when we simply want to disconnect, and disconnecting is becoming increasingly hard thanks to social networking technology. As one who was bitten early by the Blackberry bug, I can attest that the pull of these wireless electronic leashes is often too strong to resist. Today, we experience a feeling of isolation when our Internet connections go down, revealing just how dependent we’ve become on the connective power of the Web.
I remember one day a few years ago when our office phones and Internet stopped working. No e-mail, no voicemail, no Facebook, no Skype, and no Twitter. People came out of their offices and talked. I enjoyed that day.
Martin Baily, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and an adviser to the McKinsey Global Institute:
Powerful new technologies provide great benefits, but they also change the way we live, and not always in ways that everyone likes. An example is the spread of air conditioning, which makes us more comfortable, but those who grew up before its invention speak fondly of a time when everyone sat on the front porch and talked to their neighbors rather than going indoors to stay cool and watch TV. The declining cost of information processing and communication represents a powerful new technology, with social networking as the most recent service to be provided at modest cost. It can be expected to bring pluses and minuses.
New social networking services are counted in our measure of G.D.P., and will likely show up as an increase in productivity. Their effect is not large enough yet to move the needle by much, but it will be in the data, although in a rather strange way. Sites such as Facebook are free to users, with the “price” of using the service being the online ads viewed. This is, of course, the same way we “pay for” most television programming. This approach provides only a rough estimate of the economic value of the service.
But will social networking sites really improve the quality of people’s lives? The pluses include easier contacts with friends, and increased chances to make new friends and create a community, as well as find romantic relationships. Even the advertising may be a plus, because it is targeted to the particular interests of the user.
The minuses are that all of this sharing can be dangerous, through gossip and potential abuse of the services. Examples include reported suicides linked to malicious gossip circulated on a social network. Some people become addicted to life on the computer screen, and withdraw from personal contact — it’s a long way from people sitting on the porch talking to friends and neighbors.
Social networking sites are affecting the labor market as well, because recruiters evaluating young professionals applying for jobs are now hacking into applicants’ profiles, and making hiring decisions based on profile photos in which applicants are drunk or inappropriately dressed.
I am by inclination a technology optimist, believing that the bad things will be filtered out over time and net benefits will emerge. But in the early stages of any new technology, the buyer must beware.
Judith Donath, associate professor at the M.I.T. Media Lab:
The good: social networking technologies make it easier to keep up with a large circle of acquaintances and meet new people. They provide a venue for online socializing, as well as for coordinating in-person meetings.
The bad: they devalue the meaning of “friend.” Our traditional notion of friendship embraces trust, support, compatible values, etc. On social network sites, a “friend” may simply be someone on whose link you have clicked.
The ugly: for teens, who can be viciously competitive, networking sites that feature a list of one’s best friends and space for everyone to comment about you can be an unpleasant venue for social humiliation and bullying. These sites can make the emotional landmines of adolescence concrete and explicit.
The big picture: social networking technologies support and enable a new model of social life, in which people’s social circles will consist of many more, but weaker, ties. Though we will continue to have some strong ties (i.e., family and close friends), demographic changes, such as frequent household moves and the replacement of friends and family with market services for tasks such as daycare, are diminishing the role of social ties in everyday life. Weak ties (e.g., casual acquaintances, colleagues) may not be reliable for long-term support; their strength instead is in providing a wide range of perspectives, information, and opportunities. As society becomes increasingly dynamic, with access to information playing a growing role, having many diverse connections will be key.
Social networking technologies provide people with a low cost (in terms of time and effort) way of making and keeping social connections, enabling a social scenario in which people have huge numbers of diverse, but not very close, acquaintances. Does this makes us better as a society? Perhaps not — we can imagine this being a selfish and media-driven world in which everyone vies for attention and no one takes responsibility for one another. But perhaps it does — we can also imagine this being a world in which people are far more accepting of diverse ways and beliefs, one in which people are willing to embrace the new and different.
Danah Boyd, Ph.D. candidate at the School of Information, University of California-Berkeley, and fellow at the Harvard University Berkman Center for Internet and Society:
Social media (including social network sites, blog tools, mobile technologies, etc.) offer mechanisms by which people can communicate, share information, and hang out. As an ethnographer traipsing across the U.S., I have heard innumerable stories of how social media has been used to bring people together, support learning, and provide an outlet for creative expression.
These sites are tools. They can and have been used for both positive and negative purposes. For homosexual teens in rural America, they can be tools for self-realization in the battle against depression. Thanks to such tools, many teens have chosen not to take the path of suicide, knowing that there are others like them. For teens who are unable to see friends and family due to social and physical mobility restrictions, social media provides a venue to build and maintain always-on intimate communities. For parents whose kids have gone off to college, social media can provide a means by which the family can stay in meaningful contact through this period of change.
This is not to say that all of the products of social media are positive. We can all point to negative consequences: bullying, gossip mongering, increased procrastination, etc. Our news media loves to focus on these. Even the positive stories that do run often have a negative or sensationalist angle, such as those who used Twitter to track the California fires. Unfortunately, those who do not understand social media look to the news, see the negative coverage, and declare all social media evil.
It’s easy to look at a lot of elements of today’s society and cry foul. It’s equally easy to look at the new technology that we don’t understand and blame it as the cause for all social ills. It’s a lot harder to accept that social media is mirroring and magnifying all of the good, bad, and ugly about today’s society, shoving it right back in our faces in the hopes that we might face the underlying problems. Technology does not create bullying; it simply makes it more visible and much harder for adults to ignore.
Two little words — “social networking” — have become a giant buzzphrase over the past couple of years, what with the worldwide march of Facebook and headline-ready stories about Web-assisted suicides. So what’s the net effect of social networking?
We gathered a group of wise people who spend their days thinking about this issue — Martin Baily, Danah Boyd, Steve Chazin, Judith Donath, Nicole Ellison, and William Reader, — and asked them this question:
Has social networking technology (blog-friendly phones, Facebook, Twitter, etc.) made us better or worse off as a society, either from an economic, psychological, or sociological perspective?
Here are their replies.
Nicole Ellison, assistant professor of Telecommunication, Information Studies and Media at Michigan State University:
I believe the benefits provided by social network sites such as Facebook have made us better off as a society and as individuals, and that, as they continue to be adopted by more diverse populations, we will see an increase in their utility. Anecdotal evidence of positive outcomes from these technologies — such as political activities organized via Facebook or jobs found through LinkedIn — is well-known, but now a growing corpus of academic research on social networks sites supports this view as well.
Over the last three years, our research team at Michigan State University has examined the use of Facebook by undergraduate students. Charles Steinfield, Cliff Lampe, and I have used surveys, interviews, and automated capture of the MSU Facebook site to try to understand how and why students use Facebook.
Our original motivation was to better understand why individuals would voluntarily use a site that, based on media reports, offered them only a way to disclose information they shouldn’t disclose, collect hundreds of “friends” they didn’t know, and waste time better spent studying. What we found surprised us. Our survey included questions designed to assess students’ “social capital,” a concept that describes the benefits individuals receive from their relationships with others. Undergraduates who used Facebook intensively had higher bridging social capital scores than those who didn’t, and our longitudinal data show that Facebook use preceded these social capital gains.
Bridging social capital reflects the benefits we receive from our “weak ties” — people we don’t know very well but who provide us with useful information and ideas. These students were using Facebook to increase the size of their social network, and therefore their access to more information and diverse perspectives. Our interview data confirmed these findings, with participants commenting on how the affordances of Facebook helped them maintain or strengthen relationships: they used the site to look up old high school acquaintances, to find out information about people in their classes or dorms that might be used to strike up a conversation, to get contact information for friends, and many other activities.
These aren’t the kinds of Facebook activities you are likely to read about in the media, which have encouraged widespread public concern about Facebook use by young people. Yes, there have been cases in which students have shown poor judgment regarding their profile disclosures. However, tools that enable us to engage in online self-presentation and connect with others will be increasingly part of our social and professional landscape, as social network sites continue to be embraced by businesses, non-profits, civic groups, and political organizations that value the connections these tools support. IBM, for instance, has created an internal social network site, “Beehive,” to encourage more collaboration and communication across teams. In India, Babajob harnesses social networking tools to pair employers with those who seek work. We will continue to see these trends grow as social networking features are employed for fun, profit, and social good.
Social technologies never have predictable and absolute positive or negative effects, which is why social scientists dread questions like these. In considering the effects of social network sites, it is clear that there are many challenges to work through – the increasing commercialization of this space, the need to construct strong privacy protections for users, and safety issues – but I believe the benefits we receive as a society provided by these tools far outweigh the risks.
William Reader, professor of psychology at Sheffield Hallam University and social networking site researcher:
From a psychological point of view, it is difficult to answer the question with any degree of certainty; the technology is simply too new and the research too equivocal. However some (such as Barry Wellman) have suggested that social capital hasn’t really declined, but has simply moved online. As our social networks are becoming increasingly more geographically fragmented, social network sites are a useful way for us to keep in touch and seek social contact with our friends.
Some doom-mongers have suggested that social networking technologies will eventually lead to a society in which we no longer engage in face-to-face contact with people. I don’t see it. Face-to-face contact is, I believe, very important for the formation of intimate relationships (and most of us crave those). The reason for this is that friendships represent a considerable burden on our time, and our physical and emotional resources. Friends are, therefore, a big investment, and we want to be pretty sure that any friend is prepared to invest as much in us as we are in them. We therefore monitor potential friends for signals of their investment in us, and some of the best indicators of people’s investment in us are those that we experience face to face.
Shared attitudes are important for friendship. We know that people like to associate with people who are like them, a predilection termed “homophily” (love of the same). The more similar we are to our friends, the less room there is for conflicts of interest. This is why I believe that social networking will never replace face-to-face communication in the formation of close friendships. Talk is cheap. Anyone can post “u r cool” on someone’s “wall,” or “poke” them on Facebook, but genuine smiles and laughs are a much more reliable indicators of someone’s suitability as a faithful friend.
To return to the notion of social capital, we know that people are increasingly “meeting” people on social network sites before they meet them face to face. As a result of this, when many students begin university, they find themselves with a group of ready-made acquaintances. Given people’s preferences for people who are like them, it could be that friendship networks become increasingly homogeneous. Is this a bad thing? It might be if, by choosing potential friends via their Facebook profiles, it means that folk cut themselves off from serendipitous encounters with those who are superficially different from them, ethnically, socio-economically, and even in terms of musical taste.
So has social networking technology made us better or worse off? My view is neither utopian nor dystopian: social networking technologies are doubtless changing society. But like anything — apart from motherhood and apple pie — whether this is good or bad depends upon what kind of society you value.
Steve Chazin, former Apple marketing director and current chief marketing officer at DimDim.com:
I believe social networking technology has changed our lives for the better, but at a cost. Social networking tools have made it nearly effortless for me to keep in touch with friends, family and colleagues. I can know what’s on their minds (MySpace), who else they know (Facebook/LinkedIn), and even what they are doing at this very moment (Twitter). On the other hand, I’m not sure I need to know any of that.
Instant Messaging, e-mail, and voice-over-Internet-protocol has made it possible for me to be in touch with more people than I will ever meet in person, yet each one of those contacts often requires me to return a call, respond to an e-mail, or reply to an IM. The Outlook “Out of Office” flag doesn’t stop the mail from coming, it just postpones the response. And there will come a time when we’ll hold all our meetings on the Web, have truly immersive face-to-face video conversations, and experience a fusion of our real and cyber worlds when Second Life becomes second nature. We’re just not there yet.
While all humans need to feel connected to each other or to some cause, there are also times when we simply want to disconnect, and disconnecting is becoming increasingly hard thanks to social networking technology. As one who was bitten early by the Blackberry bug, I can attest that the pull of these wireless electronic leashes is often too strong to resist. Today, we experience a feeling of isolation when our Internet connections go down, revealing just how dependent we’ve become on the connective power of the Web.
I remember one day a few years ago when our office phones and Internet stopped working. No e-mail, no voicemail, no Facebook, no Skype, and no Twitter. People came out of their offices and talked. I enjoyed that day.
Martin Baily, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and an adviser to the McKinsey Global Institute:
Powerful new technologies provide great benefits, but they also change the way we live, and not always in ways that everyone likes. An example is the spread of air conditioning, which makes us more comfortable, but those who grew up before its invention speak fondly of a time when everyone sat on the front porch and talked to their neighbors rather than going indoors to stay cool and watch TV. The declining cost of information processing and communication represents a powerful new technology, with social networking as the most recent service to be provided at modest cost. It can be expected to bring pluses and minuses.
New social networking services are counted in our measure of G.D.P., and will likely show up as an increase in productivity. Their effect is not large enough yet to move the needle by much, but it will be in the data, although in a rather strange way. Sites such as Facebook are free to users, with the “price” of using the service being the online ads viewed. This is, of course, the same way we “pay for” most television programming. This approach provides only a rough estimate of the economic value of the service.
But will social networking sites really improve the quality of people’s lives? The pluses include easier contacts with friends, and increased chances to make new friends and create a community, as well as find romantic relationships. Even the advertising may be a plus, because it is targeted to the particular interests of the user.
The minuses are that all of this sharing can be dangerous, through gossip and potential abuse of the services. Examples include reported suicides linked to malicious gossip circulated on a social network. Some people become addicted to life on the computer screen, and withdraw from personal contact — it’s a long way from people sitting on the porch talking to friends and neighbors.
Social networking sites are affecting the labor market as well, because recruiters evaluating young professionals applying for jobs are now hacking into applicants’ profiles, and making hiring decisions based on profile photos in which applicants are drunk or inappropriately dressed.
I am by inclination a technology optimist, believing that the bad things will be filtered out over time and net benefits will emerge. But in the early stages of any new technology, the buyer must beware.
Judith Donath, associate professor at the M.I.T. Media Lab:
The good: social networking technologies make it easier to keep up with a large circle of acquaintances and meet new people. They provide a venue for online socializing, as well as for coordinating in-person meetings.
The bad: they devalue the meaning of “friend.” Our traditional notion of friendship embraces trust, support, compatible values, etc. On social network sites, a “friend” may simply be someone on whose link you have clicked.
The ugly: for teens, who can be viciously competitive, networking sites that feature a list of one’s best friends and space for everyone to comment about you can be an unpleasant venue for social humiliation and bullying. These sites can make the emotional landmines of adolescence concrete and explicit.
The big picture: social networking technologies support and enable a new model of social life, in which people’s social circles will consist of many more, but weaker, ties. Though we will continue to have some strong ties (i.e., family and close friends), demographic changes, such as frequent household moves and the replacement of friends and family with market services for tasks such as daycare, are diminishing the role of social ties in everyday life. Weak ties (e.g., casual acquaintances, colleagues) may not be reliable for long-term support; their strength instead is in providing a wide range of perspectives, information, and opportunities. As society becomes increasingly dynamic, with access to information playing a growing role, having many diverse connections will be key.
Social networking technologies provide people with a low cost (in terms of time and effort) way of making and keeping social connections, enabling a social scenario in which people have huge numbers of diverse, but not very close, acquaintances. Does this makes us better as a society? Perhaps not — we can imagine this being a selfish and media-driven world in which everyone vies for attention and no one takes responsibility for one another. But perhaps it does — we can also imagine this being a world in which people are far more accepting of diverse ways and beliefs, one in which people are willing to embrace the new and different.
Danah Boyd, Ph.D. candidate at the School of Information, University of California-Berkeley, and fellow at the Harvard University Berkman Center for Internet and Society:
Social media (including social network sites, blog tools, mobile technologies, etc.) offer mechanisms by which people can communicate, share information, and hang out. As an ethnographer traipsing across the U.S., I have heard innumerable stories of how social media has been used to bring people together, support learning, and provide an outlet for creative expression.
These sites are tools. They can and have been used for both positive and negative purposes. For homosexual teens in rural America, they can be tools for self-realization in the battle against depression. Thanks to such tools, many teens have chosen not to take the path of suicide, knowing that there are others like them. For teens who are unable to see friends and family due to social and physical mobility restrictions, social media provides a venue to build and maintain always-on intimate communities. For parents whose kids have gone off to college, social media can provide a means by which the family can stay in meaningful contact through this period of change.
This is not to say that all of the products of social media are positive. We can all point to negative consequences: bullying, gossip mongering, increased procrastination, etc. Our news media loves to focus on these. Even the positive stories that do run often have a negative or sensationalist angle, such as those who used Twitter to track the California fires. Unfortunately, those who do not understand social media look to the news, see the negative coverage, and declare all social media evil.
It’s easy to look at a lot of elements of today’s society and cry foul. It’s equally easy to look at the new technology that we don’t understand and blame it as the cause for all social ills. It’s a lot harder to accept that social media is mirroring and magnifying all of the good, bad, and ugly about today’s society, shoving it right back in our faces in the hopes that we might face the underlying problems. Technology does not create bullying; it simply makes it more visible and much harder for adults to ignore.
Laptops in school ok?
From Ann Collier :
You've probably heard of school laptop programs, and some schools now expect students at least to have access to computers at home. But do you ever wonder how useful (or not) it is for high school students to take their laptops to school?Marian Merritt, Symantec's Internet Safety Advocate and mother of an 8th-grader, wondered just that and put some good thinking about it down in her blog the other day <http://marian.symantec.com/blog/entry.cfm?entry_id=D2955DAB-65BE-F23E-6C43EEAEAE75E2D1>. Marian also asked some colleagues, including me, if we'd seen any research on it, so I turned to my friend and tech educator Anne Bubnic with the California Technology Assistance Project (CTAP <http://www.ctap4.org/>) for her experience with school laptop programs.Anne pointed us to some meaty links (below) but, first, here's some of her personal experience with student laptops in school which I think you'll find as interesting as I did:"I would have to say about laptops that bringing one to a school where the teachers are all on board with a structured method of incorporating them into studies is an entirely different beast than bringing one into a classroom just for note-taking, as Marian describes. A student doing so on her own would have to be a lot more self-disciplined."I filmed a group of math students. They talked about how the laptops have helped them become so much better organized. They never lose assignments or papers they are writing. They talked about being better organized again and again. It was amazing how confident that made them feel. They are learning real-world skills that will serve them well in the workplace!"They record all of their notes on NoteTaker [software]. They record homework assignments and test dates on their electronic calendars. Even their books are electronic! The kids told us that their teachers post all of their homework assignments online and that they often do the homework before it is even due - can you imagine?"They’ve learned how to juggle their busy sports schedules and social lives and homework in a way that works for them. But even more amazing, they are tackling math that may have not even been taught yet in the classroom! To watch these students using laptops is pure utopia. You wish you could wave a magic wand and every school district in the country would be there!"Related links* Links from Anne Bubnic: "One of the leading experts is Saul Rockman, who also has served as CTAP's external evaluator for over 5 years," Anne wrote. "You can find some of the Rockman et al studies at <http://www.rockman.com/projects/topics/learningLaptops.php>. And here's more research from respected educator Gary Stager <http://www.stager.org/laptops.html> and the Ubiquitous Computing Evaluation Consortium <http://ubiqcomputing.org/lit_review.html>. Apple Computers also has done a number of studies. Here's one on Del Mar Middle School" in Marin County, northern California <http://www.apple.com/education/profiles/Delmar/>. "You can also go to the Del Mar Middle School web site and find the latest student survey results <http://rusd.marin.k12.ca.us/delmar/>," and Anne pointed to a laptop learning site at Ning <http://laptoplearning.ning.com/>.* Big-picture food for thought from PBS column "I, Cringely" <http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2008/pulpit_20080321_004574.html>: "We've reached the point in our ... cultural adaptation to computing and communication technology that the younger technical generations are so empowered they are impatient and ready to jettison institutions most of the rest of us tend to think of as essential, central, even immortal. They are ready to dump our schools. I came to this conclusion recently while attending Brainstorm 2008, a delightful conference for computer people in K-12 schools throughout Wisconsin. They didn't hold breakout sessions on technology battles or tactics, but the idea was in the air. These people were under siege.... Kids can't go to school today without working on computers. But having said that, in the last five years more and more technical resources have been turned to how to keep technology OUT of our schools." See also "Beyond System Reform" in Education Week<http://www.edweek.org/login.html?source=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.edweek.org%2Few%2Farticles%2F2008%2F03%2F12%2F27kolderie.h27.html&destination=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.edweek.org%2Few%2Farticles%2F2008%2F03%2F12%2F27kolderie.h27.html&levelId=2100&baddebt=false>.* "Starting School Laptop Programs: Lessons Learned," by Andrew Zucker, Ed.D., Senior Research Scientist, The Concord Consortium <http://www.genevalogic.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2006/08/Lessons_Learned_Brief.pdf> - a few years old but substantive and on the opposite end of the US from Anne* "Study: Middle school laptop program leads to writing improvements" from the Associated Press, 10/07 <http://www.boston.com/news/education/k_12/articles/2007/10/23/study_middle_school_laptop_program_leads_to_writing_improvements/>* "School drop laptop programs, but are they dropping the ball as well?" in Andy Carvin's education blog at PBS.org, looking at a New York Times report last May <http://www.pbs.org/teachers/learning.now/2007/05/schools_drop_laptop_programs_b.html>* "School laptop debate heats up" in eSchool News, 9/06 <http://www.eschoolnews.com/news/top-news/index.cfm?i=41305&CFID=5206401&CFTOKEN=18146707>
You've probably heard of school laptop programs, and some schools now expect students at least to have access to computers at home. But do you ever wonder how useful (or not) it is for high school students to take their laptops to school?Marian Merritt, Symantec's Internet Safety Advocate and mother of an 8th-grader, wondered just that and put some good thinking about it down in her blog the other day <http://marian.symantec.com/blog/entry.cfm?entry_id=D2955DAB-65BE-F23E-6C43EEAEAE75E2D1>. Marian also asked some colleagues, including me, if we'd seen any research on it, so I turned to my friend and tech educator Anne Bubnic with the California Technology Assistance Project (CTAP <http://www.ctap4.org/>) for her experience with school laptop programs.Anne pointed us to some meaty links (below) but, first, here's some of her personal experience with student laptops in school which I think you'll find as interesting as I did:"I would have to say about laptops that bringing one to a school where the teachers are all on board with a structured method of incorporating them into studies is an entirely different beast than bringing one into a classroom just for note-taking, as Marian describes. A student doing so on her own would have to be a lot more self-disciplined."I filmed a group of math students. They talked about how the laptops have helped them become so much better organized. They never lose assignments or papers they are writing. They talked about being better organized again and again. It was amazing how confident that made them feel. They are learning real-world skills that will serve them well in the workplace!"They record all of their notes on NoteTaker [software]. They record homework assignments and test dates on their electronic calendars. Even their books are electronic! The kids told us that their teachers post all of their homework assignments online and that they often do the homework before it is even due - can you imagine?"They’ve learned how to juggle their busy sports schedules and social lives and homework in a way that works for them. But even more amazing, they are tackling math that may have not even been taught yet in the classroom! To watch these students using laptops is pure utopia. You wish you could wave a magic wand and every school district in the country would be there!"Related links* Links from Anne Bubnic: "One of the leading experts is Saul Rockman, who also has served as CTAP's external evaluator for over 5 years," Anne wrote. "You can find some of the Rockman et al studies at <http://www.rockman.com/projects/topics/learningLaptops.php>. And here's more research from respected educator Gary Stager <http://www.stager.org/laptops.html> and the Ubiquitous Computing Evaluation Consortium <http://ubiqcomputing.org/lit_review.html>. Apple Computers also has done a number of studies. Here's one on Del Mar Middle School" in Marin County, northern California <http://www.apple.com/education/profiles/Delmar/>. "You can also go to the Del Mar Middle School web site and find the latest student survey results <http://rusd.marin.k12.ca.us/delmar/>," and Anne pointed to a laptop learning site at Ning <http://laptoplearning.ning.com/>.* Big-picture food for thought from PBS column "I, Cringely" <http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2008/pulpit_20080321_004574.html>: "We've reached the point in our ... cultural adaptation to computing and communication technology that the younger technical generations are so empowered they are impatient and ready to jettison institutions most of the rest of us tend to think of as essential, central, even immortal. They are ready to dump our schools. I came to this conclusion recently while attending Brainstorm 2008, a delightful conference for computer people in K-12 schools throughout Wisconsin. They didn't hold breakout sessions on technology battles or tactics, but the idea was in the air. These people were under siege.... Kids can't go to school today without working on computers. But having said that, in the last five years more and more technical resources have been turned to how to keep technology OUT of our schools." See also "Beyond System Reform" in Education Week<http://www.edweek.org/login.html?source=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.edweek.org%2Few%2Farticles%2F2008%2F03%2F12%2F27kolderie.h27.html&destination=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.edweek.org%2Few%2Farticles%2F2008%2F03%2F12%2F27kolderie.h27.html&levelId=2100&baddebt=false>.* "Starting School Laptop Programs: Lessons Learned," by Andrew Zucker, Ed.D., Senior Research Scientist, The Concord Consortium <http://www.genevalogic.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2006/08/Lessons_Learned_Brief.pdf> - a few years old but substantive and on the opposite end of the US from Anne* "Study: Middle school laptop program leads to writing improvements" from the Associated Press, 10/07 <http://www.boston.com/news/education/k_12/articles/2007/10/23/study_middle_school_laptop_program_leads_to_writing_improvements/>* "School drop laptop programs, but are they dropping the ball as well?" in Andy Carvin's education blog at PBS.org, looking at a New York Times report last May <http://www.pbs.org/teachers/learning.now/2007/05/schools_drop_laptop_programs_b.html>* "School laptop debate heats up" in eSchool News, 9/06 <http://www.eschoolnews.com/news/top-news/index.cfm?i=41305&CFID=5206401&CFTOKEN=18146707>
Friday, 28 March 2008
Naked photo-sharing trend: Police perspective
This is a trend deserving parents' and, for that matter, everyone else's attention - especially teens'. The Associated Press report <http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,334568,00.html> of Utah middle-schoolers taking and sending nude photos on their cellphones joins similar reports from Alabama <http://www.netfamilynews.org/2008/03/middle-schoolers-arrested-for-nude.html>, Pennsylvania <http://www.netfamilynews.org/2008/01/teen-distributed-child-porn-in-pa.html>, and Georgia <http://www.netfamilynews.org/2008/01/teen-distributed-child-porn.html> in the past few months. And in 2007 the child-porn-distribution convictions of two Florida teens were upheld in a state appeals court (they'd taken sexually explicit photos of themselves and sent them to the boy's personal email account) <http://www.netfamilynews.org/nl070216.html#1>.
In the Utah case, the prosecutor told the AP that police expect to see more cases like this - they were in fact dealing with "several other similar unrelated cases" - and he is not alone in his struggle to figure out how to handle cases involving teens distributing photos that in effect constitute child pornography depicting themselves and their peers. They cover a full range of behavior, from impulsive to developmentally fairly normal adolescent risk assessment to outright harassment and bullying. For example, here's what investigators discovered in the Georgia case, as reported by the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children:
"Some girls were peer-pressured into taking inappropriate images of themselves and sending them to the boys. Others complied with the boys’ requests for pictures because they had crushes on the boys. Many of the girls suffered from low self-esteem or did not understand the seriousness of the situation because 'everybody is doing it.' Few realized their images were being circulated throughout the school and, in one case, traded with a suspect in the United Kingdom. In another case, one of the boys was charging students at the school $25 to view graphic images of one of the female victims. As of this writing, investigators have tracked down hundreds of images, and at least one video, involving these victims." [A partial report is under the second heading on this page at NCMEC.org <http://www.missingkids.com/missingkids/servlet/PageServlet?LanguageCountry=en_US&PageId=376>.]
It's important for teens and parents to know that these cases, which could technically be treated as federal felonies (child-porn distribution), are posing a real challenge to prosecutors. Det. Frank Dannahey, a youth officer in Connecticut for 17 years, agrees that this is a growing problem. A member of our Advisory Board, he emailed me last week in reference to my item on the Alabama case (<http://www.netfamilynews.org/2008/03/middle-schoolers-arrested-for-nude.html> and kindly gave me permission to publish his email, which describes a local case that struck him and offers teens some things to consider if they're ever tempted to share intimate photos online or on phones):
"I have to agree that it would not be in the best interest of the kids to have them charged with a federal crime. I really don’t believe they understand the implications of what they are doing. You and I have been talking about this topic for a long time [see his description of a 13-year-old Connecticut girl's ordeal in "Teen photos and a police officer's story," January 2006 <http://www.netfamilynews.org/nl060120.html#1>].
"I can’t tell you how many of these cases I have had to deal with or assist other agencies with. The long-term implications for these kids can be serious - not to mention the initial humiliation and embarrassment. I see these photos becoming an instrument in online bullying/harassment."
"I just recently closed a case in which a middle school girl shared nude photos of herself to males she met through IM sessions. In a different twist, the girl told me that she gave them (sent) the photos after being 'intimidated' online by the boys. This is a very shy girl one would not expect to do this sort of thing. The girl told me that the boys she communicated with had a sort of 'power' over her in manipulating her to do something that she never thought she could do [which sounds to me like the Georgia case]. She was highly embarrassed by it. This was something that I had not heard before. When kids do this sort of thing it is usually meant to be a private thing between boyfriends/girlfriends. Of course we all know that teen love doesn’t last forever and, when the breakup happens, these types of photos get 'out there.' This is certainly an issue that I address in programs with parents and teens.
"In cases where a teen sends a 'private' photo to someone and it ends up being leaked to other people, the teen’s question to me is always the same - will anyone else see the image? Unfortunately, my answer to that question is always the same: 'I don’t know.' Years ago, if a paper photo was taken from someone, they could possibly get it back, rip it up, and destroy the negative. Today in the digital age, getting a photo back that has been sent electronically is difficult at best and more likely improbable.
"I will usually tell teens the following when considering the sending of 'private' digital photos/videos to people online: Because digital media is so easily shared and reproduced, you need to consider several things before hitting the Send button:
* "Are you willing to take the chance that someone other than your intended recipient will see your images?* "Will those images be a source of embarrassment or humiliation to you? * "Are you willing to take the chance that the images may be a 'career killer' or prevent you from some future opportunity?* "Will the images/videos that you send violate the law?"
In the Utah case, the prosecutor told the AP that police expect to see more cases like this - they were in fact dealing with "several other similar unrelated cases" - and he is not alone in his struggle to figure out how to handle cases involving teens distributing photos that in effect constitute child pornography depicting themselves and their peers. They cover a full range of behavior, from impulsive to developmentally fairly normal adolescent risk assessment to outright harassment and bullying. For example, here's what investigators discovered in the Georgia case, as reported by the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children:
"Some girls were peer-pressured into taking inappropriate images of themselves and sending them to the boys. Others complied with the boys’ requests for pictures because they had crushes on the boys. Many of the girls suffered from low self-esteem or did not understand the seriousness of the situation because 'everybody is doing it.' Few realized their images were being circulated throughout the school and, in one case, traded with a suspect in the United Kingdom. In another case, one of the boys was charging students at the school $25 to view graphic images of one of the female victims. As of this writing, investigators have tracked down hundreds of images, and at least one video, involving these victims." [A partial report is under the second heading on this page at NCMEC.org <http://www.missingkids.com/missingkids/servlet/PageServlet?LanguageCountry=en_US&PageId=376>.]
It's important for teens and parents to know that these cases, which could technically be treated as federal felonies (child-porn distribution), are posing a real challenge to prosecutors. Det. Frank Dannahey, a youth officer in Connecticut for 17 years, agrees that this is a growing problem. A member of our Advisory Board, he emailed me last week in reference to my item on the Alabama case (<http://www.netfamilynews.org/2008/03/middle-schoolers-arrested-for-nude.html> and kindly gave me permission to publish his email, which describes a local case that struck him and offers teens some things to consider if they're ever tempted to share intimate photos online or on phones):
"I have to agree that it would not be in the best interest of the kids to have them charged with a federal crime. I really don’t believe they understand the implications of what they are doing. You and I have been talking about this topic for a long time [see his description of a 13-year-old Connecticut girl's ordeal in "Teen photos and a police officer's story," January 2006 <http://www.netfamilynews.org/nl060120.html#1>].
"I can’t tell you how many of these cases I have had to deal with or assist other agencies with. The long-term implications for these kids can be serious - not to mention the initial humiliation and embarrassment. I see these photos becoming an instrument in online bullying/harassment."
"I just recently closed a case in which a middle school girl shared nude photos of herself to males she met through IM sessions. In a different twist, the girl told me that she gave them (sent) the photos after being 'intimidated' online by the boys. This is a very shy girl one would not expect to do this sort of thing. The girl told me that the boys she communicated with had a sort of 'power' over her in manipulating her to do something that she never thought she could do [which sounds to me like the Georgia case]. She was highly embarrassed by it. This was something that I had not heard before. When kids do this sort of thing it is usually meant to be a private thing between boyfriends/girlfriends. Of course we all know that teen love doesn’t last forever and, when the breakup happens, these types of photos get 'out there.' This is certainly an issue that I address in programs with parents and teens.
"In cases where a teen sends a 'private' photo to someone and it ends up being leaked to other people, the teen’s question to me is always the same - will anyone else see the image? Unfortunately, my answer to that question is always the same: 'I don’t know.' Years ago, if a paper photo was taken from someone, they could possibly get it back, rip it up, and destroy the negative. Today in the digital age, getting a photo back that has been sent electronically is difficult at best and more likely improbable.
"I will usually tell teens the following when considering the sending of 'private' digital photos/videos to people online: Because digital media is so easily shared and reproduced, you need to consider several things before hitting the Send button:
* "Are you willing to take the chance that someone other than your intended recipient will see your images?* "Will those images be a source of embarrassment or humiliation to you? * "Are you willing to take the chance that the images may be a 'career killer' or prevent you from some future opportunity?* "Will the images/videos that you send violate the law?"
Friday, 14 March 2008
Privacy watchdog investigates Phorm
OUT LAW 12/03/08
Privacy watchdog the Information Commissioner is investigating advertising technology company Phorm over a deal it has cut with the UK's top internet service providers.
The deal allows ISPs a cut of ad revenue in return for providing data on customers' web use and has attracted controversy since its announcement four weeks ago, with some users fearing for their privacy.
The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) requested details of the technology and the deal from Phorm and the ISPs involved, BT, Virgin Media and Carphone Warehouse.
"At our request, Phorm has provided written information to us about the way in which the company intends to meet privacy standards," said an ICO spokesperson. "We are currently reviewing this information. We are also in contact with the ISPs who are working with Phorm and we are discussing this issue with them."
The technology takes information about a user's web surfing habits and delivers that to advertisers so that they can show users ads that they think are targeted to the user's interests. Though ad-targeting systems have long been used, they have not till now used data directly from an ISP. More traditional systems use small files called cookies, which can be used to record a user's activity on a single website or across numerous websites that share an advertising network such as DoubleClick's.
Phorm has said that the information about a user's activity is not connected to individual identities, which protects user privacy.
OUT-LAW.COM has sought answers to a series of questions from Phorm since the announcement of the deal weeks ago, but the company has not provided answers or made a representative available for interview.
Company chief executive Kent Ertegrul told The Register last week, though, that he believes users should have no privacy concerns.
"The privacy story that it is is about how you can run an advertising service and store nothing," he said. "Look at what's happening with Google and the debate about storing stuff for a year or two – we've come up with a way of storing nothing. If you're concerned about privacy this is the best thing that's happened. There's no data mine here."
The company commissioned Simon Davies from privacy pressure group Privacy International to analyse the technology. He said he was satisfied that what he saw was sound from a privacy point of view.
"It is true to say that from everything we saw, and we think we saw everything, the system seems to not use personally-identifiable information," he told OUT-LAW.COM. "It works on the basis of a cookie that seems to have no information on the machine it's embedded in. I can't see where their system can draw any inferences or information about the computer or the user."
“The Information Commissioner’s Office has spoken with the advertising technology company, Phorm, regarding its agreement with some UK internet service providers," said the ICO spokesperson. "Phorm has informed us about the product and how it works to provide targeted online advertising content."
Privacy watchdog the Information Commissioner is investigating advertising technology company Phorm over a deal it has cut with the UK's top internet service providers.
The deal allows ISPs a cut of ad revenue in return for providing data on customers' web use and has attracted controversy since its announcement four weeks ago, with some users fearing for their privacy.
The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) requested details of the technology and the deal from Phorm and the ISPs involved, BT, Virgin Media and Carphone Warehouse.
"At our request, Phorm has provided written information to us about the way in which the company intends to meet privacy standards," said an ICO spokesperson. "We are currently reviewing this information. We are also in contact with the ISPs who are working with Phorm and we are discussing this issue with them."
The technology takes information about a user's web surfing habits and delivers that to advertisers so that they can show users ads that they think are targeted to the user's interests. Though ad-targeting systems have long been used, they have not till now used data directly from an ISP. More traditional systems use small files called cookies, which can be used to record a user's activity on a single website or across numerous websites that share an advertising network such as DoubleClick's.
Phorm has said that the information about a user's activity is not connected to individual identities, which protects user privacy.
OUT-LAW.COM has sought answers to a series of questions from Phorm since the announcement of the deal weeks ago, but the company has not provided answers or made a representative available for interview.
Company chief executive Kent Ertegrul told The Register last week, though, that he believes users should have no privacy concerns.
"The privacy story that it is is about how you can run an advertising service and store nothing," he said. "Look at what's happening with Google and the debate about storing stuff for a year or two – we've come up with a way of storing nothing. If you're concerned about privacy this is the best thing that's happened. There's no data mine here."
The company commissioned Simon Davies from privacy pressure group Privacy International to analyse the technology. He said he was satisfied that what he saw was sound from a privacy point of view.
"It is true to say that from everything we saw, and we think we saw everything, the system seems to not use personally-identifiable information," he told OUT-LAW.COM. "It works on the basis of a cookie that seems to have no information on the machine it's embedded in. I can't see where their system can draw any inferences or information about the computer or the user."
“The Information Commissioner’s Office has spoken with the advertising technology company, Phorm, regarding its agreement with some UK internet service providers," said the ICO spokesperson. "Phorm has informed us about the product and how it works to provide targeted online advertising content."
Wednesday, 5 March 2008
How to avoid suspicious Web sites
Posted by Jessica Dolcourt 12 comments
(Credit: CNET Networks)
Editor's Note: This article was updated on 3/3/08 from a previous version published on 12/15/06.
No matter how you arrive at an unsafe Web site, much can go wrong when you do. Phishers will attempt to coerce you into disclosing sensitive information--such as your address and social security number--and adware engines may sprout pop-ups over your screen like a field of clover. Thankfully, you can learn to avoid trouble before it's too late. Here are nine telltale signs you're headed for dangerous waters, with tips to keep you firmly in the safety zone.
Nobody's perfect, and while these nine tips should help you avoid many dangerous sites, other online threats are more subtle. Two tools can assist in warning you about dangerous sites. LinkScanner Lite and McAfee SiteAdvisor (for Firefox and Internet Explorer) assess the hazards of sites you visit, and is available for Firefox or Internet Explorer. Online Armor scans sites in real time based on traceable patterns of malicious software behavior.
Also, our Security Starter Kit presents an excellent set of tools to provide a solid foundation of defense against potential threats.
Sign 1: Pop-up cityYou click a search result and are suddenly bombarded with no fewer than 10 porn pop-ups. Back out immediately by either clicking the X in the upper-right corners of the windows or by pressing Alt-F4 to close your browser. Then run a malicious software scanner and remover to assess and fix the damage. Many pop-up blockers are available for Internet Explorer, and both Firefox and Opera include blocking features.
It's a mouthful, but EULAlyzer's ease of use makes up for its awkward pronunciation.(Credit: CNET Networks)
Sign 2: Where's the EULA?You're about to sign up for or purchase a service and aren't prompted to accept an end-user license agreement, nor are you offered a privacy policy to view. Shady site proprietors often disclose their intentions in the privacy policy or EULA, so you should always read carefully! The free tool EULAlyzer (from the makers of SpywareBlaster) is a great help because it analyzes license agreements and notes any unusual or possibly dangerous language. An upgrade to the professional version is available for about $20.
Sign 3: Excessive firewall alertsYour firewall repeatedly alerts you to file extensions you don't recognize and other suspicious anomalies. Once you've set your firewall to allow your most common programs, any alert should be taken seriously, and a number of warnings should be a red light something is amiss. If you're not running a firewall, get one right now.
Sign 4: E-mail and instant message links phish for informationYou follow a link embedded in an e-mail and arrive at a site that asks you to provide security information for an "important update." Misleading links are increasingly sent through instant messages under the guise of a contact's friendly tip. This variety is especially easy to fall for. If the page is asking for data or looks like a different destination than the link implied, pull yourself out of autopilot and start taking screenshots. Contact the company for verification before taking any action, and check the Federal Trade Commission's alert board.
Sign 5: The site's URL and e-mail don't matchAny case in which a site's URL doesn't match the contact's e-mail address should raise an alarm. Most legitimate companies provide their employees with a corporate e-mail account. This doesn't mean, however, that you can automatically trust sites where the two align. Illegitimate companies can purchase domain names as easily as legitimate companies.
(Credit: CNET Networks)
Editor's Note: This article was updated on 3/3/08 from a previous version published on 12/15/06.
No matter how you arrive at an unsafe Web site, much can go wrong when you do. Phishers will attempt to coerce you into disclosing sensitive information--such as your address and social security number--and adware engines may sprout pop-ups over your screen like a field of clover. Thankfully, you can learn to avoid trouble before it's too late. Here are nine telltale signs you're headed for dangerous waters, with tips to keep you firmly in the safety zone.
Nobody's perfect, and while these nine tips should help you avoid many dangerous sites, other online threats are more subtle. Two tools can assist in warning you about dangerous sites. LinkScanner Lite and McAfee SiteAdvisor (for Firefox and Internet Explorer) assess the hazards of sites you visit, and is available for Firefox or Internet Explorer. Online Armor scans sites in real time based on traceable patterns of malicious software behavior.
Also, our Security Starter Kit presents an excellent set of tools to provide a solid foundation of defense against potential threats.
Sign 1: Pop-up cityYou click a search result and are suddenly bombarded with no fewer than 10 porn pop-ups. Back out immediately by either clicking the X in the upper-right corners of the windows or by pressing Alt-F4 to close your browser. Then run a malicious software scanner and remover to assess and fix the damage. Many pop-up blockers are available for Internet Explorer, and both Firefox and Opera include blocking features.
It's a mouthful, but EULAlyzer's ease of use makes up for its awkward pronunciation.(Credit: CNET Networks)
Sign 2: Where's the EULA?You're about to sign up for or purchase a service and aren't prompted to accept an end-user license agreement, nor are you offered a privacy policy to view. Shady site proprietors often disclose their intentions in the privacy policy or EULA, so you should always read carefully! The free tool EULAlyzer (from the makers of SpywareBlaster) is a great help because it analyzes license agreements and notes any unusual or possibly dangerous language. An upgrade to the professional version is available for about $20.
Sign 3: Excessive firewall alertsYour firewall repeatedly alerts you to file extensions you don't recognize and other suspicious anomalies. Once you've set your firewall to allow your most common programs, any alert should be taken seriously, and a number of warnings should be a red light something is amiss. If you're not running a firewall, get one right now.
Sign 4: E-mail and instant message links phish for informationYou follow a link embedded in an e-mail and arrive at a site that asks you to provide security information for an "important update." Misleading links are increasingly sent through instant messages under the guise of a contact's friendly tip. This variety is especially easy to fall for. If the page is asking for data or looks like a different destination than the link implied, pull yourself out of autopilot and start taking screenshots. Contact the company for verification before taking any action, and check the Federal Trade Commission's alert board.
Sign 5: The site's URL and e-mail don't matchAny case in which a site's URL doesn't match the contact's e-mail address should raise an alarm. Most legitimate companies provide their employees with a corporate e-mail account. This doesn't mean, however, that you can automatically trust sites where the two align. Illegitimate companies can purchase domain names as easily as legitimate companies.
Tuesday, 26 February 2008
Social Networking Sites, A Parent Trap?
A new web warning for families, More and more parents are getting burned with their kids spill family secrets online. Some moms and dads are even getting arrested or fired.
These websites offer kids a forum, but sometimes what they say can get their parents in serious trouble.
Teens don't often know it, but many families are getting hurt according to Internet Safety Expert Parry Aftab.
"I’ve represented a lot of parents who’ve come to me when they have been fired, they’ve been demoted or they’ve been called on the carpet because of what their kids posted online," Aftab says.
She says many teens still don't get it, that their posts on networking and blogging sites aren't private.
" I always warn kids never to post anything that parents, principal, predators can’t see. Now, I have to warn them not to post anything that their parents’ boss or anybody in their neighborhood shouldn’t be seeing either," Aftab says.
Sgt. Corey MacDonald agrees. He tours the country speaking about Internet safety and says police and employers are watching, looking for, and finding all kinds of dirt.
It look MacDonald only a matter of moments to find posts online saying "Not only do I have to live with my nagging mom, my dad does drugs" and "my parents are lazy alcoholics."
MacDonald says it's not hard for police or employers to uncover the identity of teens from the details in their profiles.
"All they have to do is narrow down who this person is that’s posting this. And then, it’s relatively easy to search their name on one of the online search sites and find out who their family is," he says.
They're also getting a lot of anonymous tips. Some posts are leading to arrests, like the case of a boy who boasted online about his mother buying a keg for his underage friends.
"This is a much bigger problem than people are aware of," Aftab says.
Even innocent-sound news can do damage.
"They may be talking about how their father is losing a job and perhaps a neighbor who’s the mortgage broker for the father isn’t aware that the father’s job is in jeopardy," she says.
Experts say it's critical for parents to talk to their teens about the repercussions of revealing family business and make sure they turn on all privacy settings.
But a note about privacy settings - even if your kids turn their's on when they send messages and pictures to friends, your have no control over whether those friends keep their page private. So the images and info may still get out there.
More than 12 million kids ages 12 to 17 used social networking sites in August 2007. That's up 15% from the same period last year. Many admit they have online friends that they've never met. Those friends could, in fact, be police officers or even their parents' employers.
These websites offer kids a forum, but sometimes what they say can get their parents in serious trouble.
Teens don't often know it, but many families are getting hurt according to Internet Safety Expert Parry Aftab.
"I’ve represented a lot of parents who’ve come to me when they have been fired, they’ve been demoted or they’ve been called on the carpet because of what their kids posted online," Aftab says.
She says many teens still don't get it, that their posts on networking and blogging sites aren't private.
" I always warn kids never to post anything that parents, principal, predators can’t see. Now, I have to warn them not to post anything that their parents’ boss or anybody in their neighborhood shouldn’t be seeing either," Aftab says.
Sgt. Corey MacDonald agrees. He tours the country speaking about Internet safety and says police and employers are watching, looking for, and finding all kinds of dirt.
It look MacDonald only a matter of moments to find posts online saying "Not only do I have to live with my nagging mom, my dad does drugs" and "my parents are lazy alcoholics."
MacDonald says it's not hard for police or employers to uncover the identity of teens from the details in their profiles.
"All they have to do is narrow down who this person is that’s posting this. And then, it’s relatively easy to search their name on one of the online search sites and find out who their family is," he says.
They're also getting a lot of anonymous tips. Some posts are leading to arrests, like the case of a boy who boasted online about his mother buying a keg for his underage friends.
"This is a much bigger problem than people are aware of," Aftab says.
Even innocent-sound news can do damage.
"They may be talking about how their father is losing a job and perhaps a neighbor who’s the mortgage broker for the father isn’t aware that the father’s job is in jeopardy," she says.
Experts say it's critical for parents to talk to their teens about the repercussions of revealing family business and make sure they turn on all privacy settings.
But a note about privacy settings - even if your kids turn their's on when they send messages and pictures to friends, your have no control over whether those friends keep their page private. So the images and info may still get out there.
More than 12 million kids ages 12 to 17 used social networking sites in August 2007. That's up 15% from the same period last year. Many admit they have online friends that they've never met. Those friends could, in fact, be police officers or even their parents' employers.
Thursday, 21 February 2008
The Youth Protection Roundtable experts survey
The Youth Protection Roundtable published the complete results of their European experts' survey on matters of safer Internet.The results clearly show the need for permanent co-operation as the Safer Internet Day has generated. The YPRT therefore tends to provide a comprehensive platform for stakeholders from all areas engaged in matters of youth protection.
The survey results are available as a printable brochure in PDF (2,5 MB). If you wish to receive some copies, please send a mail to Katharina Kunze, kunze@yprt.eu.To download the available survey graphics directly please refer to the menu on the left. Please find the Survey Results as a PDF brochure in English language under the link below (2,511 KB).Youth Protection Roundtable Survey 2007 Die Ergebnisse der Expertenbefragung als PDF in deutscher Sprache finden Sie unter folgendem Link (1,069 KB).
The survey results are available as a printable brochure in PDF (2,5 MB). If you wish to receive some copies, please send a mail to Katharina Kunze, kunze@yprt.eu.To download the available survey graphics directly please refer to the menu on the left. Please find the Survey Results as a PDF brochure in English language under the link below (2,511 KB).Youth Protection Roundtable Survey 2007 Die Ergebnisse der Expertenbefragung als PDF in deutscher Sprache finden Sie unter folgendem Link (1,069 KB).
Mobile firms to block child porn
Published on: 12.02.08Source: BBC News online
The Global association for mobile firms (GSMA) has launched the Mobile Alliance, which aims to block paedophiles using phones to send or receive child sexual abuse images. With mobile firms from across the world the new alliance is essential, because web access via phones improves.Among planned measures will be a block on mobile phone access to websites which host abusive content. Moreover there will be hotlines to give account to services carrying inappropriate images.Please read the complete article under http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7238739.stm
The Global association for mobile firms (GSMA) has launched the Mobile Alliance, which aims to block paedophiles using phones to send or receive child sexual abuse images. With mobile firms from across the world the new alliance is essential, because web access via phones improves.Among planned measures will be a block on mobile phone access to websites which host abusive content. Moreover there will be hotlines to give account to services carrying inappropriate images.Please read the complete article under http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7238739.stm
Saturday, 16 February 2008
Cyberbullying on the rise?
That was the headline on an Associated Press report <
http://www.eschoolnews.com/news/top-news/related-top-news/?i=50868;_hbguid=81326910-9480-4f4e-a1e1-f0ff24952386>on a US Centers for Disease Control focus on cyberbullying <http://www.cdc.gov/Features/ElectronicAggression/>. "Electronic aggression," as the CDC prefers to call it, is "an emerging public health problem." While acknowledging the Internet's "many potential benefits," the CDC says the fact that 80% of US adolescents own at least one Net-connected device means that "increasing numbers of adolescents are becoming victims of aggression perpetrated by peers with this technology" (cellphones, PDAs, or Net-connected computers).A qualifier is needed here: Teens are not just becoming victims, they are victimizing. "Obviously," some readers might say. But it's not so obvious in the way our society has handled this issue to date. We keep thinking of our online children as potential victims when we need to think of them as (and aim our parenting and online-safety messages at) participants. They are participants on the participatory Web - in fact they're the drivers of it (see "Users' Web" <http://www.netfamilynews.org/2006/05/users-web.html>).It's not logical to aim education about problems in this highly interactive space at passive victims. They are only part of the equation - not even half, in fact - because in many bullying situations, particularly online, there are observers as well as a bully and a victim. And there is a fine line and often a very short amount of time between being victimized by a bully and becoming one (retaliating), as well as between being an observer and a participant. Take mere gossip as an example. When adolescents engage in mean gossip about one another in instant messaging or on a social-networking site, in a matter of seconds a person being "dissed" by someone can turn the tables on him or her - and entire peer groups can "pile on," augmenting the victimization.
Research now shows a correlation between behaving aggressively online and being victimized. “Youth who engage in online aggressive behavior by making rude or nasty comments or frequently embarrassing others are more than twice as likely to report online interpersonal victimization,” wrote University of New Hampshire researchers in Archives of Pediatric & Adolescent Medicine <http://archpedi.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/161/2/138> a year ago, suggesting that online-safety messaging needs to "target the right online behaviors."Another emerging understanding is highlighted in an important article in the Journal of Adolescent Health's just-released special issue on cyberbullying <http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/dvp/electronic_aggression.htm> - that both aggression and victimization are associated with "psychosocial problems." Authors Michele Ybarra, Dorothy Espelage, and Kimberly Mitchell write that "the majority of youth are not frequently involved in Internet harassment or unwanted sexual solicitation either as victims or as perpetrators. Among those who are, however, psychosocial problems are apparent…. This is especially true for youth who are involved as perpetrators as well as victims of both Internet harassment and sexual solicitation. This small group of youth has emerged as an especially important group for adolescent health professionals to be aware of." What are psychosocial problems? The authors refer to "elevated rates of substance abuse; involvement in online victimization; perpetration of relational, physical, and sexual aggression; delinquent peers; propensity to respond to certain stimuli with anger; poor emotional bonds with caregivers; and poor caregiver monitoring." The long title of their study is "The Co-occurrence of Internet Harassment and Unwanted Sexual Solicitation Victimization and Perpetration: Associations with Psychosocial Behaviors" (it can be downloaded in pdf format here <
http://www.jahonline.org/content/suppl07>).
http://www.eschoolnews.com/news/top-news/related-top-news/?i=50868;_hbguid=81326910-9480-4f4e-a1e1-f0ff24952386>on a US Centers for Disease Control focus on cyberbullying <http://www.cdc.gov/Features/ElectronicAggression/>. "Electronic aggression," as the CDC prefers to call it, is "an emerging public health problem." While acknowledging the Internet's "many potential benefits," the CDC says the fact that 80% of US adolescents own at least one Net-connected device means that "increasing numbers of adolescents are becoming victims of aggression perpetrated by peers with this technology" (cellphones, PDAs, or Net-connected computers).A qualifier is needed here: Teens are not just becoming victims, they are victimizing. "Obviously," some readers might say. But it's not so obvious in the way our society has handled this issue to date. We keep thinking of our online children as potential victims when we need to think of them as (and aim our parenting and online-safety messages at) participants. They are participants on the participatory Web - in fact they're the drivers of it (see "Users' Web" <http://www.netfamilynews.org/2006/05/users-web.html>).It's not logical to aim education about problems in this highly interactive space at passive victims. They are only part of the equation - not even half, in fact - because in many bullying situations, particularly online, there are observers as well as a bully and a victim. And there is a fine line and often a very short amount of time between being victimized by a bully and becoming one (retaliating), as well as between being an observer and a participant. Take mere gossip as an example. When adolescents engage in mean gossip about one another in instant messaging or on a social-networking site, in a matter of seconds a person being "dissed" by someone can turn the tables on him or her - and entire peer groups can "pile on," augmenting the victimization.
Research now shows a correlation between behaving aggressively online and being victimized. “Youth who engage in online aggressive behavior by making rude or nasty comments or frequently embarrassing others are more than twice as likely to report online interpersonal victimization,” wrote University of New Hampshire researchers in Archives of Pediatric & Adolescent Medicine <http://archpedi.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/161/2/138> a year ago, suggesting that online-safety messaging needs to "target the right online behaviors."Another emerging understanding is highlighted in an important article in the Journal of Adolescent Health's just-released special issue on cyberbullying <http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/dvp/electronic_aggression.htm> - that both aggression and victimization are associated with "psychosocial problems." Authors Michele Ybarra, Dorothy Espelage, and Kimberly Mitchell write that "the majority of youth are not frequently involved in Internet harassment or unwanted sexual solicitation either as victims or as perpetrators. Among those who are, however, psychosocial problems are apparent…. This is especially true for youth who are involved as perpetrators as well as victims of both Internet harassment and sexual solicitation. This small group of youth has emerged as an especially important group for adolescent health professionals to be aware of." What are psychosocial problems? The authors refer to "elevated rates of substance abuse; involvement in online victimization; perpetration of relational, physical, and sexual aggression; delinquent peers; propensity to respond to certain stimuli with anger; poor emotional bonds with caregivers; and poor caregiver monitoring." The long title of their study is "The Co-occurrence of Internet Harassment and Unwanted Sexual Solicitation Victimization and Perpetration: Associations with Psychosocial Behaviors" (it can be downloaded in pdf format here <
http://www.jahonline.org/content/suppl07>).
Wednesday, 30 January 2008
High School Athletes End Up on Porn Sites
Privacy Concerns Raised as Photos of Student Athletes Found on Porn SitesFont SizeThe parents contend these images constitute child pornography because the Web sites feature only images of the boys when they're not actually playing and often crop images to focus on their swimsuits and genitals. "They juxtapose the photos next to really explicit images, and by the time they're done cropping them, we think they can be considered pornographic," said Joan Gould, an international water polo official and spokeswoman for a group of Orange County players' parents. "This isn't just happening with kids from California," she said. "We've found pictures of kids in Michigan, New York and across the country. They're posted on message boards for adult men all over the world who lewdly discuss their physical attributes." Gould said she has contacted the FBI, and that federal investigators "were sympathetic but said there is no legal recourse. On the surface it is legal." Parents in Orange County were further upset when they said they found evidence that some of the photos were taken by someone who worked for the University of California at Irvine Police Department. Parents said they connected the IP address of one of the sites where many of the pictures appeared and a user name responsible for posting images on other sites to the individual. The person allegedly tied to the photos could not be reached for comment, but the UCI police said it was investigating the matter. "UCI is aware of the issue and the matter is under review," said university spokeswoman Cathy Lawhon. "The UC police department is initiating an independent investigation and cannot comment on personnel issues." The father of one boy in the Costa Mesa area, who asked not to be identified, said the images are intended to be exploitive. "These pictures don't show anything about the sport. All they show are young children in Speedos," he said. "All the pictures were taken out of the water, when the kids are doing dry land stretches or adjusting themselves. There are no action shots of them actually playing." He said he recognized at least 30 children in the photos and had received no response after filing complaints with the state attorney general and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's office. "There is no clear law here to protect these kids," the father said. "When confronted by us on message boards, these photographers continuously cite their First Amendment right, but the First Amendment was written at a time when people could never have anticipated this sort of thing." The father said some of the boys have had to go through counseling or have quit the team because of negative comments made by other students who learned their pictures appeared on gay Web sites. Both parents said area schools have since taken a more deliberate approach to monitoring who is allowed to attend and photograph sporting events. Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, said the parents might be able to take legal action against the photographers and Web sites. "This issue represents just one of a whole range of new issues arising around the use of personal images on the Internet," said Rotenberg. "In some cases, publishers of online information may be immune because of an act of Congress. Internet publishers are given broader protections than other forms of media, but that doesn't mean the parents don't have a case. "If the pictures appear alongside other more explicit images, it might be an example of a false light privacy tort, which occurs when publishing a true fact but in a context that allows people to draw a wrong conclusion," he added. "If that's the case, there may be a basis for the parents to bring an action." In the meantime, La Donna Verloop and other parents have taken it upon themselves to monitor pools and ensure that only credentialed photographers snap pictures of their children. "The schools have added a security guard and set up changing tents on the pool deck, but I took it upon myself to make sure the kids were protected," Verloop said. "I travel with my son's team everywhere they go, and I search every nook where someone might be hiding with a camera."
The naked truth
By Daniel Patrick Sheehan Genevieve Marshall and Brian Callaway Of The Morning Call Once in cyberspace, images like those of nude Parkland students are with us forever.We begin on a fogey-ish note: What's the matter with kids these days?The news out of Parkland High School last week -- that at least two students had taken pictures of themselves nude and that the photos had made their way into cyberspace beyond all hope of recall -- is just the latest version of what is quickly becoming an old story. Today's technology, joined to the rashness of youth, can mean humiliating, reputation-haunting trouble.The speed of image-making and message-sending has taken away the time for reflection.''There's no time between the 'Gee, would it be a good idea to do this?' and the click of the mouse,'' said Parry Aftab, executive director of the New Jersey-based Internet safety organization WiredSafety.In addition, youth are more willing to make their private lives public in part because of media influence, she said.''They're watching reality shows, they're seeing things, they log on to MySpace and they see other people doing this and they think it's acceptable,'' she said. ''Sort of a mob mentality.''To the horror of their parents, young people living so much of their lives in cyberspace seem unaware that there is no expectation of privacy in that realm and little recourse for people who feel violated by what happens there.''People forget when they put pictures up, it's not just for their friends,'' said Sarah Rutstein, 19, a Muhlenberg College sophomore from West Windsor, N.J. ''It's really for the entire world to see.''Existing law makes it tough to prosecute cases in which photos are posted without the subject's permission.Luke Heller, a former Pennsylvania state trooper from Lower Macungie, was arrested in 2006 after posting photos of his estranged wife nude on a Web site. He initially was charged with felony crimes, including unlawful use of a computer, but a judge said Pennsylvania's computer law wasn't appropriate for the circumstances of the case. So Heller could only be prosecuted on less-serious misdemeanor charges. He pleaded guilty to harassment and was sentenced to three to 12 months in Lehigh County prison.In the Parkland case, authorities threatened to prosecute anyone who knowingly held on to the pictures -- not because they were disseminated online, but because the subjects are underage and the images constitute child pornography.Despite the threat of prosecution, the pictures -- including one of a sex act between a boy and a girl whom officials have yet to identify -- have been circulating for months and, according to some students, have already been sent to people in other states.Experts said the fallout is potentially devastating.''Look at what one click can do,'' said Sarah Stevens, a Lehigh Valley Hospital and Health Network physician who specializes in adolescent medicine. ''That's a level of damage to an individual that I don't think can ever be undone.''The wife of a Virginia school administrator learned earlier this month how fast a few choice words can spread when she left an angry cell phone message for a high school student who called her husband at home to ask why he hadn't ordered a snow day. In a minute-long tirade that within a day had been forwarded to hundreds of students, posted on YouTube and picked up by the media, the woman made reference to ''snotty-nosed little brats'' as she scolded the 17-year-old caller for his impertinence.The student's decision to post the administrator's home and work numbers on a Web site and encourage others to call him has some wondering if he crossed the line.Stevens says teenagers aren't fundamentally different than they were before technology changed the speed of life. They are impulsive risk-takers ''who sometimes do things they kind of know they shouldn't do,'' she said. ''Some of that is part of the process of figuring things out and growing up.''But many of the safeguards that helped protect teens despite themselves have disappeared, she added. Many cell phones have cameras, and a growing number are Internet-ready. The combination has made it devastatingly simple to take inappropriate photos that spread from phone to phone like a virus.Before the advent of that technology, Stevens said, ''you'd have to get a camera, which had film in it…When you took the picture, you had to take it somewhere to be developed, and if there was something inappropriate there, it probably stopped at that point.''What happened at Parkland isn't unique, said Muhlenberg College students, who had no problem reeling off examples of technology-aided vengeance and voyeurism.Four years ago, Melissa Kaplan saw something similar happen at her suburban Philadelphia middle school. A ninth-grader used her cell phone to take photos of herself naked and send them to her boyfriend. He sent the photos to his friends. It was the talk of her town for several weeks.''It became a community problem,'' said Kaplan, 19, a Muhlenberg College sophomore. ''You just don't take pictures of yourself naked, and failing that, you certainly don't send them to someone else.''Christopher Szczerbienski, a Muhlenberg freshman, said a girl at the high school he attended in Holmdel, N.J., tried to make her boyfriend jealous by taking topless photos of herself with another girl. She sent the photo over her cell phone to his phone, and he got his own revenge by quickly forwarding them to everyone he knew.''People talked about it a lot for a few weeks but the administration didn't know about it,'' said Szczerbienski, 18. ''Now it's just a funny story.''And a cautionary tale.''Teenagers need to learn to stand up for themselves,'' he said. ''You don't let people take photos of you that you wouldn't want your parents and the entire world to see. You don't do that to yourself, either. And you certainly don't pass them on.''''They think it won't happen to them,'' said sophomore Trisha Kadakia, 20, of Cherry Hill, N.J. ''Even though it happens all the time.''Muhlenberg students said they were cautioned during orientation about the potential for lasting negative impact when they publish anything on the Internet, from diaries on weblogs to networking profiles and photos of them drinking before they turn 21.Sororities warn their pledges not to post photos of themselves drinking alcoholic beverages on Facebook and other social networking sites. They are told to adjust their privacy settings so only friends can see their photos, and officials in risk management check to make sure they haven't posted anything that would harm the student's reputation or the sorority.College students have seemed to interpret this message as such: As long as the alcohol is in a red plastic cup, no one will be the wiser.''It's become part of the college experience to get drunk and take stupid photos,'' said sophomore Emily Harris, 19, of Chatham, N.J. ''And then on Monday you check all the party albums to see what happened.''Inappropriate gestures. Body parts exposed. Beer cans in the hands of underage students.''A lot of kids are posting pictures with the unrealistic expectation [that] only the people they want to see it can see it,'' Aftab said. ''But this is not a diary locked up in your sock drawer.''From the Morning Call 30/01/08
Tuesday, 29 January 2008
Web Link Among Young Suicide Victims?
Police in a small British town are investigating a series of suicides of young people, and whether the Internet was some sort of common communications denominator in any of the deaths.
What's certain is that something tragic and mysterious is going on in Bridgend, Wales, reports CBS News correspondent Mark, Phillips.
For reasons that are baffling experts, Bridgend has become the center of the apparent cluster of suicides among young people.
First, says Phillips, there were seven victims, all aged between 17 and 27. All hanged themselves over the past year. Each knew at least one other person in the group.
Now, the town's coroner has revealed another six recent suicides, bringing the total to thirteen.
There was almost a 14th victim, but her parents found her hanging, barely alive, and were able to save her.
But they say she can't remember trying suicide, or why she did.
The Internet, Phillips observes, particularly tribute sites on which people place eulogies to the dead, has emerged as a suspect in these cases. Some of the victims posted messages before killing themselves. The link isn't clear, but it worries experts.
And, according to London's "Sunday Times," at least three of the victims "all shared friends on Bebo," a popular social networking Web site in the United Kingdom.
Madeleine Moon, a local member of Parliament, says, "What's alarming (is) ... there are chat rooms (not just on Bebo) that people go into to talk about suicide and to contemplate suicide."
Still, authorities in Wales say there's no clear connection among the cases.
Schools and parents in Bridgend have been put on suicide watch. Counseling is being offered.
But, notes Phillips, nobody is exactly sure what causes or signs they're looking for.
On The Early Show Monday, clinical psychologist Jeff Gardere told co-anchor Julie Chen, "We've seen this before. It's called suicide contagion or suicide clusters. ... What they share in common is that these are young people who are actually vulnerable to suicide. They all come from the same geographical area, though we know there are no boundaries because of the Internet. And the media, but most importantly, what we've seen in this particular case, many of these kids have died by hanging. So, they do know one another or know of one another, and they do communicate on these sites.
"Suicide is the third leading cause of death with teens," Gardere continued. "And therefore, what we see, the first teen who commits suicide almost serves as a role model for other kids. In other words, they open up this book for them that these other kids can now latch onto. And if they're having depression or other mental health issues, then they can choose this inappropriate way of venting a lot of their anger and their depression.
" ... A lot of these kids are putting entries in before they die. So certainly parents should know what's going on on these Web sites. But it's also telling me kids are talking to one another and not talking to their parents. And in many ways, they're glorifying their suicides, getting attention in death that they were not getting in life. So parents, wake up. Smell the coffee. Your kids need to speak to you. There is an epidemic as far as depression and other psychological issues with our teens, and we need to address it.
"I think," Gardere concluded, "certain parents should know what their kids are doing on the websites, and if their kids are having some sociological, some psychological issues, talk to them and make sure that there's some sort of intervention."
What's certain is that something tragic and mysterious is going on in Bridgend, Wales, reports CBS News correspondent Mark, Phillips.
For reasons that are baffling experts, Bridgend has become the center of the apparent cluster of suicides among young people.
First, says Phillips, there were seven victims, all aged between 17 and 27. All hanged themselves over the past year. Each knew at least one other person in the group.
Now, the town's coroner has revealed another six recent suicides, bringing the total to thirteen.
There was almost a 14th victim, but her parents found her hanging, barely alive, and were able to save her.
But they say she can't remember trying suicide, or why she did.
The Internet, Phillips observes, particularly tribute sites on which people place eulogies to the dead, has emerged as a suspect in these cases. Some of the victims posted messages before killing themselves. The link isn't clear, but it worries experts.
And, according to London's "Sunday Times," at least three of the victims "all shared friends on Bebo," a popular social networking Web site in the United Kingdom.
Madeleine Moon, a local member of Parliament, says, "What's alarming (is) ... there are chat rooms (not just on Bebo) that people go into to talk about suicide and to contemplate suicide."
Still, authorities in Wales say there's no clear connection among the cases.
Schools and parents in Bridgend have been put on suicide watch. Counseling is being offered.
But, notes Phillips, nobody is exactly sure what causes or signs they're looking for.
On The Early Show Monday, clinical psychologist Jeff Gardere told co-anchor Julie Chen, "We've seen this before. It's called suicide contagion or suicide clusters. ... What they share in common is that these are young people who are actually vulnerable to suicide. They all come from the same geographical area, though we know there are no boundaries because of the Internet. And the media, but most importantly, what we've seen in this particular case, many of these kids have died by hanging. So, they do know one another or know of one another, and they do communicate on these sites.
"Suicide is the third leading cause of death with teens," Gardere continued. "And therefore, what we see, the first teen who commits suicide almost serves as a role model for other kids. In other words, they open up this book for them that these other kids can now latch onto. And if they're having depression or other mental health issues, then they can choose this inappropriate way of venting a lot of their anger and their depression.
" ... A lot of these kids are putting entries in before they die. So certainly parents should know what's going on on these Web sites. But it's also telling me kids are talking to one another and not talking to their parents. And in many ways, they're glorifying their suicides, getting attention in death that they were not getting in life. So parents, wake up. Smell the coffee. Your kids need to speak to you. There is an epidemic as far as depression and other psychological issues with our teens, and we need to address it.
"I think," Gardere concluded, "certain parents should know what their kids are doing on the websites, and if their kids are having some sociological, some psychological issues, talk to them and make sure that there's some sort of intervention."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)