Press, Parents And 'Experts' Blew Online Safety Threat To Children Way Out Of Proportion
from the kids-are-pretty-safe dept
If you pay attention to most of the mainstream press these days, you could be forgiven for thinking that the internet is a den of sin, where children are constantly preyed upon by predators from every angle... especially on social networks. After all, we've been told about all the sex offenders on MySpace and Facebook. There are even a few so-called "experts" who you see quoted repeatedly on just how dangerous it is for kids online -- even though study after study has actually shown that fewer kids are being solicited -- and most kids seem smart enough to be able to deal with unwanted contacts just fine. However, you don't see those stories very often, because it's not as headline grabbing to say: Hey, Everyone's Overreacting! But sometimes it does happen... and USA Today has a nice article explaining that many parents and politicians are significantly overreacting to the "threats" online facing children. As the article notes, it's extremely rare for someone to "stalk" a person via their profile and abduct them. In fact, sexual abuse cases against children are way down (by 50%) from 1990 to 2005, as the internet became so much more popular. So, the idea that the internet and social networks have somehow put more children into harms way seems totally incorrect, and it's nice to see a news source like USA Today making that clear. This isn't to say children shouldn't be taught how to deal with strangers online -- but it's like learning how to deal with strangers you run into on the street. You don't keep your children from meeting strangers completely, you teach them how to be safe.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: children, for the children, online safety, predators
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Instead of freaking out because your kid reads slashdot or has a myspace page, perhaps be more worried about all the rotating step-daddies you're bringing home. Statistically speaking, step dads and biological moms are the biggest of such risks (seriously, look it up) to children.
Not to mention all of the priests, coaches and teachers.
There was a report last week where they mentioned almost 3,000 teachers are known to have molested their students in the united states alone. In the last five years alone. And those are only the ones that we knew about. That means something like at least 600 kids every year molested by teachers . . . how many were picked up and raped online? I'm guessing that statistically, sending your child to school is FAR more dangerous than letting them use a browser.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Is this a Non-Threat?
Pictures at
http://news.naver.com/main/read.nhn?mode=LSD&mid=sec&sid1=105&oid=032&aid=0000 251534
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
beyond that, what would politicians save the children from as part of getting reelected if there was little to no danger online?
If the danger was so minimal, how could news outfits like Fox and CNN turn a profit being that the 'cause' of the fear mongering was a lie all along?
American society might just unravel if this turns out to be true
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Unraveling?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Parenting is the key to safety
I too am happy to see USA Today report the truth on these statistics. Parents must be responsible in teaching their kids about all the dangers in the world today and what to do if they encounter any, whether on the web, at school or on the streets.
Many experts always seek out publicity, anyway they can and usually with a controversial subject that the media just loves to exploit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How Much Caution is Too Much?
Is it necessary to overreact to drill the point home to both parents and children, in this two parent workforce generation?
Perhaps, as long as it does not get to the point of paranoia, or cause long term psychological effects society will test erring with too much caution at the beginning of this social Web 2.0 trend and then slowly find a practical balance.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: How Much Caution is Too Much?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: How Much Caution is Too Much?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I have kids
I also have strict rules on what information they can communicate. I don't allow my children to upload pictures, post the name our hometown, or even the name of the sports teams they like. Personal information such as name, phone, school or address are absolutely forbidden on any open site.
I log all their websites and I require them to give me the user name and password to any accounts they setup. All chats are recorded as well.
The point is you can make the internet as safe for you kids as any other environment provided you are act as responsible parent.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I have kids
What, no recording of their phone calls? No cameras watching every move? And you call yourself responsible!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I have kids
there is something called "linux live cd"
go and download it. after that, you can go to any website without your parents knowing.
Parents: Keep inmind that your kids are not gonna be 10 forever. They eventually will realize that life is more that racecars and cookies. Girls...
Dont take this ofencivly. I dont mean it like that. Just ... Grow up!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I have kids
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
lovejoy...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The simple fact is that billions are being made by companies helping parents 'save the children'; by overblowing or inventing threats to kids, they are simply making more & more money. And when the news picks up on it.... watch out; that is a credible source for a lot of people....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So will the children be safe then? Maybe from 'the man on the street', but from government?
All things considered - history proves the government is the worst serial killer by far.. So, ummm, yeah - that makes sense.
Of course, Government was only corrupt for the last 9,950 years. But it's all better now, over the last 50 years. That makes sense, I'd believe a criminal with a very long history of abuse is 'better now' in the recent past.
Hmm, odd logic indeed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Being sensible...
I'll be honest... when my kids are old enough to chat online (or read), I will probably block most of the chat sites until we've drilled home the idea of what is or isn't allowed, and then slowly open the doorway, and monitor to make sure my kids are safe. Once we've established rules, I can start checking less and less often, until they are independent, but that would be a long way down the road.
Also... I agree with Anonymous Coward that people with sick fantasies can find a place online to play them out (on adult sites), instead of finding a real person on the street, and victimizing them. In the long run, I think the internet has helped us, and we just need to teach children (as with any other experience in life) how to use it responsibly. That said... I always wondered when I watch the shows like "to catch a predator" what percentage of children would actually agree to the things that the decoys agree to. And how many parents are actually letting their 10-year-old child stay home alone or go to meet someone at McD's alone... we always had to have at least a sibling with us no matter what.... that deterred alot of things we could have done, too. Not wanting to get our siblings into trouble.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: How Much Caution is to Much
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
good thing pedos don't read newspapers?
I was mildly annoyed by the implication that I was being an irresponsible parent.
Statistics say 90% of the time children are abused by someone known to them. My wife was sexually abused by her father, and through therapy she's met many other abuse victims. All of the people she's met were abused by a family member or someone close to the family. And as you might imagine, my children know exactly what to do if someone acts inappropriately towards them.
The same day I noticed that the local 'free' paper, delivered to every mailbox in the district had a front page photo of three children helping clean up a local gully. Full names provided, and location of the gully that they all lived nearby. Since then I've been keeping an eye on this local paper and every single edition has photos of children in it. Always with their full names, and always with some approximation of where they live, schools they attend, groups they're a member of. The sort of details that everyone says children should NEVER provide on the intarweb.
The complete content of this newspaper is available on the intarweb, through the publisher's website.
And we still visit my wife's parents regularly (family is family). They don't own a computer and wouldn't know how to use the internet at all, but they do live in the same district and my wife's father, a convicted pedophile, is delivered the same free newspaper every week.
Isn't that funny.
Posted anonymously since my father in law has done his time, is unlikely to reoffend, and doesn't need any more grief.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: good thing pedos don't read newspapers?
Thank you for writing this. _IF_ there is a threat, it's pretty much guaranteed to be someone you and your kid already know. Stranger danger exists but not in the proportion used by journalists to sell papers and companies to sell product.
Not that it matters but ... I'm an abuse survivor.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Who are all these child predator supporters.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Self protection
Heckler&Koch have a excellent selection for concerned parents.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yes, save the children
[ link to this | view in chronology ]