At many restaurants and stores, free public Wi-Fi comes with your morning coffee or your child’s Happy Meal. While the convenience of this connectivity allows many to work or surf the net for fun at public cafés or fast food joints, a growing number of people use public Wi-Fi to view pornography.
With public Wi-Fi serving as an unwitting channel for pornography to creep into our children’s field of vision and attracting felons – all in public squares – large corporations continue to ignore the public outcry for change. A growing movement, National P*rn Free Wi-Fi Campaign, has been calling on Starbucks and McDonald’s as early as March 2014 to filter their Wi-Fi networks. Today, 46,500 petitions signatures later, even with the formation of a coalition of more than 75 organizations, this public safety issue still is yet to be addressed at the corporations’ shareholders meetings.
So what’s the big deal with unfiltered public Wi-Fi? What happens if Starbucks and McDonald’s didn’t do something to make their networks safer?
Imagine teenage girls chat over a Frappuccino after school, just one table over from someone browsing sexually explicit materials. Children in the play area can be just five feet from a man, sitting in plain view, watching pornographic films. These are not simply potential scenarios; they have happened and reported (http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Man-Arrested-at-Starbucks-for-Allegedly-Looking-at-Child-Porn-146895635.html).
Perhaps more dangerous is that, according to federal officers, the anonymity of public Wi-Fi attracts criminals to engage in sexual solicitation of children and trafficking of child pornography right there in public places (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/10/AR2007021001457.html). On December 29, 2014, USA Today reported the arrest of a registered sex offender while he was allegedly downloading child pornography at a Hillsboro, Washington Starbucks. (USA Today News Story, December 29, 2014).
The availability of unfiltered public Wi-Fi also means that children and teenagers whose parents turn on filtering controls on their home internet service can bypass those parental controls and freely access pornographic materials in public. Even when they are not looking for explicit material, a misspelling on search engines could expose them to images or otherwise lead them to pornographic sites – everything from adult pornography (the kind of images that appear in Playboy and Penthouse) to federally prosecutable obscene material depicting graphic sex acts, live sex shows, orgies, bestiality and violence. Even illegal content depicting the actual sexual abuse of a child (child pornography) — once only found on the black market — is instantly available and accessible on the Internet.
It’s long been established that usage of internet pornography leaves profoundly destructive consequences on the mental, emotional and sexual health of adolescents. Use of pornography can also lead to addictive and even criminal behavior. Protecting children from pornography is not merely a morality issue; it’s a global public health issue. Recent studies also show that online pornography fuels the sexual exploitation of children, violence against women, sex trafficking, addiction and the breakdown of marriage.
Unfiltered public Wi-Fi poses real threat to our society, and it’s high time that businesses take measures to make their Wi-Fi policies family-friendly and safe for their customers.
This is the clarion call of Enough Is Enough’s National P*rn Free Wi-Fi Campaign. Launched on October 2, 2014, this initiative calls on corporate America to join the fight to prevent the Internet-initiated sexual exploitation of children, as one of the latest efforts in EIE’s campaign to provide internet safety for children for more than twenty years.
The initial phase of EIE’s P*rn Free Wi-Fi Campaign targets McDonald’s and Starbucks. With a combined 25,000 stores in the U.S., these two corporate giants have locations in every street corner of our largest cities and towns, offering not just food and beverages, but also free, unfiltered, public Wi-Fi. Left unfiltered, these Wi-Fi hotspots can encourage or assist in criminal activity. However, as industry leaders, they are in a unique position to lead the way in the U.S. to provide safe public internet for their patrons.
Offering filtered, porn-free Wi-Fi will prove a win-win step for businesses and their patrons – corporations build a reputation of corporate responsibility and good corporate citizenship, and patrons and their families enjoy a safe environment without worries of being around sexual predators.
Although providing filtered public Wi-Fi could bring significant improvement in safety for customers of these businesses, it’s not a drastic or unprecedented measure in the US. Chick-fil-A and Panera Bread already filter pornography, child pornography and other inappropriate content on their Wi-Fi networks.
Even McDonald’s and Starbucks locations in the UK have long been filtering their Wi-Fi networks under an industry-wide self-regulation initiative led by Prime Minister David Cameron. As Cameron indicated, “this has never been a debate about companies or government censoring the Internet, but about filters to protect children” (http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2013/07/22/david-cameron-s-porn-speech-in-full). The United Kingdom further launched a nationwide “Friendly Wi-Fi” accreditation scheme to denote the cafes, restaurants and other businesses that offer public Wi-Fi access meeting a minimum level of filtering.
“If McDonald’s and Starbucks can protect children from pornography and child pornography in other nations, they should do so here in the U.S.,” said Donna Hughes, EIE President and CEO. “Offering safe Wi-Fi is in alignment with both McDonald’s and Starbucks’ corporate best practices and family-friendly policies. This would be a win-win for families and the companies’ respective brands. It’s not about censorship; it’s about corporate responsibility and good corporate citizenship.”
As part of EIE’s P*rn Free Wi-Fi Campaign, a public petition was launched and gathered 46,500 signatures, along with signatures of leaders of 75 organizations, on a petition letter addressed to McDonald’s CEO Don Thompson and Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz. Organizations that have partnered with EIE in this campaign include The National Children’s Advocacy Center, The Salvation Army, The Home School Legal Defense Association, The Family Research Council, The American Family Association, Focus on the Family’s Citizens Link, Parents’ Television Council, The Center for Family & Human Rights, and Concerned Women for America.
Since delivering the certified letter in March 2015, neither corporation provided official response to the petition. The issue was completely ignored at Starbucks’ annual shareholder meeting on March 18, 2015. On May 21, 2015, McDonald’s shareholder meeting likewise did not address the petition for filtered Wi-Fi, as it disregarded other demands and protests for policy changes, such as higher wages. They did, however, issue preliminary statements:
Starbucks – “While we don’t have a specific enterprise-wide, global policy on what customers can and cannot access on our free in-store Wi-Fi, we do reserve the right to stop any behavior that interferes with our customer experience.”
McDonald’s- “We are always open to continuous improvement and will take the issues raised under advisement. McDonald’s and our independent owner-operators share a commitment to providing a safe environment for our customers.”
Responding to the corporations’ slow to action, Hughes remarked, It’s stunning to me that McDonald’s and Starbucks, which already filter child pornography and pornography on their Wi-Fi in the UK and Australia, are not providing that same level of protection for children and families in America where they are headquartered.
A mom brings her kids to get a Happy Meal, and there’s a man in an adjoining booth enjoying hard-core pornography or even child pornography? Law enforcement reports this has happened. If parents understood that strangers can view hard-core pornography and child pornography in front of their kids in these establishments, I believe they would join us in saying, “Enough is enough!”
Please find below, our partner Family Research Council’s Update Article in support of the National Porn Free WiFi campaign.
“Starbucks and McDonalds filter their coffee — but not their WiFi. Despite more than 46,000 petitions, the two businesses refuse to block pornography from their free Internet service. And in some stores, the access is already costing them. In December, detectives arrested a man in Oregon for downloading child porn at the Starbucks hotspot. And that’s just one report of people using the free Internet to traffic children or solicit them for sex.
An organization called Enough Is Enough pressuring Starbucks and McDonalds to do what Chick-fil-A and Panera already do: filter out pornography from their feeds. ‘It’s about limiting the safe haven that open WiFi creates for sexual predators,’ the coalition of 75 organizations, including FRC, argues. Although both companies received the call to action, they aren’t heeding it.
In statements, they said they appreciated the feedback and would take the suggestion ‘under advisement.’ If customers want to click over to the dark world of pornography, let them do it on their own dime. Happy Meals and child porn should not be the new norm. To sign the petition, click over to the EnoughIsEnough website.”
My friend and Internet safety comrade, John Carr is involved in the UK effort and has allowed me to share with you his recent January 29th blog which gives a terrific summary of the big things happening in the UK.
For the sake of the children,
Donna Rice Hughes
President & CEO, Enough Is Enough
No one I know argues filters are a silver bullet that solves all of the problems modern parents have to think about when trying to decide what to do for the best with regards to their children’s online lives.
Yet there is no doubt filters can play a part in the home as an aid to parenting, particularly if there are younger children around. In this context typically filters help parents keep age inappropriate content off their children’s screens. Hard core pornography is often mentioned as a key concern but it is by no means the only sort of content parents care about. However, behavioural challenges such as bullying, ripping off copyright protected material and so on generally are not within the ambit of most filters.
Outside of the home filters can be deployed by a range of organizations to help prevent certain types of materials being visible in places where they would not be appropriate. In addition filtering techniques can be used to limit access to illegal material across the piece, specifically child abuse images, sometimes referred to as child pornography.
In the UK filters are used in each of these ways.
This blog is an update on the current state of play in relation to:
- What large Internet Service Providers (ISPs) do for the family market
- What WiFi providers do in public spaces
- What mobile phone network operators do for all their customers
Special provisions apply to child abuse images.
Taking them in reverse order, because it is easier
Dealing with child abuse images
All ISPs, mobile phone networks and WiFi providers block access to all urls known to contain child abuse images. The filter cannot be lifted or modified by the end user. The list of relevant urls is provided by the IWF. This policy started in 2004.
Mobile phone networks’ approach to filtering
All of the UK’s mobile phone networks apply an adult content filter by default. What is “adult content” is determined by a framework provided by the British Board of Film Classification. It covers pornography, violence as well as one or two other categories.
This filter can be removed by the user completing a robust age verification check. The filter is either all on or all off. No one ever has to specify what type of adult content they are interested in accessing. This policy began in 2005.
Last year all of the major WiFi providers in the UK agreed to introduce filters to block access to pornography web sites in any public places where children and young people are likely to be found on a regular basis. There are a range of venues, therefore, where such filters will not be routinely applied e.g. casinos, nightclubs and military bases.
Some of the WiFi providers also block access to other types of adult sites, rather like the mobile networks do. McDonald’s was an early adopter of “porn free” WiFi. Starbucks and many other well known High Street chains do likewise.
WiFi filters deployed in this way in public spaces cannot be lifted or modified by end users.
Internet Service Providers
No cost or low cost filters have been around for parents to use practically since the day the worldwide web first appeared. The UK’s four largest ISPs –BT, Virgin, Sky, and TalkTalk- have provided free filters to their customers for several years. Recently the Big Four announced they would introduce a new system to make it easier for families to use them if they so wanted. Between them the Big Four ISPs have in the region of 90%-95% of the UK’s home broadband market.
Their measures do not touch or concern business users.
The only thing you have to do is decide
The filters the ISPs provide are not turned on by default. What there is is an unavoidable requirement to indicate whether or not you want to use them. The yes option is “pre-ticked”. The whole thing can be completed in a couple of clicks of a mouse.
The ISPs are doing it their own way but there are similarities: each offers options going from no filtering at all through to strict filtering of a broad range of adult content, with different points in between depending on the company.
All Big Four ISPs have chosen a Whole Home solution. The filters work on the network so all devices in the home are caught. This avoids parents having to configure every device that connects through the WiFi router.
The ISPs’ offering provides parents with the possibility of customizing the filters to suit the family’s cultural or religious background. At least one ISP – BT – has whitelisted a number of children’s help sites so even if they wanted to parents could not block access to them using the filters they have provided.
Parents kept informed
The details of all decisions about the initial set up of the filters and any subsequent changes made to them are put in an email which goes to the principal account holder.
No legal or regulatory compulsion
There are no laws or regulations requiring anybody to block access to child abuse images, or obliging WiFi providers or the mobile phone networks to do what they do as set out above. It’s the same with the ISPs. Their initiative is entirely voluntary although there is no doubt that in relation to the way in which their free filters are now presented, the ISPs were greatly encouraged to move in this direction by the government and a range of civil society organizations.
For three of the four ISPs their new way of presenting the filters is already operational. The fourth (Virgin) is a little way behind but not far.
At the moment the ISPs’ offering applies to new customers. Existing customers will be asked to make a choice about using the filters before the end of this calendar year but no one has to wait to be asked. They can move over as soon as they want.
Not all ISPs will follow suit
There is no doubt some other ISPs will choose not to join in with or copy the actions of their larger counterparts. As a result there will always be scope for anyone who disagrees with one of the Big Four’s approach to go elsewhere.
Major promotional and information campaign
On top of their individual communications with their own customers, the Big Four ISPs are jointly funding a £25million public awareness campaign. Parents are a major target group. The aim will be to raise their awareness of the importance of internet safety and encourage them to engage actively with their children’s online lives. The campaign will provide signposts to advice, guidance and best practice. Importantly it will also include information about how filters can help, what they can do and, just as vital, what they can’t.
Every new system has glitches
As with every major roll out there have been a few initial glitches. Some of the filters had incorrectly classified and therefore blocked good sites which children should be able to access. A special working party has been established to ensure such over-blocking is kept to an absolute minimum although it is undeniable there will always be a risk of some.
The ISPs have systems to allow anyone to appeal against a classification decision to get it swiftly remedied and, as already mentioned, the customization facility in any event also allows for individual sites to be added.
Ofcom found parents saying (section 8) the whole business of setting up filters was too daunting. This group in particular will benefit from the new approach.
Worryingly between 1 in 6 and 1 in 7 parents (15%, para 1.12) acknowledged they did nothing to help their children stay safe online.
To be clear about that: doing nothing meant the parents concerned did not talk to their children about online safety, they did not check their browsing history or use safe search tools in the browser, neither did they use filters.
15% is too high a proportion to ignore. Whatever we have been doing up to now has not been working well enough. In that context what the UK’s ISPs are attempting with the new filtering initiative is innovative. We’ll see how the experiment pans out.
Defeating the filters
Can any and all of these measures be defeated by super smart kids who want to find a way around? This is often said but what evidence we have here is not many do. In the Ofcom survey (see para 5.37) only 18% of 12-15 year olds said they knew how to beat filters and just 6% said they actually had done so in the past 12 months.
3 and 4 year olds online
Bear in mind also that on the last reckoning 37% of 3-4 year olds were going online. 28% of children in that age range now have their own tablet (Ofcom survey para 5.5). When dealing with children of that age the idea that media literacy is the only or sole answer rapidly breaks down.
This is also about setting, then reinforcing rules and standards
Parents set rules and standards for their children in all areas of their lives. When it comes to the internet filters are simply a way of helping to reinforce or underpin those rules and standards in an environment where parents cannot always be physically or virtually present. In homes with younger children this may be particularly helpful. As children get older parents have to start loosening the reins as their trust and confidence in their ability to deal with a wide range of things begins to grow.
We are watching with great anticipation the unfolding events taking place in the UK regarding the ever growing challenge of protecting children online led by UK’s Prime Minister David Cameron.
My friend and Internet safety comrade, John Carr is involved in the UK effort and has allowed me to share with you his November 18th blog which gives a terrific summary of the big things happening in the UK.
For the Sake of the Children,
Donna Rice Hughes
by John Carr, Secretary, Children’s Charities’ Coalition on Internet Safety
Here in the UK it has been a busy week and a good week for child safety on the internet. Later today the Prime Minister is holding an industry summit in Downing Street to review progress on the calls he made in his landmark speech on 22nd July, 2013. We have already had a glimpse of what’s in store
On Saturday we saw announcements reconfirming the intention of the UK’s biggest ISPs to require every domestic account holder to decide how or indeed whether they want to use filters to restrict access to online adult content in their home.
The filters will be provided to customers at no extra cost. They will work at the level of the household’s WiFi router or higher up on the network itself. This means every device that connects to the internet through the common access point will be governed by these choices. For families with maybe twenty or more different smartphones, tablets, games consoles, laptops or what have you this is going to simplify things hugely.
For new customers these arrangements will be in place by the end of the year. Existing customers will be put in a similar position by the end of next year. It’s not practical to move everyone over at once.
On by default
During the sign up process if a new customer simply clicks yes, next, yes, next, yes the filters will be turned on by default. They will cover a broad range of categories, not just pornography. In theory the account holder – who will have been verified as being over 18 – will make the decisions about whether or not to use the proffered filters. At the end of the set-up, or following any subsequent changes, an email will be despatched to that person’s given address summarising the choices or alterations that were made. The point to note, though, is once the decision on filters has been taken it will apply in the same way to everyone. 5 year old Jenny gets the same access as 17 year old Johnnie and Granddad.
Major public awareness campaign – reaching the “unlulled”
A £25 million public awareness campaign funded by the ISPs aims to make sure everyone understands what the filters will do as well as what their limitations are.
Nobody wants parents to be lulled into a false sense security about the effectiveness of filtering. However, we have been living with a generation of “unlulled” parents pretty much since the internet began and it hasn’t worked out too well in many families. ISPs are now going to have a go at it the other way around. We call this innovation. It’s one of the things for which the internet is said to be famous.
Historically the choice was presented rather starkly: do you try to reach out to explain how filters can help kids stay safer before or after they have been allowed to venture into cyberspace? In my book they are not alternatives. You do both but absent a positive contra-indication you apply the filters at the kick off. Parents should not have to jump through hoops to make the internet safer for their kids. Any hoop-jumping should go in the opposite direction.
Mobile phones have been doing this since 2005
The mobile phone networks have been doing something similar since 2005. The key difference is that whereas the ISPs’ offering assumes it is the age-verified adult account holder making the decisions about filters in the home the mobile networks require real time proof of age at the exact point where the decision is taken. Until that proof is received the filters are applied to every phone, or rather to every SIM card because it is the phone number that constitutes the account.
Of course a household account used by many is not the same as a mobile phone number used by one person but the parallels are there. In the long run I think all ISPs in the home market will end up closer to the position which currently exists with mobile phones.
At work and at school we are all used to having our own log ins with appropriate access rights linked to our accounts. The proliferation of individually owned portable devices plays into the same space. Eventually I think we will all have unique age-verified log ins that we will carry with us across platforms and devices. Every account will therefore be configured in an age appropriate way according to the needs or interests of each family member.
Having said that there is no question that what the ISPs are proposing to do now is an important step forward. We’ll see how it works out. Maybe we won’t need to go in the direction I am suggesting is inevitable. I’d be delighted to be proved wrong.
Public WiFi providers are joining in
Britain’s largest WiFi providers are also joining in on the drive for a safer and better internet for children. Family Friendly WiFi is coming down the tracks. In many places it is already here.
At the time of writing the detail of the final package on WiFi is not completely tied down so check against delivery with what the Prime Minister actually says on the subject. The overall commitment, however, is now clear and irrevocable.
In public spaces where children and young people are likely to be found on a regular basis urls containing child abuse images (drawn from the IWF list) and legal porn will not be accessible. Other categories of adult content will be blocked by some WiFi providers but it is not clear if all of them will do that. I expect in time a consistent and common standard will emerge although there is no doubt that restricting access to porn is number one on most parents’ list.
A new logo will promote awareness of Family Friendly WiFi facilities in retail outlets, coffee bars, on buses and trains, in parks and so on. I imagine major retail chains, municipalities and other big brands will be quick to ensure they are offering a Family Friendly service. The value of a distinctive logo is that it will encourage smaller enterprises to join in.
A very large experiment
The internet is still relatively new. One way of thinking about the collection of measures outlined above is as one very large experiment. Through it we should all learn a lot, for example about how effective filters are as aids to good parenting in the digital age. The world will be watching. The only alternative model people could point to up to now for anything like this came out of Australia but there the politicians messed it up so comprehensively it should stand as a text book example of how not to do it.
Now the really radical stuff
Some of the most dramatic new steps to make the internet safer and better for children are being taken by Google and Bing.
The core point is Google and Bing are adjusting their search engines to make it harder for paedophiles or individuals looking for child abuse images to do their worst.
Blocking retained and extended
Google and Bing already block access to urls known to contain child abuse images. The urls are drawn from the IWF’s and similar lists. This will continue.
In relation to detecting actual images, as opposed to urls, Microsoft’s image fingerprinting technology, PhotoDNA, has held centre stage for many years. They give it away so really any internet-based business providing free or paid for online storage facilities should deploy it or something similar. Those that don’t are, in effect, saying they don’t care what people do on their systems or put on their machines. They are turning a blind eye.
A video version of PhotoDNA
Google has also announced a new type of fingerprinting technology – essentially a video version of PhotoDNA – so that known child abuse videos can be detected and removed at scale. The new programme is currently being tested on YouTube but will soon be made available to the entire industry. As paedophiles increasingly move from still images to video this is a most welcome development.
Action on Peer2Peer
Progress has also been made around Peer2Peer networks. A pilot project has been announced which will allow for the blocking of torrent urls that initiate sharing illegal child abuse images. Google and Bing will be working a lot more closely with the police, helping to construct new and larger databases of known illegal images, making them easier to detect and remove. Progress in this area is essential as without a doubt it is in the realm of Peer2Peer networks that the largest growth in the distribution of child abuse images has taken place.
Paedophilic searching gets harder
If a person types in a known paedophile term or something that suggests they are looking for child abuse images a clear warning message will now be displayed from Google, Bing and child safety organisations telling the searcher they may be on edge of breaking the law and this could have severe consequences for them. It will also point towards sources of advice and help if they seriously want to break with their criminal and abusive behaviour.
These messages may not deflect determined or already committed child sex offenders but there is little doubt they will cause some to stop and think. If that means fewer children are abused it has to be worth giving it a shot.
Bing and Google will be collaborating with the police and other agencies to ensure they stay as up to date as possible in relation to how the paedophile community and image collectors are trying to use the internet for their evil ends to make sure they can’t.
While it is obvious why one might want to block access to known illegal content or sources known to supply illegal images, when it comes to words describing illegal or unsavoury acts it is a different matter. Very few countries have laws which make words illegal, however revoltingly they are used.
However, the search engines are now relegating the possibly legal but unsavoury content, that was previously being returned on some child abuse related queries, to the cyber equivalent of Siberia and replacing it with positive content.
To give a hypothetical example if someone was looking for information about child rape they will be helped to find articles in the academic press or to locate sources of help for victims. The stuff paedophiles have been publishing will be on the outer edges offindability. In this way neither search engine can be accused of censoring the internet or of refusing to provide access to otherwise legal if distasteful material but they have gone a long way in that direction. Again we will see how this is going to work out in practice.
Pulling out the stops
Google and Microsoft have really pulled out the stops. This is a very impressive initiative. It is narrowing the spaces in which paedophiles and collectors of child abuse images can operate. The challenge now is to work out how to gauge the effectiveness of and learn from the various measures that are being put in place but I am sure there is a will so we can find a way.
The beginning of a new phase
This is unlikely to be the end of the story but there is no question we have reached an important milestone. There are still anxieties about the Darknet and the true extent to which it and the use of encryption may continue to frustrate law enforcement’s and everybody’s efforts. But we don’t always have to do the really hard stuff first. Dealing with the more open parts of the internet has to be a key priority precisely because it is so accessible and therefore has the greater potential to draw in new offenders.
All the companies involved deserve a great deal of credit for their willingness to sail into these uncharted waters and so does Claire Perry MP and the Government as a whole for sticking with the issue in the way that they have. I await with interest to see how what is happening in the UK starts to roll out or impact other jurisdictions.
Friend and former staffer with Enough Is Enough, Cris Clapp Logan, had a thought-provoking blog about learning when to trust your kids.
Far too often, the parents that I talk with are worried about upsetting their kids and invading their privacy, but it’s up to you as their parents to do everything in your power to protect them-from dangers inside the home, outside the home and those they can access in the palm of their hand. This doesn’t mean you should always suspect the worst or act like the secret police around your children, but it does mean watching out for warning signs, teachable moments, using parental controls and digging a little deeper in conversation when appropriate.
To continue reading Cris’ full article on how to build a more trustworthy relationship with your kids please click here.
In my last article we discussed all the ways that our kids have segmented themselves from the family and yes, even their friends. Texting and “group texting” – where kids get on their phones and talk in a huge text-efficient conference room – are great ways to not only say and offer up one line responses to things they’d never ever say in person, but ruin their reputation in the process. There’s nothing worse than leaving a line of text out there you can’t get back.
To better arm parents with some ways to get control once again in the household, I’m offering the following tips. Of course every child is different and I’m not recommending you use all of these, but I’m sure you’ll find something here you can apply.
1) Charging Stations
Whether it be a tablet or phone, make sure your child doesn’t assume that charging the device is better done in their room at night when they go to bed. If you want to see bleary eyed kids come downstairs for breakfast in the morning, let them take their communications to the bedroom. There are two obvious reasons not to allow this. The first, is just the practical side that if you’re viewing the internet and chatting with your friends at all hours of the night (and they will, if they take it to bed), they will suffer in school. The second is that late at night, people (adults too) with their defenses down, tend to do some irreperable harm when talking while tired. Simple solution – make them charge it in the kitchen or living room.
2) Check their Apps
Once thing the various app stores don’t really monitor is age appropriate and negative consequence tools that can be downloaded on your phone or tablet. There are plenty of apps that are inappropriate for your child. One to particularly look for is SnapChat. It’s one of those apps that looks harmless from the outside, but when you realize that it’s wholly designed to share photos and immediately erase them from view – you have to ask the question – “what’s the purpose of this?” The answer? Nothing good. I told my son it’s like MTV. If I ask you what you’re watching and you say “some show on MTV” I’m going to tell you to change the channel. It doesn’t matter what show. Why? Because I know that nothing socially redeeming has EVER been produced by MTV. That’s not their purpose. Neither is that the purpose of SnapChat. If you find it on your son’s or daughter’s phone, delete it or like me, tell them if you see it appear again they’ll lose their phone.
One solution that will take the day to day burden off of parents is to use Norton’s great new line of mobile family safety filters and tools which you can find here.
While this column mainly skirts the issues of safety and oversight for parents – the Enough is Enough Internet Safety 101 site has a great full-bodied checklist of many of the tools and procedures you can use as a parent. You can find that list here.
3) Set an Example
When we’re sitting in the living room at night as a family, I can’t possibly tell my child to stop ignoring the family by texting all night, if we’re doing the same thing. I look around the room some evenings and it’s amazing how we can all be in the same room but virtually somewhere else. I found that I was just as bad as my kids. When I took my phone and/or tablet to the other room and left it there – that gave me license to tell my kids to do the same. By the way, the same goes for texting and driving and that’s another topic for another day.
One of the best way to set an example for the whole family is to employ an open dialogue of your expectations. You certainly can’t get your family to abide by rules that are “assumed” but not stated. We parents are very good at expecting our children to abide by standards we rarely exhibit or express ourselves.
4) Get their Passwords
If I’m paying for the phone and/or the phone service (don’t let them get away with saying it’s their phone because they bought the device but don’t pay the monthly bill) then it’s my right to occasionally check out what’s going on with the phone. To do this I need their password and my kids know that they have to give it to me to use one. It’s amazing what you can learn about your kids and more importantly their friends, when you check out the texting history. I’m not saying you do it every night, but do it every once in a while and find a way to talk to them about their behavior (or their friend’s) without specifically going line by line through the phone. If anything, it’s a good way to determine how deep they are into bad conversations and whether they are leading or being led by a stream of inappropriate talk. If, by the way, your child is not involved in anything untoward, it will also help you sleep better.
Mark Gilman is a married father of five, from 29-12 and a member of the Enough Is Enough Advisory Council. He also owns a marketing and communications company based in the Detroit area (www.decusstrategy.com). He can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org.
It is my pleasure to welcome Frederick Lane to the EIE Blog. Fred is an author, attorney educational consultant, expert witness, and lecturer who has appeared on “The Daily Show with Jon Stewart,” CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS, the BBC, and MSNBC. He has written seven books, including most recently “Cybertraps for the Young” (NTI Uppstream, 2011). All of his books are available on amazon.com or through his website. Fred has been our guest blogger on the EIE blog sharing excerpts from his book “Cybertraps for the Young.”
A decade into the 21st century, it’s impossible to overestimate just how important computer
skills will be to our children and grandchildren throughout their lifetimes. Consider the fact
that people born when the first personal computer was released in 1978 are already in their
early 30s, many with children of their own. Computers are an integral part of our education,
our work, and our leisure, so much so that the research firm NPD Group estimates that 97
percent of American households own a computer—a level of ownership that rivals
televisions and stereos.
The importance of personal computers was underscored for me when, while writing this
book, I spent a day in the reading room of the Widener Library at Harvard University. The
long wooden tables were filled with undergraduates, graduate students, and researchers, and
nearly all of them had laptop computers open on the table in front of them. Assuming an
average value of $1,000 per computer (the numerous Macs in the room bumped up the
average a bit), those library tables were covered with at least $100,000 in portable computing
equipment. As a society, we’ve invested a staggering amount of money in hardware and
software, and it would be unrealistic to think that kids can succeed in school and in the
workplace without at least some familiarity with and exposure to this technology.
For parents, however, there’s a tension between the obvious benefits of computer
ownership—homework, research, entertainment, socialization—and the distractions and
dangers that come with it. Thanks to the development of the World Wide Web in the mid-
1990s, every computer is now a portal to an infinite array of information, entertainment, and
enticements, not all of which are salutary.
As we’ll see throughout this book, many kids need nothing more than a keyboard and an
Internet connection to get themselves into a world of electronic trouble. Computer hacking,
for instance, has a long, albeit disreputable history, and enterprising teens have often been at
the forefront of the mischief. But even less computer-savvy teens now have at their
fingertips all the tools they need to violate a host of laws. With any type of Internetconnected
device—laptop, mobile phone, gaming console—children can harass or bully
other children, libel their teachers, commit fraud on eBay, violate U.S. copyright laws, or
commit a felony by downloading or distributing obscene materials. Given the prevalence of
computer web cams—either clip-ons for desktops or pre-installed in laptops—kids have the
ability to broadcast themselves and others from the privacy of their bedrooms to a global
audience, and that behavior has the potential to violate any number of federal and state laws.
We don’t normally think of desktop or laptop computers as phones, but thanks to web cams
and online conferencing software like Skype, they certainly can be used that way. Actually,
the line between computers and handheld devices is blurring in both directions. Kids can use
computers like phones (albeit bulky ones) through the use of software like Skype and
Google Talk, while mobile smartphones allow them to perform a number of computing
functions—e-mail, Web browsing, photo sharing—on the go.
In fact, it is only a matter of time before such handheld devices match traditional computers
in both power and convenience. A vision of that future could be seen in April 2010, when
Apple announced the release of its tablet computer, the iPad. There have been numerous
previous attempts at creating and marketing a tablet computer, but with its inimitable
attention to detail, design aesthetic, and sheer coolness, Apple succeeded where so many
others have failed. During the 2010 holiday season, online retailers and tech journalists
reported that the iPad was squarely at the top of the teen wish list, despite its impressive
Right now, the iPad is an imperfect bridge between laptops and the iPhone. Out of the box,
it lacks a physical keyboard, has no camera, and has relatively limited onboard storage. Both
Apple and various third-party vendors, however, sell keyboards that dock onto the iPad;
future versions of the iPad are likely to include both a rear- and front-facing camera (for
“Face Time” chat, among other uses), along with more memory and faster processors.
The iPad’s enormous success—more than 25 million sold in fiscal year 2010, with another
32 million projected for FY 2011—has attracted numerous competitors, including the
Samsung Galaxy Tab, the HP Slate 500, the Dell Streak, and the Motorola Xoom. How
those tablets will fare in the marketplace remains to be seen, particularly with Apple’s iPad 2
waiting in the wings, but one thing is clear: computing’s own Olympic motto—smaller,
faster, cheaper—will continue to drive developments in the tech world.
With relatively few exceptions, these new electronic devices and the ones that inevitably
follow will offer more options, more capabilities, and more ways for kids to get into trouble.
And kids will continue to love them. This book aims to level the playing field a bit, to give
parents and teachers a solid introduction to the ways in which kids can accidentally or
intentionally misuse electronic gadgets. I’ll begin with a general overview of the
communication revolution, describe the potentially life-altering cybertraps that can snare
kids, and then offer some suggestions on how to protect your child.
It is my pleasure to welcome Frederick Lane to the EIE Blog. Fred is an author, attorney educational consultant, expert witness, and lecturer who has appeared on “The Daily Show with Jon Stewart,” CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS, the BBC, and MSNBC. He has written seven books, including most recently “Cybertraps for the Young” (NTI Uppstream, 2011). All of his books are available on amazon.com or through his website. Fred will be joining us for the next 2 weeks as a guest blogger on the EIE blog sharing excerpts from his book “Cybertraps for the Young.”
Many industries have legitimate reasons to bemoan the rise of digital technology, and photo
processors are near the front of that line. Not so long ago, it seemed as if every shopping
mall was equipped with a drive-up Fotomat kiosk offering one-day film processing. But
Fotomat didn’t survive the rise of one-hour developers in malls and box stores; in turn,
those one-hour shops have largely been replaced by drug-store kiosks—or even inexpensive
home printers—that can produce prints directly from CDs, USB sticks, or memory chips.
The culprit for all this retail change is the digital camera, a device that first became
commercially available only about twenty years ago. As prices have steadily fallen into the
low double digits, digital cameras have become ubiquitous—106 million were shipped in
2009 alone, and that figure was actually down about 12 percent from the 119 million units
sold the previous year (a drop attributed in large part to the growing popularity of mobile
phones equipped with cameras). The attractions of digital cameras are obvious: the ability to
see photos as soon as they’re taken, limited costs for film development, and software that
makes it easy to save images to a computer, digitally manipulate them, and instantly
distribute them via e-mail, a blog, a website, or a social network.
As the Amazon.com catalog illustrates, digital cameras are often the first electronic devices
to be put into small hands. There are a number of benefits to doing so: photography can be
a terrifically rewarding hobby, and, by eliminating the costs of film and film processing,
digital cameras have helped thousands of children discover a new artistic medium, a new way
of looking at the world around them. It’s the very simplicity and ease of digital cameras,
however, that have turned them into increasingly insidious cybertraps. To paraphrase the old
saying: just because a photograph can be taken doesn’t mean it should be taken.
As kids get older and start exploring their sexuality, they all too often employ digital cameras
or mobile-phone cameras as part of that exploration. Few fully understand, however, that
taking nude or semi-nude photographs or video of someone under the age of eighteen (even
a self-portrait) can have serious, even life-altering, consequences. As I’ll discuss in more
detail in Chapter 11, children who have circulated these types of photographs have been
subjected to cyberharassment and cyberbullying laws, have been suspended and/or expelled
from school, have been prosecuted under state and federal law for producing and
distributing child pornography, and, in a few extreme cases, have committed suicide.
To make matters worse, digital cameras are steadily shrinking in size, making it dangerously
easy to take photos or video of someone without their knowledge or consent. In fact, there
are entire websites devoted to illicit candids conspicuously labeled as “upskirt” or
Even if the subject of a photo is aware he or she is being photographed, the speed and
simplicity of digital technology reduces inhibitions and makes it less likely that either the
photographer or the subject will consider issues like privacy or propriety. And the younger
the kids on either side of the camera, the less likely it is they’ll think about the long-term
consequences of what they’re doing. After all, there’s no longer any risk for your child that
he or she will feel embarrassed when you pick up that packet of racy photos at the
developer; there’s the illusion that what’s taken with the camera will stay in the camera.
But that sense of privacy truly is an illusion. The whole point of a digital camera, after all, is
that the images can easily be transferred to a computer, thus freeing them for distribution to
the rest of the world. More recent digital cameras skip the transfer process altogether—
they’re equipped with wireless transmitters that allow photographs to be sent directly to email
or social networking sites. In fact, there’s even a memory card, the Eye-Fi, that will
enable older digital cameras to transmit photos wirelessly. Not to mention that any
smartphone equipped with a camera (and most are) is specifically designed to transmit
photos in a variety of ways—as e-mail attachments, as MMS messages, or as direct uploads
to any of hundreds of websites and social networking services.