Net threat to minors less than feared
WASHINGTON -- A long awaited report from the Internet Safety Technical Task Force concludes that children and teens are less vulnerable to sexual predation than many have feared. The report also questions the efficacy and necessity of some commonly prescribed remedies designed to protect young people.
The task force was formed as a result of a joint agreement between MySpace and 49 state attorneys general.
Over the past couple of years, several state AGs have been looking into potential dangers to youth, and some have called for social-network sites to use age verification technology to confirm the ages of users in an attempt to prevent adults from or interacting online with minors. The task force includes representatives of Internet and social-networking companies, security and identity authentication vendors, and nonprofit advocacy organizations. It's chaired by John Palfrey of Harvard Law School's Berkman Center for Internet and Society.
Disclosure: I served as a member of the task force, representing ConnectSafely.org, a nonprofit internet safety organization I co-founded along with Anne Collier. ConnectSafely receives financial support from MySpace, Facebook, Google, Yahoo, and other Internet and social-networking companies. I am also founder of SafeKids.com and am on the board of directors of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, which is represented on the task force.
Based on data analyzed by its Research Advisory Board, the task force concluded that "actual threats that youth may face appear to be different than the threats most people imagine" and that "the image presented by the media of an older male deceiving and preying on a young child does not paint an accurate picture of the nature of the majority of sexual solicitations and Internet-initiated offline encounters."
While the task force found that youth risk from predators is a concern, the overwhelming majority of youth are not in danger of being harmed by an adult predator they meet online. To the extent that young people have received an unwanted online sexual solicitation, data from a 2000 study and a 2006 follow-up from the Crimes Against Children Research Center concludes that "youth identify most sexual solicitors as being other adolescents (48 percent in 2000; 43 percent in 2006) or young adults between the ages of 18 and 21 (20 percent; 30 percent), with few (4 percent; 9 percent) coming from older adults, and the remaining being of unknown age."
What the task force did find is that "bullying and harassment, most often by peers, are the most salient threats that minors face, both online and offline." Partially because researchers can't agree on a definition of bullying and harassment, the actual risk is hard to quantify, but it is clearly much higher than the risk of being harmed by a predator. Some studies suggest that as many as 49 percent of youth have experienced some type of bullying or harassment. In many cases no serious emotional or physical harm occurred. However, a study by Michelle Ybarra and Janice Wolak found that "39 percent of victims reported emotional distress over being harassed online."
There is also a widespread belief that deception is often involved where adults pose as teens to engage with young people, but research shows that that's rarely the case. The report found that "although identity deception may occur online, it does not appear to play a large role in criminal cases in which adult sex offenders have been arrested for sex crimes in which they met victims online." Interviews with police show that "most victims are underage adolescents who know they are going to meet adults for sexual encounters." This does not imply that such relationships are healthy or safe, nor that we should blame the victims or tolerate the actions of adults who engage in sex with minors. But it does suggest that child safety advocates need to take a more proactive role in helping teens understand the risk of engaging in relationships with adults.
Importantly, the task force found that online risks "are not radically different in nature or scope than the risks minors have long faced offline, and minors who are most at risk in the offline world continue to be most at risk online." For example, "a poor home environment full of conflict and poor parent-child relationships is correlated with a host of online risks."
The attorneys general who called for the task force were anxious for us to study the efficacy of using age verification to help limit inappropriate contact between adults and children online. To help in that job, the task force formed a technical advisory board (TAB) composed of technology experts from Harvard, MIT, Dartmouth, University of Massachusetts, University of Utah, Rochester Institute of Technology, and Bank of America. This board looked at a wide range of technologies including age verification and identity authentication, filtering and auditing, text analysis, and biometrics.
What the TAB found was that age verification technology can be used to identify adults and therefore help prevent minors from engaging in adult-only activities such as accessing adult content or purchasing alcohol or tobacco. There were several technologies submitted by companies that could identify adults based on accessible records such as credit reports, criminal history, and real estate transactions, but these relatively automated systems cannot reliably identify or verify the age of minors because, as the TAB concluded, "public records of minors range from quite limited to nonexistent." Documentation about young people such as birth certificates, passports, and school records are restricted by federal law for some very good privacy and security reasons.
Age verification options presented by some companies would allow parents to request that their child's school verify his or her identity and age, but these proposals have their own critics including those who worry about the cost, the possibility of privacy or security leaks, and the financial model presented in some cases that includes providing marketers with information about kids.
The TAB also looked at "peer-based" verification schemes that "allow peers in a community to vote, recommend, or rate whether a person is in an appropriate age group based on relationships and personal knowledge established offline" but worried that with these methods "users can vote as many times as they wish to artificially raise or lower a peer rating." There were concerns that "minors might organize against another minor in their ratings or recommendations in an online form of bullying."
At one task force meeting, a company presented technology that tries to distinguish between an adult and a child by analyzing the bone density of the person's hand. Another tool attempts to identify an individual through facial recognition to match that person against a database of registered sex offenders.
Although the TAB expressed "cautious optimism" about the possibility of using technology to protect kids, it concluded that "every technology has its problems" and that "no single technology reviewed could solve every aspect of online safety for minors, or even one aspect of it one hundred percent of the time." The bottom line was that "technology can play a role but cannot be the sole input to improved safety for minors online" and that "the most effective technology solution is likely to be a combination of technologies."
But even if these technologies can be employed effectively, there remains the question of whether they are necessary or helpful. Using technology to separate kids from grown-ups doesn't address the fact that kids are far more at risk from other kids than from adult predators.
Another danger is that age verification or new rules could be used to keep kids off of social networks or require parental consent. But before issuing rules about this, authorities should explore possible unintended consequences such as isolating kids, causing them to go underground, failing to serve kids from dysfunctional families, and preventing kids from accessing vital services such as the Suicide Prevention Hotline or one of the many online self-help groups.
The task force report will have its critics, including possibly some attorneys general and others who feel that it underestimates the risk of online predators. Indeed, sting operations from law enforcement (as well as the TV show To Catch a Predator) demonstrate that there are plenty of adults who, if given the chance, would engage in sex with youth they meet online. But, based on the research presented to the task force, it appears that the vast majority of young people are savvy enough to avoid such encounters.
Still, there remains a minority of youth who--for a variety of psychological and social reasons--are vulnerable both online and offline. More research needs to be done to identify these young people and provide them with resources and protective services. The fact that most kids are safe is reassuring but it's not sufficient. If even one child is in danger, then there is work to be done, and that is one thing everyone who cares about this issue can agree on.
Larry Magid is a technology journalist and an Internet safety advocate. He's been writing and speaking about Internet safety since he wrote Internet safety guide "Child Safety on the Information Highway" in 1994. He is co-director of ConnectSafely.org, founder of SafeKids.com and SafeTeens.com, and a board member of the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children. Larry's technology analysis and commentary can be heard on CBS News and CBS affiliates, and read on CBSNews.com. He also writes a personal-tech column for the San Jose Mercury News. You can e-mail Larry or follow him on Twitter @larrymagid. 
Lay off the age discrimination, pal. Whether or not a relationship is healthy or not depends on the INDIVIDUAL RELATIONSHIP. You cannot judge a relationship solely on the basis of age. There are plenty of 15 yr olds who are mature enough to enter into relationship and plenty of 25 yr olds who are not mature enough to enter a relationship. I recommend you take MLK's advise and judge people on the content of their character, and not by some arbitrary characteristic (like chronological age).
http://sexoffenderstudies.blogspot.com/
It's about time a reputable source came out with this. I've had many other studies on my blog, which stated the same exact thing. It's all fear-mongering by the media and politicians.
Not to discredit the efforts of the task force, but the way this information is being gathered leaves a lot to be desired. Frankly I'm not sure there is any good (accurate) way to get the information.
Then, once pedosexuality is brought out into the open and normalized, like homosexuality and heterosexuality, it will naturally become less dangerous for BOTH parties involved.
It's about time to realize that this whole thing about 'maturity' is a ******** argument. Period, done with, over: it's BS. The fact is that many of these adults who are saying "Children aren't self-powerful enough to make their own choices about sexual relationships!" are living in a dream world, where adults have this 'magical power' to get children to do anything they want them to do..... that's a load of crap, coming from someone who babysits children and KNOWS DIFFERENT. Hell, I know different from when I was a child: if I didn't want to do something, sexual or not.... NO ONE could get me to do it. And yes, I was having sexual relationships with adults and other children, both older and younger, and if I had it do over again.... I will still live my life the exact same way.
We need to stop allowing this persecuting of pedosexuals because they 'harm' children by having sex with them. No, the harm comes from the adults who brainwash the children into thinking that they were taken advantage of by the adults in question. Excuse me, but children have been taught for OVER 50 years now, that if someone touches them in ANY fashion without their permission.... they are supposed to yell, scream, rant and rave, and tell that person to stop or they are going to get them in trouble by telling their parents.
I blame the children in question when they do not do that, and whine later about being 'forced' into a sexual relationship.... 'scuse me, but I know what REAL force is... and I reported the persons who did that to me when I was 12. Of course, the truth is.... those people were the same age and YOUNGER than me.
To be truthful..... I cannot seriously say that I am absolutely sure that ANY adult forced me into sex. I suspect that I was drugged two times by an adult (who is sitting in jail for drugging another child).... but I cannot be sure in the slightest that he did that, because I just woke up with a sore butt and I'd had that happen before when I was at home, alone.... not even my parents there.
If people TRULY want to protect children (and the usual reason is NOT because of the sexual relationships themselves, but because of STD's).... start yelling at the government to give birth control to all girls over the age of 7 or whenever they get their first period, realize that STD's are NOT very common in pedosexuals outside of the children's famlies at all (I have YET to see one instance where a non-family member gave a child an STD, even AIDS, save when the girl/boy was snatched off the street and forcibly raped, which even I say is wrong), and start yelling at government to find cures for these STD's. There are less strains of chlamydia than polio! We should have had a cure for most STD's by now... but the religious folks use it to terrify people into not having sex outside of marriage, the ONLY reason we don't have cures and vaccines.
Try to answer this question, for once, without making a big "whoopdeedoo" about your pedosexualty. Because I have a hard time believing you feel anything for someone who had something forced on them they didn't want. You're too wrapped up in your own sexuality to give a straight answer. All your statements about sex are just plain SELFISH. You sugguest having sex with newborns is ok because they are born with genitalia, a time when they can't even talk or tell people what they want.
to Mister-Bigmouth; you make a valid point. Rape will always be a part of this world but it is a crime that crosses all lines. A rapist can be straight, gay, or pedo but just as not all hetros or homos are reapists the same is true for us. The idea that child rape will decline if our lifestyle is legalised is based upon the idea that some of us are pushed to such acts out of despiration becuase there is no legal way for us to express our love. If we are legalized such acts of desperation will vanish and child rape will see a small decline.
In your second post you mention children who are abused. To all abuse children (and adults who were abused as children) please accept my sincear apologies on behave of the pedosexual community. Those who hurt children sicken us. The very notion of hurting or raping a child goes against our very credo, but please understand, we do NOT condone their actions. We respect that a child will always have the right to say no, and those who touch the child (where the child said not to) are not welcome among us. We who love children will always wait untill the child says yes, and will do NOTHING that is against the child's will.
Later in you post you talk of brainwashing, funny that you should mention that. You see, a pedosexual that accepts him/her self is alrady free from societies guilt dumping agenda. The once who trully need protection from brainwashing are the children themselvs. All of their lives children are told that sex is "dirty" and "wrong" and we (the pedo) simply don't feel this way. We want evrey child to know about sex and that they (and they alone) may choose not only wither they have sex at all, but also with whom they have it with. Society tells children evreyday to say no to the "inapropiate" attentions of the pedo, and while we agree that a child should always voice his/her discomfort (and say no to the advance) we want the world to know that when you give somone the right to say no, you also give them the right to choose to say yes. we have no intrest in an unwilling child, we wish to be in consensual relashionships with children or not at all.
Finally, you said to Lerianis "go get help";
well you should know that he/she has help: Me! and others like me (Such as GVGL)
The message I want you (and the whole world as well) to hear right now is: No matter how much you hate us, no matter how hard you try to desroy us, no matter how long you close your eyes and pretend we don't exist; We are here and we are NEVER going away! Someday we will be free to live our lives, and when that day comes we will shout from all the rooftops:
"I am a pedosexual and I am proud!"
and then we will join hands with our supporters and the children whom we love and who love us back, and we will sing aloud:
"Free at last, free at last! Thank God almighty, we are free at last!"
- by caesarsf January 14, 2009 4:10 PM PST
- Are you really serious? If this issue was not brought up there would still be 50,000 sexual predators on Myspace, and there are probably still more on Myspace and other sites. Did myspace contact the parents of the children that were contacted? Did they share the messages and correspondence? If technology does not work then why is myspace and supposedly facebook using technology to find sexual predators?
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(12 Comments)These are real unanswered questions that you did not even address.
Did sexual interactions happen between minors and adults before the internet? Certainly. Has it increased significantly since then, I would have to say that it has. Now is this a positive thing that 24 year olds interact sexually in the internet with 17 year olds. I would say no but the panel seems to think that that is okay. Not for me. Can we do something, although not perfect to segment the two groups?
Yes, adults can be verified. Minors cannot. Is it perfect? No. But is something that is mostly effective better than nothing. I believe that it is. Do we place age restrictions on some items? Yes. Is it perfect? No. But is it better than no restrictions for age? I say no. What specific technology was reviewed by name, and what was the flaws and benefits? What is the cost that must be born by providers? How much? And what is 50,000 sex offenders on myspace worth?