An Internet safety study (PDF) just released by Cox Communications shows that teens may be a bit more safety conscious than previously thought.
The survey, which was done by Harris Interactive, asked 655 13- to 18-year-olds about their online and cell phone behavior, specifically addressing issues of cyberbullying and sexting. The study was in partnership with the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children and "America's Most Wanted Host" John Walsh.
For the purposes of the study, cyberbullying was defined as "harassment, embarrassment, or threats online or by text message," while sexting referred to "sending sexually suggestive text or e-mails with nude or nearly-nude photos."
(Credit: Cox Communications Teen Online & Wireless Survey)Not surprisingly, the vast majority of teens (72 percent) have a social-networking profile, while 73 percent use cell phones and 91 percent have an e-mail address.
What they know vs. what they do
The study raises an interesting contradiction. 59 percent of the teens say that posting personal information or photos on public blogs or social-networking sites is either "somewhat unsafe" or "very unsafe." Only 7 percent say it's "very safe," while 34 percent say it's "somewhat safe." Yet, when asked about their own behavior, 62 percent of the kids post photos of themselves, 50 percent share their real age, 45 percent the name of their school, and 41 percent the city where they live. When it comes to more private information, only 4 percent post their address, 9 percent "places where you typically go," and 14 percent post their cell phone number.
The study's executive summary explains, "Though they are aware of the risks, many teens expose personal information about themselves online anyway."
That revelation appears alarming but after looking at other research about teen online risk, I actually find it reassuring.
What kids say they know about online risks appears to be what adults have been telling them for years. But when you look at the real risk factors, their behavior isn't nearly as dangerous as even teens say they think it is.
An in-depth and academically rigorous 2005 study from the University of New Hampshire's Crimes Against Children Research Center found that posting personal information online does not, by itself, correlate with risk. As all of the studies show, millions of kids engage in this practice and very few encounter any serious problem as a result. Let's face it, the whole premise behind sites like Facebook and MySpace is to share that type of information and despite some of the hysteria, there have been very few reported problems of young people being victimized as a result of them putting this type of information online.
Of course, nothing--including attending school--is 100 percent safe, but the 34 percent who said that posting personal information online is "somewhat safe" are getting it right.
Cyberbullying and sexting numbers not as bad as thought
The cyberbullying numbers are also quite reassuring, especially when you compare them to some earlier studies.
The summary points out that "Cyberbullying is widespread among today's teens, with over one-third having experienced it, engaged in it, or known of friends who have who have done either." But that one-third is cumulative of bullies, people who have been bullied and even people who know someone who's been bullied.
The survey found that approximately 19 percent of teens say they've been cyberbullied online or via text message and that 10 percent say they've cyberbullied someone else. The largest group, 27 percent, say they have "seen or heard of a friend who was bullied" online, with 16 percent saying they've "seen or heard of a friend who's bullied others online or by cell phone.
Of course any amount of bullying is unacceptable but the numbers from this survey are lower than several previous studies.
There is also good news about sexting. The most widely quoted study on sexting from the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy reported (PDF) that 20 percent of teens "say they have sent/posted nude or semi-nude pictures or video of themselves." But the data from the Cox survey showed that while 20 percent of teens "have engaged in sexting," that number, too, is cumulative. Only 9 percent "sent a sext," while 17 percent received one, and 3 percent forwarded a "sext." Again, that 9 percent number is too high but it's less than half the 20 percent figure commonly used. And 90 percent of the kids who sent sexts said that nothing bad happened, even though 74 percent of the kids agreed that sexting is "wrong." Twenty-three percent felt that it's OK if both parties are OK with it and only 3 percent said "there is nothing wrong with it."
This survey, said Center for Safe and Responsible Internet Use Executive Director Nancy Willard, "clearly demonstrates that the overwhelming majority of young people have not engaged in risk-taking online behavior or been harmed online. Also, it appears that teens are sensitive to the potentially damaging implications of the material they post online."
While the news from this survey is mostly good, there is still a significant minority of teens who are harming others, being victimized by other teens, or putting themselves at risk. That's why it's important for parents to talk with their teens about appropriate use of the Internet. Don't scare them or shut down their use, but do remind them to mind their manners, think before they post, and seek help if someone is bullying or harassing them.
Cheating is cheating regardless of whether you use technology or old-fashioned paper notes. I'm appalled that kids may be using technology to cheat in school, but I'm just as appalled at how schools are cheating kids when it comes to technology.
But in addition to admonishing kids about why it's wrong to cheat, perhaps it's also time to rethink what it means to evaluate students in the age of the Internet and omnipresent mobile devices.
(Credit: Common Sense Media)The survey, which was conducted by Benenson Strategy Group for Common Sense Media, found that "41 percent (of seventh- to 12th-graders) say that storing notes on a cell phone to access during tests is cheating and a serious offense, while 23 percent don't think it's cheating at all." Similarly, 45 percent say "texting friends about answers during a test" is cheating, while 20 percent do not consider it cheating. More than a third (36 percent) said that downloading a paper from the Internet to turn in was not a serious cheating offense and nearly one-fifth didn't consider it to be cheating at all. Just more than half the kids admitted to using the Internet for some form of cheating,
As a parent and former educator, I am strongly opposed to any type of cheating. And there is no way that anyone--not just students--should get away with claiming authorship on a paper they didn't write. But this survey might also present an opportunity for educators to re-evaluate the type of tests they're giving. I think there is a role for tests that measure a student's ability to quickly acquire and interpret information through mobile devices, even if they know nothing about the subject prior to sitting down for the test.
I'm not making a universal declaration that every kid should be issued a smart phone or iPod Touch to help them with every test they take. But I do think that the emergence of cheap mobile technology and--eventually--omnipresent connectivity offer educators an opportunity to incorporate the technology into their classrooms and even testing.
As Peggy Sheehy, a library media specialist from Suffern, N.Y., put it: "We can't teach 21st century literacy and assess with 19th century methodology. We have to look at what we really need students to be able to do when they leave us" and we must ask, "what is my student learning outside of school and how can I get them just as engaged?"
Right now, it's a valid point to say that letting kids access mobile devices may discriminate against those who can't afford the phones or the service. Yet that will change, just as it did with electronic calculators, as these devices become even more affordable, especially if students can access free wireless networks at school.
In the work force, what's important in most situations is not so much the facts you can pull out of your head but your ability to acquire information when you need it and--most importantly--your ability to make sense of it.
I'm not saying being able to recall facts from memory is never important. I have to do that nearly every day when I go on live radio. And I often use the Internet to acquire facts only moments before the broadcast and have occasionally had to look up a fact while taking on live radio. What's most important is not my regurgitation of the facts but my interpretation. The ability to put things into context is hard to measure with the types of multiple choice tests that are commonly used in schools.
Of course, the ability to use a search engine is no substitute for kids learning how to critically evaluate the information they do acquire. Knowing how to judge the authority of a source and being able to interpret the meaning of information--in the long run--is more important than the ability to remember it.
A few years ago I participated in a conference with educators from the U.S. and Japan. Both groups had their gripes about their country's educational system, but what I heard from several of my Japanese colleagues was the concern that their system concentrated too much on rote memory and not enough on creativity and critical thinking.
David Ricky Matsumoto, author of "The New Japan," said the same thing those educators told me: "In my experience," he wrote in the book, "the typical Japanese student excels at learning facts and figures. "...what many Japanese students lack is the ability to think about problems creatively, critically, and autonomously."
So, while we should continue to discourage cheating of any kind, we should also encourage schools to find creative ways to use technology, including cell phones, in the learning process and in the testing process. It's called adaptation. And besides, progress should always be a part of a progressive educational system.
This post is adapted from a column that appeared in the San Jose Mercury News.
One problem with most of today's Internet safety messaging campaigns is that there is only one set of messages for the entire population of youth and parents. But, an extensive literature review conducted by the Internet Safety Technical Task Force Research Advisory Board found that "not all youth are equally at risk" and that "those experiencing difficulties offline, such as physical and sexual abuse, and those with other psychosocial problems are most at risk online."
To be effective, the Internet safety community has to find ways tailor its messages based on particular risk factors. Not to do so would be like inoculating an entire population for a disease that affects only a small number of people while not inoculating the very people of are most at risk. I've often worried that most of the teens and parents who are consumers of safety messages are the very people who least need to hear them.
Broader expertise needed
In addition to redefining online safety, we also need to expand the discussion. When online safety advocates gather at conferences, the room is typically filled with public policy professionals, technology experts, lawyers and sometimes representative of law enforcement.
But the cadre of professionals needs to also include psychologists, physicians, counselors, social workers, youth workers, clergy, tech educators and others involved in the lives of young people. And young people themselves need to be part of the discussion, not just to listen and parrot what adults tell them to say, but to help think through the issues, help adults understand the difference between real and imagined dangers and come up with messages that will resonate with other youth.
Internet safety and the "sexually toxic culture"
We must also look at behavior in light of the culture in which youth are being raised. I would never suggest that society should be prudish or suppress sexuality, but I am concerned by the extent to which overt sexuality--starting at a very young age--is being promoted by the media, fashion industry, music, TV, movies, everywhere. Young people are growing up in what sexual abuse prevention specialist Cordelia Anderson has referred to as a "sexually toxic culture."
Anderson chairs the National Coalition to Prevent Child Sexual Exploitation that has drawn a connection between commercial and individual sexual exploitation with youth risk and even child sexual abuse. Kids posting or sending sexually provocative photos (sexting) according to Anderson, "is behaviorally consistent with what kids see all around them."
Overcoming this larger cultural issue is not going to happen overnight nor will all stakeholders agree with Anderson and other members of the Coalition that it's a contributing factor to teen risk. But there are plenty of studies to show that risky teen behavior is influenced by the media, social, and cultural environment around them.
The one thing I am sure about is that kids' use of the Internet doesn't take place in a vacuum. Technology doesn't put kids in danger nor will it prevent them from danger.
Disclosure: I serve on the National Coalition to Prevent Child Exploitation representing the non-profit group, ConnectSafely.org.
Joswiak talked about the new features of the phone, the new parental controls (Joswiak said they do not allow parents to block specific websites) and why Apple thinks that a lot of existing iPhone users will want to upgrade.
The interview runs 8 minutes, 11 seconds
Listen now: Download today's podcast
In 1994, when I wrote Child Safety on the Information Highway, the first widely disseminated Internet safety publication, I advised parents not to let kids put personal information or photos online and--because of what turned out to be an exaggerated fear of predators--I urged them to avoid online conversations with strangers. Back then, along with trying to keep kids away from porn, Internet safety was mostly about protecting children from dangerous adults.
But starting around 2005, a new phase of the Web--often referred to as "Web 2.0"--prompted some Internet safety advocates to focus on ways kids could get in trouble for what they post on social-networking sites like MySpace and Facebook. It was in that year that Anne Collier and I founded BlogSafety.org (later renamed ConnnectSafely.org) so we could provide a forum for discussing safety issues on the interactive Web. It was also around that time that politicians and the media, especially the TV show "To Catch a Predator," started whipping up fears of predators trolling the Web for vulnerable children.
But statistics show that the likelihood of a young person being harmed by an online stranger is quite rare, and sexual solicitations and harassment are most often from peers. And to the extent it has occurred, it affects teens, not young children. Based on studies by the Crimes Against Children Research Center, the overwhelming majority of crimes against youths continue to take place in the "real world," mostly by adults known to the child.
Teens interact with 'real world' friends
That doesn't mean that the Internet is a risk-free zone. It's just that young people are far more likely to be harmed by other youth or the consequences of their own online behavior than by adult criminals.
Their interactions are largely with people they know from the real world. As danah boyd (she prefers a lower case d & b) observed in her doctoral dissertation, Taken Out of Context: American Teen Sociality in Networked Publics (PDF), "teen participation in social network sites is driven by their desire to socialize with peers. Their participation online is rarely divorced from offline peer culture; teens craft digital self-expressions for known audiences and they socialize almost exclusively with people they know."
This understanding of youth risk led to a whole new phase of Internet safety education focusing on such things as cyberbullying and urging youth to avoid posting material that could be embarrassing or get them into trouble with authorities and potential future employers. Recently, the focus has turned to the emotional and legal consequences of "sexting,"--kids sending nude pictures of themselves via cell phones or the Web. But as Collier observed in NetFamilyNews.org, we run the risk of "technopanics" over sexting and bullying.
What we've learned from observing how kids use the Net, mobile phones, gaming devices, and other interactive technology is that there is really no distinction between online and offline behaviors. Technology is woven into their lives. They don't go online, they ARE online. So it's really about youth safety--not Internet safety.
It's about helping young people make wise choices not just in how they use technology, but in how they live their lives. Internet safety is more than just the absence of danger. It also includes finding ways to use technology for learning, collaboration, community building, political activism, self-help, and reaching out to others.
These are not just philosophical arguments. They're pragmatic because preaching about safety or trying to lock down the Internet doesn't protect kids. Trying to instill fear--especially based on myths--actually increases danger because it causes kids to tune out good advice.
Filters as fences
Sure, there are technologies that can keep kids from using social-networking services or visiting inappropriate Web sites. But, like fences around swimming pools, the use of filters at home and school can't protect them forever. That's why we teach kids to swim. Not only does knowing how to swim help prevent drowning, it empowers them to thrive in the water instead of fearing it. The same is true with technology. Filters and other parental control tools often make sense for young children, but as kids mature into teens, we must pull back on the technological controls in favor of self-control.
In an e-mail interview, Larry Rosen, professor of psychology at California State University, Dominguez Hills, and author of Me, MySpace and I: Parenting the Net Generation observed, "sadly, too many parents think that using technology to track their children's keystrokes or restrict access to certain Web sites is sufficient parenting. It is not. Parents must be involved with their children's virtual lifestyles developing trust, being aware of any potential problems, learning about the technologies they use, and communicating often."
This post is adapted from an article that first appeared in the Palo Alto Daily News.
After plenty of coverage about how its Bing search engine makes it all too easy for kids to find and view porn, Microsoft has made some changes that will make it easier for parents to block or monitor what their kids are viewing on the site.
In a blog post, Microsoft announced that it is making two changes the company thinks will help address the issue.
According to the post, "explicit images and video content will now be coming from a separate single domain, explicit.bing.net. This is invisible to the end customer, but allows for filtering of that content by domain, which makes it much easier for customers at all levels to block this content regardless of what the SafeSearch settings might be."
With this change, parents should be able to use parental control tools to block that domain and therefore block the images and videos. Almost all third-party filtering tools can be configured to block specific domains or sites, as can the parental controls in Microsoft Vista and Mac OS X.
Microsoft will also return the "source URL" information of specific images and videos, so if a filtering program blocks that site, it will prevent the video or image from being viewed within Bing. For example, if there is a video playing at Playboy.com, a filtering program that blocks Playboy would also prevent someone from viewing the content from inside Bing.
I tested this by right-clicking on a thumbnail of an explicit video in Bing and looking at properties. The URL of the image began with "ts3.explicit.bing.net." When I right-clicked on a sexual photograph, it contained "ts1.explicit.bing.net."
In an e-mail, Microsoft spokesman David Burt said the company has reached out to more than 25 filtering and security vendors to work with them to provide a solution for filtering explicit content while using Bing.
Bing raised the ire of some Internet safety advocates when it was discovered that all you have to do to watch an explicit video or view an image was to hover your mouse over its thumbnail within a Bing search. Although Bing's default settings would not bring up sexually explicit content, it did display an invitation saying "to view these videos, turn off safe search." One click later, the videos would start to play.
Microsoft's changes are likely to silence some--but not all--critics. Cris Clapp from the Internet safety group Enough is Enough said that "the steps they've taken are good," but added "it's important for them to make it more intuitive to guide parents to change filter settings."
These new features should also make it easier for schools and businesses to filter student or employee access to explicit content.
I'm pleased that Microsoft responded relatively quickly to concerns about how easy it was for kids to find and view porn. But even with these changes, parents still need to stay in close touch with how their kids are using Bing or any other Internet site. Not all families will want to use Internet filters. I didn't when my kids were younger but instead had frequent conversations with them about appropriate Internet use. But these changes should be welcome news for those parents who do choose to use tools to filter or monitor their kids' access. Without filters in place, it will still be easy for kids to access porn from within Bing, but at least parents will soon be able to block it if that's what they want to do.
As I pointed out in an earlier post, searching for certain terms on Microsoft's new Bing.com search engine brings up videos that display hardcore porn within the Web site and because the porn is playing within Bing instead of the site where it's hosted, the videos are not necessarily blocked by parental control filters. And monitoring programs designed to tell parents where their kids have been are likely to simply report Bing.com instead of the site that actually hosts the video.
As Tom Krazit pointed out, Microsoft has responded to the issue in a blog post Thursday. That post is defensive--"we think our current search safety settings are solid"--but it does acknowledge "we also are listening to customers, and some have told us they want more control and they want it now."
The company says that it has a "short term workaround" but not only do I find the description of the workaround incomprehensible, I couldn't get it to work even while on the phone with a Microsoft executive. If you can figure out how to implement these instructions, please let me know:
So for right now, we wanted to let people know that you can add "adlt=strict" to the end of a query and no matter what the settings are for that session, it will return results as if safe search was set to strict. The query would look like this: http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=adulttermgoeshere&adlt=strict (yes it is case sensitive)."
But even if this can be made to work, it might help companies prevent employees from viewing porn but doesn't even begin to address the concerns of parents who don't want their kids playing porn movies from within the search engine of the world's largest software company.
To its credit Microsoft does have a "SafeSearch" option that does not bring up porn. In fact, it's the default setting. The problem is that if someone searches for an adult term with the setting on strict or moderate, they immediately get an invitation to "change your SafeSearch setting" right there on the screen. I love things that are user-friendly but, for kids, that may be a bit too user-friendly. At the very least, Microsoft would be better off following Google's example by requiring the user to manually go into the preference area to change the settings. It wouldn't stop a cybersavvy teen from finding porn, but it would at least slow them down a bit. And it probably would stop younger users from finding it. Another solution would be to have a family version of Bing with a different URL. The best solution is probably simply not to let porn videos play within Bing.
I'm not suggesting there is a silver bullet to this problem and I understand that Microsoft may have been caught by surprise over this, but it strikes me that a solution can be found and quickly implemented.
In the meantime I did get an e-mail today from Microsoft's Chuck Cosson telling me, "today we provided filtering companies as well as network administrators with a simple solution for restricting Bing to filtered searches." And he added, "while we give some further thought to Bing, I think it's also still our thinking that safe search settings on a single search engine can't substitute for a complete parental control offering--one reason to work with the filtering companies for example, but also that will inform how we respond here over time."
I agree. I don't think it's appropriate to demand that Microsoft make its search engine entirely kid-friendly. Porn may be inappropriate for kids and distasteful to some, but the type of porn you find on Bing is legal material and adults should have a right to search for it. I think parents do have the responsibility to set and enforce rules for their kids and, in some cases, monitor what their kids are doing online. But I also think Microsoft needs to put a bit more thought into how it can better empower parents to shield their kids from inappropriate material without censoring search results for adults. This may not be easy but it is possible.
The Palm Pre is probably the most highly anticipated tech product of the year, and, finally, people are starting to get their hands on it. A few days before the launch, I spoke with Paul Cousineau, Palm's director of product management for WebOS. Listen to what he had to say.
Listen now: Download today's podcast
As a followup to my post from Tuesday about the ability for someone to view porn from within Bing, I just heard from a Symantec spokesperson that the company's Internet monitoring and filtering service, OnlineFamily.Norton (review), can't yet prevent Bing users from searching sexually explicit terms for Web sites or videos. The company plans to add Bing to its protected search engines in the next release. Other major search engines, including Google, are covered by the software's SafeSearch feature.
In the meantime, Symantec recommends that parents use OnlineFamily.Norton to block access to all of Bing--which isn't particularly good for Microsoft.
OnlineFamily is a free Windows and Mac application that can be used to block sites and monitor a child's online behavior. Unlike some Internet-monitoring programs, it doesn't operate in stealth mode so, if parents use that feature, kids know that their Web activities are being watched.
Because Bing plays videos within its own site and doesn't require the user to click through, checking the browser history or using monitoring programs like OnlineFamily would only show that they visited Bing.com, not what videos they watched from within the site.
I tested this feature quickly and with great caution on board a Virgin America WiFi equipped flight, being careful to shield the screen from fellow passengers and crew.
When I searched for a word that was sure to bring up porn, I was first warned that it "may return explicit adult content" and told that "to view these videos, turn off safe search." One click later, safe search was off and I was looking a page of naughty thumbnails. And, as advertised, hovering the mouse over a thumbnail started the video and audio. Even when playing in a small thumbnail, it was unmistakably hard core porn.
Of course, kids don't need Bing to find and view porn. You can find it with Google and other search engines, and even though Google has a filtered search option, there's nothing to stop someone from turning that off. But Microsoft makes it a little too easy. If moderate or strict filtering is on and you search for a filtered term, the site simply instructs you to click a link to "change your SafeSearch setting." If you configure Google for "strict filtering," a user who searches for a filtered term on Google simply sees that the word or phrase "did not match any documents." Of course a kid can always go in and change Google's settings but they have to know how to do it and bother doing it. Microsoft makes it all too easy.
I don't know if Microsoft plans to do deal with this issue in any updates, but regardless of whether your kid uses Bing, Google, or Yahoo, or just knows the URLs of porn sites, the only ways to protect your kids from accessing porn is either to watch them, educate them, or filter them.
Watching them might work with very young children but it's not exactly practical for teens or even pre-teens. I recommend that kids under eight be supervised when using a device with Internet access. Education will work with many kids but not all. Parents certainly have the right to set rules and guidelines and impose consequences if their kids access forbidden sites. But, let's face it, hormones, curiosity, and just plain interest in things sexual can have a strong pull on kids, especially teenage boys. Besides, some younger kids could stumble on porn if they use any unfiltered search engine, even if they're just looking for innocuous terms like "Barbie."
Filtering programs (or the parental controls built into Vista and Mac OS X) will block most porn sites, but it's not yet entirely clear which ones will prevent Bing from previewing such sites. Safe Eyes filtering software "blocks all pornographic content on Bing and Google searches out of the box," according to a post on its company blog. From my perch in the sky, I wasn't able to check with other filtering companies, but I'm betting some will and some won't.
Coincidentally, I'm writing this post on the way to Washington, D.C. for the first meeting of the Commerce Department's NTIA Internet Safety Working Group, which I serve on. I have a feeling this will come up at Thursday's meeting. As one of my fellow working group members, Internet Keep Safe Coalition President Marsali Hancock, said by e-mail, "as new technologies release it is critical that industry and child health advocates explore the potential impact on young developing minds and quickly respond to health and safety concerns."
I'm going to keep on top of this issue with Microsoft and the filtering companies and will report back as this story unfolds.
