News Blog

The SC-MX20 will be available in August for $279.99.

(Credit: Samsung)

Each month seems to bring a new YouTube-centric digital camcorder and July is no exception: Samsung has announced the SC-MX20, a $279.99 model that's the successor to the SC-MX10. It'll arrive in stores in August and come in blue, black, red, and white.

According to the news release, the camcorder has a 680,000-pixel CCD sensor that delivers a 720x480-pixel resolution that allows the SC-MX20 to capture video with "stunning color and clarity." That may be a slight exaggeration, but the new model does feature a Schneider lens with 34x optical zoom, a 2.7-inch LCD, advanced noise reduction (3-D Noise Reduction), Samsung's allegedly improved Advanced Image Stabilization, and Face Detection, "which can automatically detect up to five faces and adjust focus to ensure better composition." According to Samsung, the value priced SC-MX20 shares some features found in its higher-end SC-HMX20C, including its design.

What makes the SC-MX20 YouTube-friendly is a special Web and mobile-shooting mode that simply tells the camcorder to shoot video with YouTube-optimized video settings. According to the release, "By selecting the Web & Mobile mode, the camcorder's resolution is automatically adjusted to 640x480 (H.264 / AAC / MP4) and optimized for use on Web sites. Unlike other camcorders, users can easily import video from the SC-MX20 and play it on MP3 players and other portable multimedia players supporting H.264, without having to convert the files." Some CyberLink software is thrown in for editing and customizing video files.

As for memory, the SC MX20 has a slot for SD/SDHC (up to 32GB) and MMC+ memory cards, though the camcorder doesn't come with any memory, which means you'll have to supply your own card. According to the release, "thanks to H.264 compression, when in full resolution and when set to fine mode, users can record up to four hours of footage using an 8GB memory card, eight hours using a 16GB memory card, and up to 16 hours using a 32GB memory card. Furthermore, the SC-MX20 features the longest battery life in its class, lasting up to three hours."

While the overall specifications don't appear to be all that different from those of the SC-MX10, we're hoping the tweaks are really more than just tweaks. We'll let you know when we get our hands on one.

The Yamaha YSP-3050 boasts a small--but important--upgrade to the YSP-3000

(Credit: Yamaaha)

When CNET reviewed the Yamaha YSP-3000 Digital Sound Projector, we singled out its "limited video capabilities" as one of the main shortfalls of the virtual surround speaker system.

Yamaha must have listened, because the company has just unveiled an upgraded version that addresses that very issue. The YSP-3050 adds to the mix the conversion of analog to digital video, but it's essentially otherwise identical to its predecessor. That's not a bad thing, either: we've found that the Yamaha YSP line remains the best choice for delivering convincing virtual surround-effects from a single speaker, and its all-in-one design precludes the need to purchase a separate AV receiver.

According to the specs page on Yamaha's site, the YSP-3050 has a component and composite video input, in addition to its two HDMI ins.

A post earlier this year by CNET News.com's Stephen Shankland pondering how he should store photos while traveling got me thinking about the same question.

I can't claim to have come up with "the answer," but I've thought about the issues, read through some discussions about what people consider best practices, and have tried to roughly quantify relative failure rates. What's right for you will depend on priorities and circumstances, but hopefully the following will offer some food for thought.

Real-world failure rates are hard to come by. However, having been the owner of a variety of laptops and other devices with hard disk drives, a 1:100 drive failure rate in a portable device over the course of a month's vacation doesn't seem out of line. Flash memory fails too. Anecdotal information from a couple of dealers (based on product returns) suggests that a 1:1000 rate is a reasonable stake in the ground--10x the reliability of disk. Further complicating the story is that some errors are recoverable, but you'd probably better stop using the card when you have a problem.

That's the hardware. Then there's the wetware--i.e. you.

This one's even harder to quantify. However, speaking for myself, I'm always misplacing loose memory cards. Furthermore, procedures that involve a lot of multi-step copying, editing, and so forth offer lots of potential to erase something that you thought you backed up or for an operation to otherwise fail without your knowledge. Or you might, like me, sometimes just do something really dumb. Also, consider theft and other forms of loss beyond your control.

Add it all up and my guess is that, for most people, minimizing the possibility of human error is more important than incrementally reducing the impact of a potential hardware failure.

With those reliability estimates and human realities as a baseline, here are my thoughts for some reasonable practices:

• If at all economically feasible, carry enough flash memory to hold all your photos. Flash has a good 10x the reliability of hard disks, more when you consider that it's probably going to be OK even if you drop it or run it through the washing machine.
• Common wisdom is that name brands are, in the aggregate, more reliable, and some higher-end cards also come with data recovery software. This seems reasonable. However, I've never seen actual data to bolster this belief--only random stories about crappy off-brand cards purchased on eBay. One data recover company notes that differences in build quality are indeed part of the reliability story but goes on to say it doesn't correlate in any consistent way to brand.
• Because photos can sometimes be recovered from memory cards after they've had a problem, it's a good idea to have at least one backup card. That way, if there's a problem, you can take the card out of the camera and work on it when you get home. Messing with it in the field is a recipe for losing data that could otherwise have been retrieved.
• A lot of people advocate putting fewer eggs in one basket. That is, they suggest using multiple smaller cards rather than one or two larger ones. This is hard to argue against so long as you develop a good system to ensure you don't lose the spare cards or accidentally erase or otherwise mess something up while you're swapping them around. Given overall flash reliability, I don't see this as a particular win--and may even be a net loss if taken to the extreme of some complicated scheme of rotating cards in and out of the camera.
• Although I tend not to bother, making a periodic hard disk backup of your memory cards is good belt-and-suspenders practice. If you're traveling with other people, a hard disk is also a good way to trade pictures. A computer is one possibility. Hard disk-based media players or portable devices specifically designed for the purpose are others.
• If you can't keep everything on flash, then you obviously need to copy it somewhere. Based on the numbers I threw out above, I wouldn't trust a single hard disk backup as my only copy of anything I really cared about. In this case, I'd want either a second hard disk or a way to burn a copy to DVD. (One advantage of making DVDs is that you can potentially mail a copy to yourself at home. (Laptop and DVDs were the solutions that Shankland eventually decided on.) If you have a bunch of spare thumb drives of reasonable capacity laying around, that may be another possibility.
• Cameras break too--maybe more so than any of the other parts we're talking about here, especially if you're in harsh conditions. I'm not sure of the final digital camera mortality rate on the Grand Canyon boating trip I took a couple of years back, but a fair number bit the dust. So definitely consider a backup camera. Sharing memory card format and/or batteries between main and backup is nice, if feasible.

Ultimately, it's all a matter of playing the odds of hardware failure, while keeping in mind all the dumb things that we can do to sabotage ourselves.

More and more 2- to 6-year-olds are watching videos on YouTube. And even the most cautious parents could find it hard to stop their little ones from discovering clips in which Tickle Me Elmo kills Barney.

That's where Totlol.com comes in. The month-old Web site leaves it up to parents to moderate which YouTube videos their kids can see. Parents can join Totlol's community to pick and review YouTube videos that would be appropriate for 6-month-olds to 6-year-olds. They can also browse among the site's more than 1,000 videos of disco penguins, singing hippos, and leaping elephants--or about 42 hours of parent-approved content.

Ron Ilan, founder of Totlol, said he started building the site in March after YouTube released a new, advanced application protocol interface (API), which the site is based around. His impetus was to create a safe site for his 2-year-old son and 1-year-old daughter.

"I had to do something with my son while I was in front of the computer. It's every parent's new age problem," said Ilan, a longtime Web developer based in Vancouver, B.C. "I imagined that YouTube had a lot of good stuff. But I couldn't comfortably find it. You don't know what you're searching for."

Totlol is among a bevy of new Web sites that cater to toddlers. For example, KidZui, which launched earlier this year, vets YouTube videos for kids among a community of teachers to ensure that they're age appropriate, among other features. KidZui, which offers a downloadable application, recently lifted its monthly subscription fee in an effort to attract more parents and kids.

In contrast, Totlol is available directly online and looks like a cartoon-themed YouTube. Once parents join, they can search for child-friendly YouTube videos through an API-powered search engine. A search for "goat" via Totlol would yield similar results to one on YouTube. But once the parent found a kid-friendly clip, they would submit it to the community at large for approval. The API takes description video data from YouTube, but the parent can also add notes on why the video is either interesting or relevant to kids. After that, the video goes up for screening and a "certain number" of parents must approve the clip before it airs on the site.

The system isn't foolproof, but the majority of material that surfaces on Totlol is child-appropriate, Ilan said. The main sticking point, however, is that parents can disagree about what kind of content their child should be exposed to. For example, Ilan said that his 1-year-old daughter loves a video in which Elmo and Grover sing a Numa Numa song. In that video, Grover tells Elmo to shut up--an act that ruffles the feathers of some parents.

That's why Ilan is working on new tools that will let parents block videos they don't want their kids to see or play only what they like from a "favorites list."

"It's the Internet--people can decide to watch it or not. It's all in the area of opinion and culture. That's why we need better and better tools," he said.

Ilan started the business with his own money, and without a clear business plan. He's not yet sure how he will make money from the venture, but he is sure how he will not turn a profit.

"No ads while kids are watching," he said. "I think there are opportunities beyond that. Worst-case scenario: I won't be able to move it forward."

John Battelle's Conversational Marketing Summit, which debuted last fall with much acclaim in a more intimate setting in San Francisco, faced a challenging task with its second edition last week in New York.

For starters, the speaker lineup was impressive, but two of the most important players of the social media Web were noticeably absent: Facebook (which, to be fair, took part last year) and Twitter. Yes, where was Twitter, the epitome of online conversations? Or at least another micro-blogging service?

Additionally, and more crucially, the program had to deal with what business lingo calls a "good problem:" the summit last fall had done such an excellent job establishing and exhaustively addressing the topic that it was hard for the NY program to offer new insights. Sure, the trend toward and the need for conversational media have continued and amplified. So has the emergence of the distributed Internet, or in Battelle's words: "To keep building our brands, we have to go to where the audience has gone." And the audience has gone to conversational media, as traffic data suggests, according to Nielsen/NetRatings.

The most successful new online brands are indeed conversational: Blogging service Wordpress, for example, experienced a whopping 202 percent traffic growth since last year, YouTube is up by 80 percent, Wikipedia by 28 percent, Facebook by 72 percent, and Flickr by nearly 86 percent. Sites with tools, services, and platforms that enable conversations to thrive are thriving themselves while the traffic to traditional properties (aka portals) stagnates or shrinks.

"Too many advertisers buy impressions instead of making impressions," Matt Freeman of GoFish remarked. Despite all the momentum that conversational media enjoys, as far as marketers' best practices and tools are concerned, not so much has actually changed since the last CM Summit. And some of the panels seemed to artificially prolong a conversation that had already ended last fall.

B2B = B2C²
Yet it was still an excellent program that Battelle and team put together. Focusing on the role of conversational media in building brands, the summit set out to find the "online analogs to the executions we so love in magazines and television."

Beth Comstock, chief marketing officer of General Electric, was well-suited to provide answers, for she represents an old, venerable brand (the "Hillary Clinton of brands," as someone in the audience framed it) that is successfully adapting to the new branding paradigms on the web. Overseeing a $1 billion budget, she can afford to experiment. But it's not only the money, it's the latitude: "GE is a brand with the permission to do a lot of things," Battelle described it.

Comstock spoke about the importance of "visual storytelling" and GE's continued foray into social media and conversational marketing. She said that the company should--and will--be more aggressive in embracing online conversations, further enhancing the use of embedded video ads and engaging audiences through multimedia content in all of its online channels: "The media plan is becoming the distribution channel." Comstock also made an interesting point about GE's investment in consumer marketing: in her eyes, it elevates the overall brand because it provides a strong umbrella for all of GE's B2B marketing. She's on top of an emerging trend: at the end of the day, enterprise clients are consumers and have the same emotional needs (or as the saying goes, "B2B customers are consumers who have the luxury of having a company pay for what they desire"). On the engagement level, conversational media seem to increasingly force B2B marketers to think like consumer marketers and develop programs that connect directly with the customer--through narratives rather than benefit statements and feature lists.

Will standardized metrics stifle innovation?
The most interesting debates throughout the two-day program centered on the elephant in the room: measurement. Most people in the industry would probably agree that the "end of the click" is near. CPM (cost-per-thousand impressions) and CTR (click-through-rate) do not suffice anymore as go-to metrics for the effectiveness of brand-building display advertising campaigns.

A recent report from Starcom MediaVest suggests that the majority of clicks being purchased are being consumed by unemployed, twenty-something, gambling, shopaholic, Internet addicts: "Heavy clickers represent just 6 percent of the online population yet account for 50 percent of all display ad clicks. While many online media companies use click-through rate as an ad negotiation currency, (...) heavy clickers are not representative of the general public. In fact, heavy clickers skew towards Internet users between the ages of 25-44 and households with an income under $40,000. Heavy clickers behave very differently online than the typical Internet user, and while they spend four times more time online than non-clickers, their spending does not proportionately reflect this very heavy Internet usage. Heavy clickers are also relatively more likely to visit auctions, gambling, and career services sites--a markedly different surfing pattern than non-clickers."

Therefore the cry for new types of brand engagement metrics is getting louder: "There is more and more emphasis by advertisers for greater return-on-objectives in campaigns, particularly in the digital space where the accountability data is so readily available," said Grant Prentice, Starcom USA's director of connections research and analytics. "'Natural Born Clickers' shows us that we can't count on click-through rate as our primary success metric for display ads; Starcom is more reliant on shifts in brand attitude metrics and analytics tying online exposure to sales as the true measures of online advertising efficacy." Added Battelle: "The success of online advertising can no longer be defined only by direct response metrics. Today's brand marketers are focusing on an entirely different set of parameters."

However, at present, there exists a plethora of metrics but no standardized set of measurements that lets conversational marketers prove the impact of their programs.

"One of the greatest barriers that we've seen for marketers in social media has been a general lack of standards and tools for campaign measurement and reporting," said Debra Aho Williamson, analyst at eMarketer. "There are, of course, vendors who supply disconnected data points, but it has so far been up to the marketer to wade through this sea of data themselves. What is needed is a single device or methodology that aggregates relevant data in an easily digestible form." Several companies and industry alliances have developed dashboard models seeking to fill that gap.

Federated Media, the summit organizer, introduced its own product: the Conversational Measurement Toolbox, an open suite of campaign measurement, planning, and reporting tools across the three dimensions--"engagement-amplification-equity"--offering marketers greater control and insight into their conversational marketing efforts.

Not everyone working on the creative side of the business is buying into the quest for a standardization of metrics. George Bennett, founder and CEO of branded entertainment firm Magic Bullet Media, contends that viral marketing campaigns are by nature unmeasurable, at least by standardized measures.

In his eyes, viral content, by definition, spreads through paths that are outside of the marketer's domain and are therefore difficult to track--and that's exactly how it should be. Well, probably not much longer. Video analytics firm Visible Measures announced Monday that it is launching a service that enables advertisers and agencies to measure the viral reach and audience engagement of video campaigns. Visible Measures' technology monitors user engagement in a given video stream, and its Viral Reach Database tracks video performance over 80 million unique videos across 150 of the Web's most popular video-sharing sites.

Let 100 flowers bloom
Amid the fixation on engagement metrics, Rich Silverstein, co-chairman and partner of advertising agency Goodby, Silverstein & Partners, brought back the idea of the good old big idea: "If it's good, it will work. Nice ideas that are big and deep will go a long way." And they even become a broader conversation, a cultural phenomenon, as proven by the recent Clinton vs. Obama Saturday Night Live spot (and a Time cover), both of which were inspired by a Silberstein NBA commercial.

Maybe a standardization of metrics would indeed stifle innovation and social media marketers' appetite for experiments. In the unregulated, fragmented social media space that we're in right now, anything goes, which may very well be a major factor for its vibrancy. Failure is always an option. Andy Markowitz from Kraft Foods quoted Guy Kawasaki: "Let 100 flowers boom."

However, Steve Rubel, senior vice president and director of insights for Edelman Digital, slammed the industry.

"We've gone backwards. There's no standard. The TV screen has a number. A dollar is a dollar. Having a standard makes transactions work. IAB has been moving slowly, fearing, justifiably, that if they come down from Mt. Sinai with two tablets offering a Ten Commandments of metrics, they worry that things could change in six months and render any standard useless," said Rubel, who also writes the Micro Persuasion blog. "Because there are no standards, all agencies are speaking different languages and no one has an answer."

Yet he reminded the audience that the "social Web is made of people" and demanded additional qualitative metrics that measure the impact of conversational marketing on the other side of the equation--the consumer. Social media, at its core, is about collaboration, he argued, and attempts to simply apply the old, quantitative templates of tracking marketing programs would fall short of capturing the essence of online conversations. They are no longer one-way streets: "Consumers are tired of being treated like cattle." They know they are marketed to and expect substantial value in return for their permission, said Rubel.

Consequently, metrics failing to measure the value of marketing programs for consumers would be one-sided and skewed. He also suggested rebranding "conversational marketing" as "collaborative marketing."

"Conversations are just a means to an end," he said, and he finds them valueless if they don't have a positive impact on consumers' lives. That's a somewhat radical proposition, seemingly far ahead of its time. What would truly consumer-focused, impact-driven conversational marketing metrics look like? A good question for the next CM Summit, this fall, in San Francisco.

Behind the MediaSmart Connect's fold-down front panel is a USB port and a slot for an optional removable hard drive.

(Credit: HP)

Hewlett-Packard's line of MediaSmart TVs includes the built-in ability to stream digital media from your home network and the Internet straight to their screens. But for the vast majority of us who don't own an HP TV, the company will soon have a second option: the MediaSmart Connect. The little black box connects to your home network (via its built-in 802.11n Wi-Fi or wired Ethernet) and streams a wide variety of digital audio, photo, and video files--including content from compatible Internet services (including Live365, Vongo, CinemaNow, and MovieLink).

The MediaSmart Connect should be able to pull digital files from any UPnP and DLNA compliant storage devices on your home network--beyond standard Windows PCs, that includes network attached storage devices such as HP's own MediaSmart Server and Media Vault. It can also double as a Windows Media Center Extender when interfacing with Media Center-enabled versions of Windows Vista--allowing the streaming of live or recorded TV at HD resolutions. The MediaSmart Connect doesn't have any on-board storage, but users can use the box to pull compatible media straight from an HP Pocket Media Drive (found on the company's PC desktops) or a standard USB flash drive.

The MediaSmart Connect will be available later this summer for $349, and is now available for preorder. (If it looks familiar, it's because HP has been teasing us with it since January's Consumer Electronics Show.) It'll include a learning remote that can control up to four other devices, an HDMI cable, and a $20 CinemaNow coupon. To drum up publicity for the product's launch, HP is offering a trade-in program where 100 people can exchange their old digital media adapter for the MediaSmart Connect. The company is also teaming with Microsoft to offer a series of four online "webinars" to demonstrate the product's features over the next few weeks. Feel free to check them out, but don't be surprised if you're just getting an infomercial for the product in question.

We'll be doing a detailed hands-on review of the MediaSmart Connect once we get a final production sample in July. (Also on deck: the similar Linksys DMA2200.) Until then, the floor is open: do you have any interest in the MediaSmart Connect, or in Windows Media Center Extenders in general? Is the whole idea of streaming media in the home just a niche market that will never go mainstream? Or would you prefer to go with an Xbox 360, which handles nearly all of the same media streaming functions, and adds game playback to boot?

HP MediaSmart Connect product page

The transition to digital TV is not going as smoothly as some had hoped, according to some government agencies that testified to Congress earlier this week.

A report issued by the Government Accountability Office showed that nearly half of the households that could lose TV service after the transition to digital broadcasting are still unprepared for the switch.

About 84 percent of consumers were aware of the transition, but many didn't know what they had to make sure their TV service wasn't interrupted, the GAO report said. More than half of those surveyed said they were aware of the government's voucher program to subsidize the cost of converter boxes that are needed to view digital TV on older analog TVs. But about two-thirds of those people didn't know how to get a coupon.

Even consumers who won't be affected by the switch were confused, The Washington Post reported. Roughly 30 percent of those who don't actually need a converter box said they were getting ready for the transition.

The confusion is occurring despite broadcasters and cable operators airing public awareness campaigns on TV.

The vouchers, which cover $40 of the cost of the converter boxes, started being sent in February. But they expire after 90 days. The agency overseeing the program reported that more than 40 percent of the 800,000 vouchers that have already been sent out have not been redeemed. And the agency doesn't have enough money to pay for the postage to resend these vouchers.

In February 2009, TV broadcasters will vacate wireless spectrum used to broadcast analog TV signals. Instead, broadcasters will transmit digital TV signals, which use spectrum more efficiently and provide better picture quality. The transition to digital means that some older TVs, and TVs with analog-only tuners, will have to be retrofitted to tune into digital signals.

Preparation for the switch to digital TV is being closely watched since some older TVs that have not been retrofitted won't work after the analog signals stop broadcasting.

Many of the 70 million or so analog TV sets that rely on over-the-air signals belong to minorities, senior citizens, low-income individuals, and people who live in rural areas. The fear is that these individuals will not be ready for when broadcasters stop transmitting analog TV signals in February 2009.

You'd think Disney or the Cartoon Network would lure the most 2- to 11-year-olds scouting for video on the Internet. But the honors actually go to YouTube, with clips of Bugs Bunny, trains, and puppies (mixed in with "Twitter whores" and frat parties).

According to a new study from Nielsen Online, the largest number of tykes and preteens go to YouTube for video (or 4.1 million viewers aged 2 to 11), followed by the Disneychannel.com at a distant second, with 1.3 million viewers in that age bracket for the month of April. MySpace.com, NickJr, and Google Video also showed up on that list.

Their habits could signal TV's future. On average, the kids watched 51 video streams from home during April, spending almost two hours on video clips. That usage outstrips the average of nearly 75 million adults who regularly view video clips at sites like ESPN.com and CNN.com. On average in April, adults of voting age watched 44 video streams, for about 1 hour and 40 minutes of their time.

As you might expect, teens between the ages of 12 and 17 spent the most time with video in April, more than 2 hours worth; and they watched the most streams of all age groups (an average of 74 per person). Slightly disturbing, the site with the highest concentration of 12- to 17-year-olds, or 44 percent of this age group, was Stickam.com, a hub for live Webcams of people in their bedrooms. Atlantic Records and Epic Records were runners-up in that category.

But YouTube trumps all video usage among 2-year-olds, teens, and adults. In April, more than 73 million people watched as many 4 billion video clips on the Google-owned video-sharing site. That's more video streams than the combined volume of Fox Interactive Media, Yahoo, Nickelodeon Kids, MSN, ESPN, Disney, and CNN--the runners-up in the category of top video brands.

If YouTube wanted to keep its competitive edge with preschoolers and their parents, it could launch a kid-safe version of its site that filters out all those risque clips of Barbie and death threats to Elmo.

Lawmakers and Internet executives are perking up to the growing problem of kid bully fights on the Web.

Legislators are newly arming themselves with laws that will protect kids from being repeatedly harassed via the Internet, text messages, or other electronic devices. In recent weeks, Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.) and Rep. Kenny Hulshof (R-Mo.) proposed a federal law that would criminalize acts of so-called cyberbullying (PDF). And Missouri Gov. Matt Blunt was scheduled Friday to sign into state law a similar measure, but the event was postponed because of inclement weather in St. Louis.

Both state and federal laws were prompted by the suicide of Missouri 13-year-old Megan Meier, who was the victim of repeated harassment on MySpace.com. An adult neighbor was indicted in the case last month by a grand jury in Los Angeles not on charges of cyberbullying, but on charges of unauthorized access of a computer system with intent to harm another person. (Missouri litigators said they didn't have a law to prosecute the case at the time.)

The case has raised national awareness around the issue of cyberbullying.

"When you see adults preying on kids, we're learning how significant the risks are," said Parry Aftab, an attorney and founder of the nonprofit advocacy group Wired Safety.

Parents, teens, teachers, and Internet executives also came together this week to hash out issues of digital fights at Wired Safety's International Stop Cyberbullying Conference, a two-day gathering in White Plains, N.Y., and New York City. Executives from Facebook, Verizon, MySpace, Microsoft, and many others talked with hundreds of teens and parents about how to better protect kids online from harassment.

In general, the conversation among these groups is moving from a focus solely on sexual predators to the everyday harm that kids can inflict on each other in chat rooms, social networks, virtual worlds, or via text message. Researchers say that anywhere from 40 percent to 85 percent of kids have been exposed to some kind of digital bullying, whether it's a stolen password or being called "fat" via instant message.

Even in adult-monitored virtual worlds for kids, children have been known to get around dictionary controls by naming a virtual room after a peer that he or she wants to ridicule, e.g., "Mary is fat." And while calling someone "fat" is not a crime, parents and legislators are trying to prevent the behavior before it leads to tragedies like Meier's.

"It used to be that adults would pooh-pooh bullying as a phase, but we're seeing increasing violent actions resulting from it," Sanchez said in an interview.

"The problem with cyberbullying is that kids aren't even safe in their own home, because they're being harassed through the computer or cell phones 24/7 potentially," she said.

Lawmakers are seeking to address cyberbullying with new legislation because there's currently no specific law on the books that deals with it. A fairly new federal cyberstalking law might address such acts, according to Aftab, but no one has been prosecuted under it yet. The proposed federal law would make it illegal to use electronic means to "coerce, intimidate, harass or cause other substantial emotional distress."

When signed, the Missouri state law will update existing regulations on harassment and stalking to include instances of those acts over the Internet, text message, or other electronic device. It will make cyberbullying punishable by up to four years in jail.

Stopping harassment
This week at an Internet conference, Scott Arpajan, founder of kids' virtual world Dizzywood, backed up this notion. He said that more than sexual predators, the company needs to watch out for cyberbullying in its growing community of 8 to 14 year olds. Dizzywood hires outside moderators to keep an eye on interactions among children.

"The biggest thing is keeping kids from getting in fights," Arpajan said.

Middle-school kids and teens said this week that they want more technology and response from adults and Internet companies when it comes to these issues, according to Aftab. At the conference, which hosted as many as 200 teens, kids said they want to be able to report instances of cyberbullying online and not have them "go into a black hole." Teens also said that they want Web sites to write easy-to-understand terms of service and privacy policies. That could mean creating policies that are animated or graphical.

To the consumer electronics industry: The teens also said they want new and better tools to stop harassment on cell phones. That would include buddy lists that block anyone besides approved senders from reaching their text message in-box.

As for the industry, more groups are creating Internet safety programs for K-12 kids that address bullying. Microsoft, for example, is sponsoring the Anti-Defamation League's program to train teachers, students, and parents on how to stop cyberbullying. Google also recently sponsored an Internet safety guide from Common Sense Media.

Sites like MyYearBook and Facebook have hosted pages that call on teens to pledge against cyberfighting, in honor of Meier. Wired Safety's group of teen Internet safety volunteers put a page on MyYearBook and there's a similar page on Facebook.

Tina Meier, the mother of Megan, said that change has to start with the kids, but parents need to talk more to their children. "The biggest thing I tell parents is to communicate and know what's going on with their child. They have to know what apps they're using and be on those sites," Meier said.