November 26, 2011

eModeration Links of the Week: Tweeps, a Slayer, and Tweeting to the Presidency

A social media links list curated from a (mostly) US perspective. Below are just a few of the Social Media reads from around the web this week, and nary a turkey joke among them.  Enjoy!


Trouble at Twitter?  An Engineer Speaks Out
Adrien Gaarf, one of the engineers who worked on the Twitter - Facebook integration, lets the world know how he really feels via a post on his blog.  Most interesting, not particularly relevant bit of trivia?  Apparently, Twitter employees call themselves "tweeps."  No wonder they've got problems. 

Facebook Photos Missing in Action
J.D. Biersdorfer of the New York Times walks us through what to do if a batch of photos goes missing on Facebook.   (If you haven't heard J.D. and Pedro Rafael Rosado on the Tech Time podcast, you are missing one of our favorite geeky treats.) 

Meet Buffy:  The Mobile with Deep Facebook Integration
(We tried and tried for a sparkling vampire joke here, but it just wasn't happening.)  Facebook commits to Android by allowing HTC to build a new smartphone that will deeply integrate Facebook into its platform.  All Things D covers the discussion (and the evolution of the Buffy moniker) in a series of posts earlier this week. 

Occupy GM Facebook
Saab owners stage a sit-in on GM's Facebook page with the rallying cry "Let Saab Go!" after former parent GM blocks the Saab sale to competing Chinese auto-makers.  It is an intellectual property stalemate, but all the fans want is to save their brand. 

Twitter THE Campaign Tool for 2012 Presidential Elections
The Hill's article was so interesting, we dug up a piece by Michael Kemper, MMW Group President, on a talk by President Obama's former press secretary and a NYT article on Republicans who tweet.   140 Elect goes as far to say that a campaign's Twitter follower numbers predict who will lead in polling.  Bipartisan linkage done, we have to say ... we love this stuff!  

Obama's Google+ Page
Speaking of social media in the political realm, Obama's team has set up his verified Google+ page.  In the words of a commenter on the announcing post, "Welcome to G+, Mr. President."


 

Read more...

November 24, 2011

Tips for journalists: how to keep your social networking safer


Just a few days after my rant about online abuse - particularly that directed against women - came this excellent article in Poynter from Jeff Sonderman focusing on the harassment that women journalists face from their social networks when using Twitter and the Facebook subscribe function to engage with their readers.

“We’re more accessible to people than ever, which is both a good thing and a bad thing,” Politico reporter Juana Summers told Sonderman. “I’ve covered cops and courts, protests, and now state and national government, but some of the most seedy and inappropriate stuff that’s been said to me, mostly race or gender-based, has been said on my social networks.”

As we discuss in our white paper: A guide to managing social media for news sites and media organisations, journalists are encouraged to use personal Twitter accounts to build up followings.  But there are a few very obvious safety groundrules which should be observed.  In Sonderman's article, femail journalists recommend these steps:

Keep personal information to a minimum.

Don't tweet about where you are, what hotel you're in ...wait until  after leaving a place to post a review online or check in on Foursquare 

Take evidence If you are being harassed, copy transcripts or capture screenshots of harassing content when it happens, before you delete it.

And then of course, there are examples of retaliation ...Think Progress reporter Alyssa Rosenberg began tweeting the full names and institutional affiliations of her harassers under the #ThreatoftheDay hashtag. “Threaten me,” Rosenberg wrote, “and I will cheerfully do my part to make sure that when employers, potential dates, and your family Google you, they will find you expressing your desire to see a celebrity assault a blogger.” Perhaps not what could be officially recommended, but I bet it made her feel a lot better. 

Specifically for Facebook, here are some suggestions from Mandy at Zombiejournalism.com on keeping your Facebook profile clean and safe if you're using the 'subscribe' feature

Set up friends lists to help direct posts.
Click on ‘Friends’ on the left side of your profile. Here you can sort, search and assign friends into lists of your choosing. Take the time to create lists based on the sort of things you share. Maybe you have a list for family and friends to show off photos of your kids/pets/self. Maybe you have one just for coworkers or work-related purposes.

Be selective about who you share with.
You can direct individual status updates, photos, videos, notes and galleries to very granular groups (based on those friends lists you made). Your subscribers likely don’t care about your dinner plans with friends, so maybe those sort of updates should be directed to friends only. Also take the time consider the privacy of those you tag or feature in posts or images, they may not want to be exposed to your public audience.

Be smart.
Don’t share where you live or details about your schedule on public posts. Consider what your public posts say to the sexual harassers, stalkers and all-around creeps who hang out on Facebook.

Manage your comments.
If you have comments turned on for subscribers, keep an eye on them. People will sometimes spam you, say horrible things or pop into a conversation thread like a bull in a china shop with a “So hottt. C me in Turkiye”. You need to delete stuff sometimes, your friends and subscribers are depending on you to keep the comments cleared. Do this by hovering over the right side of their comment until you see an X. Click to delete the comment.

Don’t be afraid to block people. If someone is spamming you or being abusive to you or your commenters, don’t hesitate to block them from your page. Do this by first deleting the comment, then you’ll get an option to block the user.

Read more...

November 19, 2011

eModeration Links of the Week: Facebook Porn Spam Attack Thwarted?

A social media links list curated from a (mostly) US perspective. Below are just a few of the Social Media reads from around the web this week that caught our eye. Enjoy!


Browser Flaw to Blame for Facebook Porn Attack
Just which browser, Facebook won't say, but they have stated the spammers responsible have been identified.   For the eModeration moderators, it has been a "wear your hazmat suit to work" kind of week.

Facebook to IPO "Soon"
An insider rumor has Facebook employees wondering what the Zuck's definition of "soon" really is.  Via Nicholas Carlson for BusinesInsider

New Social Media Exchange Traded Fund Launched
It's an international mix, with Chinese and Japanese firms holding a significant percentage and Google, Groupon and Pandora contributing US weight, but the balance is expected to shift once Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn finally join the game. 

Why Americans Use Social Media
Two-thirds of online adults (66%) use social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, MySpace or LinkedIn.  Pew Research Center's full report is stat heavy, and fascinating to boot. 

Microsoft's Secret Social Network 
Microsoft appears to have in the works a social discovery network called Socl.com. The site is currently unreachable, with a cached version displaying this message:  Thanks for stopping by.  Socl.com is an internal design project from a team in Microsoft Research which was mistakenly published to the web. 

Six Degrees of Social Separation
Yahoo and Facebook have teamed up to test the theory of six degrees of separation in a project called the "Small World Experiement."  We are participating, and you can, too.  Let us know if you manage to link up with Kevin Bacon - we love that guy.

Read more...

November 18, 2011

Reporting content, moderating and managing audiences on Google Plus Pages


Now the fuss is starting to die down around the Google Plus Pages launch, we’ve spent some time digging around to look at the detail of how easy or otherwise it is to administrate and manage a G+ brand page.

The first and most obvious problem is the single admin rights – much covered elsewhere, and something that I’m sure Google will fix quickly (in fact, we've been told that Google will be sorting this in Q1 next year.) This is the most obvious barrier to companies using it with any real effort.
Update 4 Jan 2012 - Google now allows up to 50 multiple admins - see our post on how to set it up.

Reporting content

Reporting inappropriate content to Google+ is relatively easy, with different options, depending on whether you are reporting a post, comment or providing feedback on a webpage. 

Webpage reports are primarily feedback to Google about technical matters, using the ‘send feedback’ button that sits in the corner of each page. When you hit the button, you can highlight the part of the page that you want to report, and submit it to Google. You can also black out any bits you don’t want to submit, such as personal information. This is a great feature, but as it may also be used to report abuse, I’d like to see something built onto this to categorise reports, so that pages containing serious abuse, for example, don’t get lost among more minor complaints or technical issues.


A general comment about reporting inappropriate content – the buttons are somewhat subliminal and you can only flag a comment when you hover over it.  CEOP do not yet seem to have a page in Google+, nor of course the app aimed at young people which installs a panic button on Facebook home pages.

You can report profiles – with a choice of spam, nudity, hate speech or violence, copyright, impersonation or fake profile (what happened to pornography or child abuse?).  There will be no notification to the reporter of any action taken: “We've received your report and will review it as soon as we can. Please note that we will not personally notify you of our decision. If you see the profile is still available within a few days, it's likely that we've determined it is not in violation of our policies.” Whilst in many cases, the lack of follow up may not be an issue, it is certainly proving so with reported bullying on Facebook.



You can report posts with the arrow at the top right corner.  Here you have a choice of spam, nudity, hate speech or violence, child abuse, copyright or other (not pornography)) Again, no notifications



You can also flag comments (with no categorisation) and there exists an ‘unflag’ option for accidental button-pushing.

It’s still early days, and I suspect a disproportionately high proportion of people on G+ are involved in brand marketing and social media, so reported or blocked content is likely to be low initially (although I did find some profiles of blatantly pornographers). When consumers use Google Plus in large numbers, these features will become more important to block abuse, spam and other unwelcome or illegal behaviour. There is a clear content policy on Google+ (though you have to search to find it). It includes the usual list of illegal activity, abuse, hate speech and so on (unbelievably though these policies make reference to blocking ‘child pornography’ rather than ‘child abuse images’ which child protection agencies will, I’m sure, lobby to change).

How well this reported content is managed and how quickly it will be taken down remains to be seen. Let’s hope it does better than Facebook, which doesn’t have a great reputation for pulling down offensive or abusive content.

Moderation of content
 The big drawback in moderation terms is that, as with Facebook, you can’t pre-moderate comments. A search for ‘moderation’ or ‘moderate’ in Google Plus Help brings up no responses, and there isn’t yet a profanity filter option (which Facebook does have). However, Google announced yesterday that a handful of social media management platforms (Context Optional, Vitrue and Buddy Media among them) have been given access to the Google Plus API, so management tools are likely to be one their way shortly. As more consumer brands set up G+ Pages, they’ll want to make sure their pages stay clean, and abuse or spam free.

On a brand’s own posts, you have the option to edit, delete, link to or lock the post (an improvement on Facebook which only allows you to delete or hide a post); and to disable comments at a granular level, post by post.  Facebook will only allow you to disable comments for the whole page, at the ’Edit Page’ level.  You can’t spam people with sales messages – individuals have to have put your Page in their circles for you to send content to them. You can also block or ignore users.

User posted content
G+ doesn’t seem to be as social as Facebook. There doesn’t appear to be the option to post directly onto a brand’s Page (as you can post onto a Facebook Wall), but you can comment on individual posts. This means that the brand has to initiate the conversion – something that brands might prefer, but that I suspect consumers won’t, and does put a spoke in the wheel of using Google+ pages for customer service. I imagine this will change in the future.

Age restrictions

Currently, the minimum age for Google+ is set at 18, although the Google+ FAQ page doesn’t set out the minimum age requirement (but if you try to get an account and fill out your age as under 18 you will (we think) be refused).  Before Google+ pages were opened to the public, Brian Rose, a Google customer support rep, said: “We won’t be letting users under 18-years-old into the Field Trial until we’re confident that we have the right teen safety features in place. We currently don't have plans to open the product to users under 13, thanks.”  Another rep said“We want to make sure that Google+ provides the best experience to users under 18 who may be eligible to use our product before we open it up to them."

Segmentation and audience
Setting up a page is (relatively) easy – but be careful who you choose to set it up as they will be sole admins for the moment, and I like the idea of being able to segment customers by interest or customer group.  You can only add people to your circles that have first added your company page to one of their own circles. The circles functionality will let brands create communities within communities – for example brand ambassadors, stakeholders and customers. This is much easier to do than on Facebook, which involves the intricate creation of lists.

It is still in a very early stage, but Google Plus needs to learn from Facebook’s early mistakes and make Pages safe from abusive content. As Google+’s audience grows, it need to build in at least the same safety advice and help as Facebook has  and could easily steal a march on Facebook by building in admin tools to make posts and comments easier to moderate and manage. Sharing and linking to information is easy, but real interaction between a brand and its consumers will be stilted in the short term until some of these issues are addressed.

Read more...

November 17, 2011

Trying to turn the tide against online abuse

If you're a UK parent, there's a very good chance you'll already know that this week is Anti-Bullying week, with a simple theme: ‘Stop and think – words can hurt’.  Beatbullying and other organisations are doing a great job in spreading the anti-bullying gospel - Beatbullying's global Big March will culminate with the delivery of a petition to the United Nations Building in New York; asking the United Nations to explicitly enshrine 'bullying' in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC).

But it's not just children who suffer bullying, on or offline. In the work eModeration does, inevitably we see an enormous amount of bullying and online abuse between grown people. This week, along with The New Statesman's Helen Lewis-Hasteley I spoke to Jane Garvey on Radio 4's Woman's Hour about the vicious attacks frequently levelled against woman who dare raise their head over the internet parapet and express themselves. Laurie Penny, writing in The Independent, concludes: "An opinion, it seems, is the short skirt of the internet".  With horrifying candour she writes: "You come to expect it, as a woman writer, particularly if you're political. You come to expect the vitriol, the insults, the death threats. After a while, the emails and tweets and comments containing graphic fantasies of how and where and with what kitchen implements certain pseudonymous people would like to rape you cease to be shocking, and become merely a daily or weekly annoyance, something to phone your girlfriends about, seeking safety in hollow laughter."

Some bloggers and journalists become akin to celebrities: at least public figures. They are easy-to-reach targets in a way they never were before.  See Laurence Green's great post last week in musician's blog Totally Vivid: "In one of the most high profile cases, Welsh Opera singer and Forces’ sweetheart Katherine Jenkins was subjected to continued online bullying by a specific user on Twitter for a year, culminating in the user sending a crude, insensitive question in to a chat show Katherine was participating in."  It's really sad to see such attacks against celebrities, particularly from young people, attacks that are incredibly personal and like playground bullying. We of course delete them but it's amazing how people use Twitter to openly abuse celebrities knowing they quite possibly will read them. I can only speculate that it's the sense of power which the direct communication of Twitter and Facebook gives to these individuals which provides the kick.
 
Much of our moderators' time is spent deleting the horrifyingly aggressive comments levelled against celebrities - or indeed levelled against each other for expressing like/dislike of celebrities.  Actually, against each other for expressing pretty much any opinion at all.  A moderator said to me recently that such a simple community engagement tactic as a 'love/hate' poll could stir up a virtual feeding frenzy amongst 'fans': she has come to know which areas of a forum or status updates on a Page will need her attention most.  And we have to rotate our moderators away from some projects because facing that amount of filth and grief every day becomes unbearable (thank heavens we get to moderate kid's hallowe'en pumpkin contents too).

We blogged recently on Facebook's lack of action over Pages with names such as: "What's 10 inches and gets girls to have sex with me? My knife." Though Facebook's terms of use prohibit posting content that is "hateful," "threatening," or "incites violence," getting the social network to take down user-created pages such as "I know a silly little b--ch that needs a good slap" took almost two months, thousands of people, and outspoken criticism on a multitude of social media sites. And even then, more than a dozen in the same vein remain. It seems that some of these sites are so frightened of upsetting a tiny percentage of sexist, aggressive men at the risk of not being seen as getting the 'joke', that they're chipping away at what becomes acceptable behaviour in society as a whole.

Image courtesy of Flickr by angelsk
And whilst anonymous commenting certainly brings out the worst in people, it seems that using your social network identity is not the moral safeguard that perhaps it once was.  I'm honestly shocked at the things people will post and 'sign'.  What do they do?  Write "I hate your f**king guts and I hope your daughter dies screaming' to some C list celeb - then get up and help the kids with their homework?

I don't think I'm being hopelessly nostalgic when I say that it wasn't like this on the internet ten, or even five years ago.  We seem to be locked into a downward spiral where prevalence begets acceptability; where the young - and the not-so-young - are hiding behind their shut doors and keyboard to express sentiments that they would never do face to face.  Because it's OK to do that; because those words are everywhere.

So, I think what I'm trying to say is this.  We have to set the bar higher.  Platforms such as Facebook and YouTube, publishers, columnists, celebrities, bloggers ... we need to start and maintain a culture of zero tolerance towards online aggression, abuse, bullying.  And that takes effort and determination and a lot of time (= money).  But what else can we possibly do?  I hope against hope that we can turn the tide.

I realise that of course I have a vested interest in this, but believe me, I would rather my staff spent their days nurturing communities and helping with customer service queries than scrubbing the excrement off Facebook walls.

Read more...

November 12, 2011

eModeration Links of the Week: Teens, The Muppets and James Bond Go Digital




A social media links list curated from a (mostly) US perspective. Below are just a few of the Social Media reads from around the web this week that caught our eye. Enjoy!


What US Teens are Doing Online
The 2011 Teens and Digital Citizenship Survey by Pew's Internet & American Life Project, in which 799 teens aged 12 to 17 were polled from April 19 through July 14.
We were fascinated by the results - a long but worthy read.

YouTube's audience now 60% Non-English Speaking
Have we mentioned lately that eModeration offers moderation services in over 50 languages? Just sayin'. 


70% of US Web Users Watch Online Content
Our US team watches online content, but only for work. And for viral videos. And episodes of The Guild ... maybe it would be simpler to list what we don't watch on the web.

The King of Tumblr
A great email Q&A with Anthony de Rosa, Social Media Editor of Reuters, on the hows and whys of the intersection of Social Media with Journalism.


Filtering the Firehose: TV Partners for Twitter
Mass Relevance and Crimison Hexagon were named as curation partners for repurposing tweets for
repurpose tweets for use on websites, television shows, jumbotrons and more.
First Mixed Reviews of Google + for Brands


Discussion of Google+ brand pages is everywhere following this week's release (including tangentially here on the eModeration blog.) We found this piece by Ki Mae for
Adweek to be both well-rounded and insightful. 


James Bond is now on Twitter
We were hoping for more birds-eye-view tweets instead of production PR releases, but the account is young.


The Muppets Almost Make it to the Oscars via Grassroots Social Media
Apparently Billy Crystal has been named the new host. Miss Piggy, we were rooting for you.

Read more...

November 11, 2011

When Facebook is Not Funny - the responsibilities of platform owners

This week, it's all been about Google+ brand pages, and how they stack up against Facebook Pages.

This post isn't really about Google+ however - but it starts out with an appealing feature of Google+ that I noticed.  The page feedback mechanism. I noticed was this, in the corner of each page:

It's a button, so I pressed it.
Yay!  You get to highlight what part of the page has upset you AND black out any bits you don't want to call attention to.  Looks good - makes issue reporting a whole lot easier.  There's no kind of attempt to categorise the problem though, so I'm not sure how Google will be prioritising and reporting on page flags since it's likley that this will be used for innapropriate content as well as issue reporting.

Will Google+ do better than their Facebook counterparts at handling reported content?  We don't know yet - of course Google+ hasn't gained the kind of critical mass to attract 'the wrong kind' of UGC.  (If anyone has experience of flagging content on Google+, please do comment)

But to illustrate just how low Facebook have set the bar at dealing with reports, two examples came my way yesterday.  I had a conversation with the Director of Practice at Beatbullying about what happens to victims of bullying when they make reports to Facebook (answer: often nothing.  Not even an auto-acknowledgement of response, which she says is devastating to them) and I also read this horrifying post from Bianca Bosker on The Huffington Post, highlighting Facebook's lack of action over pages with names such as: "What's 10 inches and gets girls to have sex with me? My knife."  From the article: 

"A Facebook page bearing this name was among more than half a dozen recently removed by the world's largest social networking site following weeks of outrage online and a Change.org petition that garnered more than 180,000 signatures.

"Though Facebook's terms of use prohibit posting content that is "hateful," "threatening," or "incites violence," getting the social network to take down user-created pages such as "I know a silly little b--ch that needs a good slap" [...] took almost two months, thousands of people, and outspoken criticism on a multitude of social media sites. And even then, more than a dozen in the same vein remain.

"The controversy sheds light on the challenges that Internet companies face when policing individuals' actions online, as well as the difficulty users have in communicating with web behemoths that control hundreds of millions of individual accounts. 

"While sending photos, updates and other personal information to Facebook is a seamless process for users, getting answers from the social networking site about its policies can be far more difficult. Shelby Knox, Change.org's director of organizing for women's rights, noted that weeks went by before Facebook reached out to explain why it would allow pages like "Riding my girlfriend softly so she doesn't wake up" to remain on its site.

"Facebook initially declined to pull the controversial pages, citing users' freedom to voice their opinions and likening the pages to jokes friends might tell over a few beers."

There's a whole great big fat discussion to be had here about what is freedom of speech, where you draw the line, what opinions can and cannot be expressed because of fear of offence.  (In fact, later this month, eModeration is going to a research seminar on this topic as it relates to news media).

But there can be no question that these particular Pages are inciting violence against women and contain "hateful," and "threatening," language. That they are gaining so many thousands of 'likes' from people unafraid to brandish their opinions on their social networking profiles says something about my fellow men that I don't want to hear, and that Facebook can willfully condone them by allowing them to remain is beyond offensive. I think they should be considered criminally liable.  After all they have been notified ...

Read more...

November 9, 2011

Get Safe Online brings out 'Rough Guide to Internet Safety'

Half way through Internet Safety Week already, and - having attended the Get Safe Online summit in London on Monday -  I'm counting myself lucky that I've not yet been the victim of a serious attack. 

According to Verisign, 19 people in the UK fall for some scam or get suckered by a piece of malware every minute. Cybercrime is costing the UK an average of £474 million a year - most of which its victims will not be able to recover.

The summit was crammed with facts and stats about cybercrime, fraud and the battle against it.  But what I'm thinking will stick in the minds of most was the 'almost live' video demo by the engaging Rik Ferguson of  Trend Micro.  Blue Peter style with a trojan he'd 'already prepared', he demonstrated how a downloaded app could send a premium rate text (at something like £6 a pop) every minute from your phone, and you'd be none the wiser until the bill hit you.  Ouch.

Mobile malware is (not suprisingly) on the up. But you can help to protect yourself, and Get Safe Online and its partner organisations are doing what they can to help us ...

Learn:  This week Get Safe Online brings you The Rough Guide to Staying Safe On Line: a genuinely useful, informative pdf, designed to be updated regularly. It strikes the right balance and manages to to readable and comprehensible without being redundant or patronising.  In my view it should be standard issue in every household in the UK.



Report: There is a single point of contact for all reports: the Action Fraud line (http://www.actionfraud.org.uk/).   The benefits to having all reports chanelled through a single organisation are obvious: the data collected is fed through into the National Fraud Intelligence Bureau (NFIB), who can then analyse it and take action.  By reporting scams and malware through the Action Fraid, you can actually help stop cybercrime spreading.



Two easy take outs from Internet Safety Week then.  Protect yourself (and spread the word amongst family and friends - you could even hold a seminar at work or a meeting in your child's school, why not?).  And if you do spot a scam, help stop it by reporting it through.

Read more...

November 5, 2011

eModeration Links of the Week - Moms don't like shopping any more ....

A social media links list curated from a (mostly) US perspective. Some of the Social Media reads from around the web this week that caught our eye. Enjoy!



Stat of the Day: Kids Take all the Fun Out of Shopping
Apparently social shopping isn't what it used to be. Overstressed moms go online or mobile for shopping. We could have told them that .... By Matt Carmichael for Ad Age.

Social Media Bleeds Cubbie Blue

Great info from Kevin Saghy, Public Relations and Marketing Specialist for the Chicago Cubs, on what it takes to make true-blue fans happy online and off.

Kim Kardashian's Divorce pwns Twitter
With 9 trending topics on Twitter, even if we didn't want to know all about it, we still know all about it.

Think Before You Tweet: Two-Thirds of Twitter Users 'Unaware' of Legal Risks
A subject near and dear to our hearts: "Research suggests that most UK Twitter users, which operate under strict libel and defamation laws, are "unaware" of the legal risks associated with posting online content." By Zack Whittacker for ZDNet. (For more on this topic, check out our white paper: A guide to managing social media for news sites and media organisations)


Job Ad of the Week: Social Media Specialist with Sam Adams Brewery
(Insert "tough job, but somebody's got to do it" joke here.)

Read more...

November 4, 2011

COPPA - is it doing children online more harm than good?

Last month, we published a review of COPPA's proposed changes, which concluded that, whilst the aims are laudable, the proposed changes are unlikely to be effective or workable, and may indeed, result in more harm.

And indeed, as it currently stands, COPPA is reported to be seriously flawed and counter-productive.  This month, the redoubtable danah boyd from Microsoft Research and a team from US universities have published 'Why parents help their children lie to Facebook about age: Unintended consequences of the ‘Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act’: a highly readable piece of research into parents' views of their children's rights to social network access, based on a national sample of 1,007 US parents who have children living with them between the ages of 10-14.


 Among parents of 10-to-14-year-old Facebook users, 84% were aware their children signed up and, of that 84%, nearly two-thirds (64%) even "helped create the account," the authors wrote. "Our data show that many parents knowingly allow their children to lie about their age – in fact, often help them to do so – in order to gain access to age-restricted sites in violation of those sites’ Terms of Service. This is especially true for general-audience social media sites and communication services such as Facebook, Gmail, and Skype, which allow children to connect with peers, classmates, and family members for educational, social, or familial reasons."



The report highlighted these issues:

  • Do parents understand why there is a restriction?  (no). 
  • Do they understand that it derives from COPPA legislation and is an attempt to protect their children's privacy? (no).  
  • However, are they concerned about these privacy issues and online safety? (yes)
  • Do they understand that the age restriction is a requirement and not an recommendation? (no)


Some of the report's conclusions:

As a result of COPPA, lying about one’s age has become normal, and parents often help children lie, which creates safety and privacy issues  - because children lie about their age, these sites still collect data about children under 13 that COPPA would otherwise prohibit without explicit parental consent.

Online safety and privacy are of great concern to parents, but most parents do not want solutions that result in age-based restrictions for their children: "Rather than providing parents with additional mechanisms to engage with sites honestly and negotiate the proper bounds of data collection about their children, parents are often actively helping their children deceive the sites in order to achieve access to the opportunities they desire. Were parents and their children able to gain access honestly, the site providers might well present them with child-appropriate experiences and information designed to enhance safety, provide for better privacy protections, and encourage parent-child discussions of online safety. With deception being the only means of access, these possibilities for discussion, collaboration and learning are hindered."

Online safety and privacy are of great concern to parents, but most parents do not want solutions that result in age-based restrictions for their children. Parents are open to recommended age ratings [as with film ratings, for example] and other approaches that offer guidance without limiting their children’s access.




So, why do parents help their children lie to get onto Facebook?

Because "they want their kids to have access to public life,"   danah boyd told ConnectSafely.org co-direct Larry Magid in an interview for CNET: "Today, what public life means is participating in commercial sites. They want to help their kids get on these sites and use them responsibly."

"These are not parents who are saying, 'Oh, get on Facebook' and then walk away," danah continued. "these are parents who have the computer in the living room, they're having conversations with their kids, they're often helping them create their accounts to talk to Grandma. They're helping them actually negotiate all of this. And they want to do it often in the middle school years, when they can actually have reasonable conversations about how to act responsibly and where they can be present in this."


So, can COPPA be fixed?

The report proposes that "policy–makers shift away from privacy regulation models that are based on age or other demographic categories and, instead, develop universal privacy protections for online users. This would avoid creating an environment where service providers like Facebook have incentives to “divide and conquer” populations in terms of privacy and data collection policies. This would not only eliminate the problems with age–based prohibitions and circumventions, but also provide increased privacy protection to both teens and adults. As modern online data collection and advertising practices become more complex, it is not just children who need protections.


"Furthermore, given many parents’ openness to recommendations, it might be useful to develop mechanisms to provide parents with recommendations about the appropriateness of various sites for children of different ages and the various risks that users may face. Our findings show that parents are indeed concerned about privacy and online safety issues, but they also show that they may not understand the risks that children face or how their data are used. Greater transparency and increased information flow can help parents make appropriate decisions."

As we've said before, Facebook with stabilisers please.


Image courtsey of http://www.toledoblade.com/

Read more...

Latest from Tamara's Twitter

  © Blogger templates The Professional Template by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP