'The talk' revisited

It's not what you might think it’s about. It's not even a single, now-you-get-it conversation. It's an ongoing, long-term conversation families need to have about safe, constructive use of the Net and communications devices because both kids and technology keep changing. Marian Merritt, Symantec's chief online-safety evangelist, recently wrote about it, and I agree with her: "Your goal," she suggests to parents, "is to understand how your child is using technology, recognize any potential risk factors that need addressing and ensure you are the person your child can go to if something weird should happen when they are on the Web." All of that's important, especially that last point, because research shows that kids don't talk to parents about bad stuff that happens online, and we need to do everything possible to encourage them to. Merritt offers talking points for "the talk(s)" in the form of some questions you can start off with, but don't forget another good bit of advice: "Have the conversation during a quiet time when there are no time pressures," have the online computer at hand in case you want to check things out together, and "keep the chat neutral, not confrontational" so your child will continue the conversation willingly the next time!

Nude photo-sharing: Q from a family that's been there

In response to my feature "Naked photo-sharing trend," "Marcia" in New Jersey emailed me about her own daughter's extremely difficult experience with sharing a photo of herself. With Marcia's permission, I sent her story and question about it to psychiatrist Jerald Block in Oregon and Det. Frank Dannahey, a youth division officer in Connecticut and with everybody's permission (for privacy protection, "Marcia" is not her real name), I'm sharing their perspectives here....

"Just recently my 14-year-old daughter, a freshman in high school, sent a nude picture of herself to a boy who sent it to someone else, then a few girls got it and proceeded to send it everywhere. This was a total shock of course that my daughter would take a picture, but trying to be an understanding parent in this world, I listened carefully and stayed calm. She said that the boy bugged her and bugged her until she could not take it anymore. The school is trying to handle this.... My daughter went to a counselor at school and talked about it. She does not know why she did it but my feeling is the boy egged her on until she felt she had to, and now she knows she never should feel like she is being controlled by somebody.

"My question is, even though it is going to be hard for her to go back to school, the school is telling me that it is best for her and I think it is best that she just not talk about it with anyone. But I feel that these kids that have been spreading this around should realize that it is a "criminal act" and that is where I stand now and don't know how to approach it. I don't want to take anyone to court and she is suffering enough from her own mistake - I want her to be able to get back to her life and enjoy it. She knows she made a stupid mistake and she has to live with that. Also, her picture did not have her face at all in it, but the girls who sent it around made sure they put her name on it. This was all done by cell phone, not on the Internet."

Detective Dannahey:

"Wow, this 'power of control' seems identical to my case and what the teen involved told me. As far as the criminal side of this, there are a few problems concerning the 'child porn' aspect. I notice that the mom said that her child’s face does not appear in the photo. If this case was to come into my office, the first thing we would have to try doing is to determine 1) if we could prove the photo was of that specific child and 2) if we could not prove that it was in fact that specific child, could we prove that it is a photo of a minor. I have had several cases of this type. In some cases you can use the background in the photo to prove that it was taken in the child’s home, which could be helpful in proving that it is a specific child. If a photo is very clear in detail we might be able to prove who's in the photo by birthmarks, marks on the body, etc. You can also use the file data from the photo to at least give you a time period of when the photo was taken and in this case data from the phone where it was taken from. Lastly, we have taken a child’s photos to a physician who is recognized as a court expert in the area of child exploitation and, based on the child’s development, he or she *might* be able to make a convincing case that the child in the photo is a minor. Would every police department go this far? Maybe not.

"I would say that in this case, you would have a criminal violation in the fact that a group of teens is circulating a nude photo, supposedly of a specific minor, and attaching a name to the photo as being a specific person. This action would obviously cause alarm and humiliation to a teen. In this case, you may or may not prove the 'child porn' aspect of it, but you would certainly have a charge relating to the alarm and humiliation factor. That exact charge would differ from state to state. I know this sounds a little complicated... The fact that this child’s face does not appear in the photo severely complicates this case."

Dr. Block:

"This is a complex and surprisingly common occurrence. I can imagine two different strategies: (1) just wait it out, or (2) notify the police. Transferring the photo is a serious federal crime, so perhaps a police officer would be willing to address the school and educate them at the same time. However, if anyone actually got into trouble, the backlash against the girl might be terrible. Also, by bringing in the police, the issue is prolonged and cemented into the minds of her classmates. Finally, there may be some legal risk to the girl herself. An aggressive prosecutor could come after her (see this). I'd consult a lawyer, then, before talking to the police.

"So, if it were my child, I probably would be inclined to 'do nothing' and let it blow over. However, I would send the daughter to see a therapist so that she would have a safe place to discuss and think through the harassment, which is awfully shaming and painful. Also, I would leave the decision about whether to involve the police or not to her. Giving her that decision (in the context of therapy, where it can be thought through carefully), might give her a greater sense of control over the situation. What a difficult position to be in, as a child or parent."

Related links

In addition to cases this year in Alabama, Pennsylvania, and Georgia (see this item) - as well as the New Jersey one above that may not become a case - three recent reports in the nude photo-sharing trend:

Wisconsin: Two 17-year-old Hudson, Wisc., boys "were charged with misdemeanors for being party to defamation of character in the April 1 incident, which started when a girl used her cell phone to send nude pictures of herself to male friends" - by the Associated Press in the Minneapolis Star Tribune.

Ohio: "Trading Nude Photos Via Mobile Phone Now Part of Teen Dating, Experts Say" - story about teens in Columbus from the Associated Press at FoxNews.com

Utah: "Cell phone nudes" - A 15-year-old Farmington, Utah, boy is charged "one felony count of dealing material harmful to a minor, and three misdemeanor lewdness counts. The charges come in the wake of a growing trend among Utah teenagers who trade nude photos of themselves over cell phones." Archived at the Salt Lake Tribune.

More recently two stories from New York and Minnesota, and later an AP article referring to other cases in Alabama, Connecticut, Wisconsin, and Texas....

Minnesota: Students cautioned to avoid cellphone, Web pitfalls" in the Pioneer Press

New York: "Pioneer School District finds nude photos on students cellphones" in the Buffalo News

Online teens: Snapshot by numbers

A whopping 93% of US teens (12-to-17-year-olds) are online, Pew/Internet's Mary Madden told NPR recently. That's up 20 percentage points from the 2000 figure for online teens in the US. Not surprising to most of their parents, the "frequency and intensity" of their Internet use is "also increasing, such that most teens are online every day," Madden also told NPR, and "a majority of teenagers who go online maintain one or more profiles at social-networking Web sites."

'Honesty Box' encouraging cyberbullying?

You've probably seen mentions of JuicyCampus.com, which has gotten some national attention. I've also blogged about "Honesty Box," which - as a widget social networkers can put on their profiles - is in effect a mini JuicyCampus (see this about the latter). These are phenomena of the participatory Web, on which too many people have a distorted sense of their free-speech rights that goes something like "I can say anything nasty I want about anybody (which is not what the First Amendment is about) because I'm anonymous (which they aren't, truly). Having said that, no social site or anything on the user-driven Web is all good or all bad, but some sites and services - such as JuicyCampus and Honesty Box - do seem to be more negative than neutral, more conducive to the darkside of human nature. The ReallyWorried blog is campaigning to get Facebook to delete the Honesty Box widget from its lineup of these little software applications. Three interesting points are made among the comments underneath the blogger's post: 1) Honesty Box is an opt-in widget users can choose not to have on their profiles (and can unsubscribe if they do and change their minds); 2) that may be true about unsubscribing, but the widgetmakers make it hard to unsubscribe; and 3) Facebook "should do everything in its power" to be a safe site for all. The Honesty Box application is not going to help him achieve this." So, my readers, what do you think? Email me your thoughts at anne@netfamilynews.org, or post them at the ConnectSafely forum for the benefit of all. Thanks!

Teens' definition of writing...

...does not include all the texting, IMing, blogging, and commenting they're constantly doing online, and yet they're writing all the time as they compose phone text messages, IMs, blog posts, and comments in social-networking sites. This disconnect between what they're doing and their perception of it is a very interesting finding from a new study by the Pew Internet & American Life Project. Why does the disconnect matter? Because there's a debate going on among adults - parents, educators, etc. - about whether all this writing is hurting their formal writing and, just as importantly, Pew says in its description of the report, "because teens believe good writing is an essential skill for success and that more writing instruction at school would help them." The study "looks at teens’ basic definition of writing, explores the various kinds of writing they do, seeks their assessment about what impact e-communication has on their writing, and probes for their guidance about how writing instruction might be improved." Meanwhile, any writer will tell you that the two most important activities for aspiring professional writers are writing a lot and reading a lot. Here's coverage from The Times of London and CNET.

'Grand Theft Childhood'?

The release this week of the latest version of Grand Theft Auto (IV) sparks a new flood of headlines about 1) how the hot videogame industry is headed for the stratosphere (USATODAY) and 2) videogame violence. Interestingly, a $1.5 million study by two Harvard Medical School professors funded by the US Justice Department found that the connection between violent videogame play and violent videogame players "may be more tenuous than previously thought," the Harvard Crimson reports. The study resulted in a new book by Profs. Cheryl Olson and Lawrence Kutner, Grand Theft Childhood, which says "videogames do not affect all children equally." The Crimson adds that "Olson said that gaming - including playing 'M'-rated games - is such a widespread teenage phenomenon that it should not be considered abnormal." What is abnormal, the authors suggest, is excessive videogame play. They advise a balance of gaming and other activities. A thoughtful post about Kutner and Olson's research in the OpenEducation.net blog suggests that parents play with their kids as "a great way to keep the conversation going and help you navigate the game. Parents may initially find the skills and dexterity very challenging but abandonment is not the answer." Why? Well, for one thing, the study cites the view of Michael Jellinek, M.D., professor of pediatrics and psychiatry at Harvard Medical School and chief of child and adolescent psychiatry at Massachusetts General Hospital, "that a parent’s awkwardness 'can be used to your advantage when it comes to strengthening relationships with your children'.” Here's the Chicago Tribune's meaty coverage of the swirl around GTA IV's release, Chicago-style.

Chat, Webcams used to trick teen girls

A Canadian man could get a life sentence for allegedly tricking or coercing at least 12 teenaged girls, one as young as 14, to pose nude for him in front of a Webcam, The Register reports. Daniel Lesiewicz, 27, of the Montreal area, "was arrested in March and charged with possession and production of child pornography, uttering threats and extortion." The Quebec police have since added further charges, "including multiple counts of luring a child, and unauthorized use of a computer." He reportedly created a profile of a fictional girl and used it to befriend other girls in chat rooms and persuade them to pose nude in front of Webcams on their computers. Once he had screen shots of those, apparently, he'd threaten the girls that he'd post them online if they didn't provide more. Further confirmation that warning bells should go off wherever Webcams and chatrooms, separately or together, are used by minors. On the former, maybe wait till they go off to college and hope they're used only for seeing and talking with family and offline friends. Many new computers have built in Webcams, so parents might consider disabling them. Also key, though, is teens' developing critical thinking, which will protect them better than any technological filter or "parental control," neither of which can possibly follow them around online or off. To help them develop that mental filter, talk about how people online aren't always who they say they are. A couple of other discussion aids might be "How social influencing works" and "How to recognize grooming."

Young teachers: *Not* thinking about privacy

In that last item I linked to a National Public Radio report about how more thought is going into online privacy on the part of teen and 20-something social networkers (see just below). The story didn't say they were being more private but that they were considering their options a lot more (though 66% of teen social networkers do use privacy controls, Pew/Internet has found - see this). Well, this story in the Washington Post detailing some of the more raunchy content on some young school teachers' social-networking profiles conflicts with NPR's. What surprised me most was just how unthinking the Post's 22-something sources were about how public their intimate photos and sarcastic comments were. It's kind of today's version of "not reading the directions" - so many thought only their friends could see a profile that was actually open to and searchable by "the more than 525,000 members of the Washington, D.C., network. Anyone can join any geographic network." What they also need to know comes from a lawyer with National Teachers Association (teachers' union). The Post cites him as saying that "if teachers claim free speech protection under the First Amendment ... the US Supreme Court recently ruled that governments can fire employees if their speech harmed the workplace's mission and function."

Teen social networkers: Thinking about privacy

For a good reality check on teens' privacy online and how they handle it, don't miss this report by National Public Radio's Laura Sydell. Parents may not be comfortable with what kids put online, but at least they can take comfort that most teens who use social sites take advantage of privacy controls and the young people Sydell spoke with are really thinking about the issue, not just blithely putting stuff out there. As they should be, and this is why parents need to continue encourage their kids to think critically in this way: Privacy conditions are constantly changing on them, with that gray area between ethical and unethical use of their information growing (see ArsTechnica). An example from Slashdot: "Because Facebook allows users to 'tag' photos with the names of friends, it is possible for third-party apps to distribute photos that a user might only want to be seen by their inner circle of friends."

Teen social networkers: Thinking about privacy

For a good reality check on teens' privacy online and how they handle it, don't miss this report by National Public Radio's Laura Sydell. Parents may not be comfortable with what kids put online, but at least they can take comfort that most teens who use social sites take advantage of privacy controls and the young people Sydell spoke with are really thinking about the issue, not just blithely putting stuff out there. As they should be, and this is why parents need to continue encourage their kids to think critically in this way: Privacy conditions are constantly changing on them, with that gray area between ethical and unethical use of their information growing (see ArsTechnica). An example from Slashdot: "Because Facebook allows users to 'tag' photos with the names of friends, it is possible for third-party apps to distribute photos that a user might only want to be seen by their inner circle of friends."