We really need more articles like this one, don’t we?
“Within schools, social networking sites like MySpace put schools at risk from the legal liabilities of kids posting threatening or defamatory information about their classmates or their teachers,” said Paul Henry, vice president, Strategic Accounts for Secure Computing. “These networking sites have allowed kids to take threatening behavior to the next level — basically allowing kids to become cyberbullies from the comfort of their own home or from a computer in the school lab.”
But wait! There actually is some good news! Look at this column by Roy Mark on Internet.com. Seems things might not be as bad as the election year politicians and for profit businesses are making it out to be. A new Harris poll shows 80% of parents actually monitor their kids’ use of the Internet, even though a minority don’t feel fully up to the task. And over half of parents think Congress should keep out of the issue.
Even better, look at this:
And now for the second report out this week: The number of youths sexually solicited online is actually declining.
Moreover, most solicitation incidents — almost 80 percent — happen on home computers. And fewer than 10 percent happen on a school or library computer.
Funded by the federal government and researched and written by the University of New Hampshire’s Crimes Against Children Research Center, the Online Victimization of Children report states that in 2001, 19percent of children reported unwanted sexual solicitations over the Internet.
Five years later, the number fell to 13 percent.
“Despite the decline in the proportion of youth who received solicitations, however, the number of youth receiving the most dangerous sexual overtures, aggressive solicitations that move, or threaten to move, beyond the Internet into real life, has not declined,” the report states.
Nor has it increased over five years, suggesting the problem is being badly blown out of proportion by vote-hungry lawmakers.
I’m still amazed at how little coverage this has gotten. Still nothing in the major papers about DOPA, and it’s literally on no one’s radar. Oy.
technorati tags:DOPA, education, social, MySpace, fear, politics
The thing that is most problematic about the statements by Paul Henry, vice president, Strategic Accounts for Secure Computing is his use of the word kids as a broad generalization. His statement sounds as if all “kids” are engaging in bad behavior on-line. Read his statements again and instead of the word, “kids” insert any minority group. Sounds much more inflammatory, doesn’t it? The way our students are using the internet is as diverse as they are and broad generalizations about students are never accurate. Will some students make mistakes? Yep. Will others make good choices? Yep, just like every other day in school.
To the best of your knowledge has anyone tried to contact the news orginazations that have been doing the negative pieces on social networks and proposed to them a different point of view? You are an experienced spokesperson on the subject … the worst that can happen is that they don’t take you (or whomever) up on it. I have a feeling though they would want examples of students using MySpace and the like in educationally meaningful ways, and to be able to interview kids and maybe their parents about this – I personally don’t have examples I can draw from here – you have (as do a few others) more knowledge and access to where these examples might be. Just a thought, and maybe you and others have already tried to no avail.
Brian
I hadn’t heard of DOPA until I read your feed this afternoon, and I must say this is a very unsettling development. How is that such a very real threat to the first amendment has had no coverage? In your experience, what does it take to bring something like this to the public’s attention? Or, is it more likely that it will just quietly pass in the senate and no one will care?
The guy from Secure Computing sounds like he is trying to use scare tactics to sell his product. I remember getting some very similar phone calls about the security of our network during the Y2K scare. It’s easy to exploit fears for profit, especially if the topic is misunderstood.
A bit off topic but….
There is danger out there in cyberspace but parents have a defence EDUCATION. Other parents are shocked that I let my five year old help me blog. How else is she going to learn? I agree with Tom “It’s easy to exploit fears for profit, especially if the topic is misunderstood.”
Blows my mind that some parents are just as scared to talk about the internet as they are about sex.
It isn’t going away and “Kids” are going to do it!
DOPA is under most folks’ radar. Only the edubloggers (and a few of their friends) knew about it at BlogHer2006. It came up too late in the process to be a panel presentation, and it is too complicated an issue to be put into a 10-second sound bit (dang those clever Republicans, framing the issue just right).
The Mercury News did publish an editorial against it. So did Larry Magid for CBS. Both can be read here.
I forgot to say, twenty years ago I was working at the Hoover Institution and got to see their editorial placement program up close. What they’d did was to garner hundreds (if not thousands) of contacts at small-town newspapers across the country. Every week, a different Hoover scholar would write an op-ed piece on a different topic (obviously with a conservative slant). The op-ed would be photocopied and mailed off.
The hit rate wasn’t 100%, but it was pretty danged high.
Now how is this relevant?
Many small towns have a small weekly newspaper. Maybe you could write an editorial against DOPA, and your faithful readers could mail it to THEIR local newspaper with a cover note explaining how this is important to THEM.
WHERE IS THE PRIMARY SOURCE?! This is the Blogosphere. It is the perfect place to rather than rely on the two layers of watered down analysis, to post a link to the actual study (which I have on my blog), and then bring a new layer of comments that are closer to the primary source than to this Ditto-head-esque cursory commenting. We want students to use primary sources since they have the Internet at their disposal, but instead there is a lot of shooting from the hip and numbers with no support being tossed around. I have the report. It isn’t that long. Want to know something interesting? The family makeup of this report is way off from the national average in terms of marital status. 76% of families surveyed reported being married, while only 11% reported being divorced or seperated. Not only that, but 33% of those surveyed made more than $75,000 of household income. Shooting from the hip here, but these sound like a LOT of stable families that are skewed from the “norm” of the rest of America. According to the US Census however, roughly 24% of Americans make over 75K. Look at the number of college grads and post grads in the study! 55% of those surveyed, while the national averages found in different areas of the country barely break 30% of the population… “The Northeast had the highest proportion of college graduates (30.9 percent), followed by the West (30.2 percent), the Midwest (26.0 percent) and the South (25.5 percent).”
Please, before clinging to a survey, read the actual survey for some critical analysis. I am not saying poo-poo this survey, but I am saying let’s not blare the trumpets just yet either.