Display:
Report Finds Online Threats to Children Overblown - NYTimes.com

The Internet may not be such a dangerous place for children after all.

A task force created by 49 state attorneys general to look into the problem of sexual solicitation of children online has concluded that there really is not a significant problem.

The findings ran counter to popular perceptions of online dangers as reinforced by depictions in the news media like NBC's "To Catch a Predator" series. One attorney general was quick to criticize the group's report.

The panel, the Internet Safety Technical Task Force, was charged with examining the extent of the threats children face on social networks like MySpace and Facebook, amid widespread fears that adults were using these popular Web sites to deceive and prey on children.

But the report concluded that the problem of bullying among children, both online and offline, poses a far more serious challenge than the sexual solicitation of minors by adults.



The fact is that what we're experiencing right now is a top-down disaster. -Paul Krugman
by dvx (dvx.clt ät gmail dotcom) on Wed Jan 14th, 2009 at 04:27:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Almost all sexual abuse happens within the family or local community.

Everything else is pretty much a distraction, but it's much more fun for the media to harp on about, so that's what gets coverage: evil stalkers are much better TV. Much better politics too.

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Wed Jan 14th, 2009 at 04:34:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]
True.

For me, "Internet child molesters" is a subset of the US "stranger danger" obsession: the fear that nameless "others" are lurking out there just waiting to rape, pillage and kill you or your family. This mindset drives a whole lot weird behavior, most notably the cult of the firearm.

As you say, the fact that we all are much more likely to be victimized by someone we know is assiduously ignored.

The fact is that what we're experiencing right now is a top-down disaster. -Paul Krugman

by dvx (dvx.clt ät gmail dotcom) on Wed Jan 14th, 2009 at 04:43:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It seems to extend further than "stranger danger" as well. I have for example seen many articles published in Swedish newspapers urging parents to be careful about posting pictures of their children. Even pictures that may seem so innocent and cute. Because, you see, some perverted paedophile out there might be getting himself off looking at those pictures. Now, would this pose a greater risk to the child? I have never heard of a case where a family's online photo album was used to track down a child, abduct it and abuse it. And it is not even suggested that this could happen. Rather, it is simply assumed that we should indulge in parental horror that someone out there might masturbate to the picture of your beloved child, and that this on its own is somehow a violation, though the impact on the child is of course zero. I.e. heavy on the 'ick' factor with not much else behind it.
by someone (s0me1smail(a)gmail(d)com) on Wed Jan 14th, 2009 at 05:35:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]
UK schools don't allow photography or video at school events just in case someone posts the content on YouTube, where - of course - evil perverts can masturbate furiously over it. Because evil perverts won't be trying to download and swap the hard stuff from their favourite porn rings.

Considering there have been a number of recent child porn cases involving head teachers and other authority figures, it's possible this may be missing the real dangers.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Wed Jan 14th, 2009 at 06:51:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Brass Eye: highlights of the show | Media | MediaGuardian

A stream of celebrities and politicians were persuaded to rail against an internet game featuring a cartoon dog supposedly used by paedophiles to attract children.

For those who missed the programme, here are the highlights:

* Barbara Follett, Labour MP: "Pantou the dog - a child's game on the internet, but look again. An online paedophile has converted that eye to be a webcam to look at the children playing."

* Nick Owen, ITN news reporter: "Sometimes the child can glimpse the paedophile in that kennel, bouncing around and waving."

* Phillipa Forrester, broadcaster, holds up a T-shirt printed with a small body so that it looks like her head sits on the tiny body: "Wearing a T-shirt like this the paedophile can disguise himself as a child."

* Barbara Follett: "So the child thinks it's playing with another child."

* Kate Thornton, broadcaster and journalist, holding up a board with the initials HOECS written on it: "It's called a HOECS game - a Hidden Online Entrapment Control System."

* Nick Owen: "Singapore police have sent us these pictures. This man has plugged his groin into his computer to get sexual pleasure from the actions of a child playing with Pantou."

* Richard Blackwood, comedian: "So every time you kids tickle Pantou, the paedophile gets his rocks off. And it doesn't stop there."

* Barbara Follett: "In this shot, Pantou the dog has told the boy to press this face on to the screen. Online paedophiles use special gloves to fell and pulpate the child's face."

* Phillipa Forrester: "In fact, with gloves like these, the manipulator can molest any part of the child's body placed against the screen."

* Kate Thornton: "We have footage, too alarming to show you, of a little boy being interfered with by a penis-shaped soundwave generated by an online paedophile."

The TV show (Brass Eye) was running a spoof, but the guests' reactions were sincere. Showing how hysterical the fear of Internet can be. (From 2001)

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Wed Jan 14th, 2009 at 04:44:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series