A new report from the prestigious Crimes Against Children Research Center (CACRC) at theUniversity of New Hampshire should put to rest the notion that America’s children are routinely sending around naked pictures of themselves.

Yes, it happens, but it’s a lot less prevalent than many people claim. A nationally representative sample of 1,560 10 to 17 year-olds found that only 1.3% had sent or created an image of themselves that showed breasts, genitals or “someone’s bottom.” A somewhat higher number (2.5%) sent images where they were either nude, partially nude or in a sexy pose, even if fully clothed.

A 2009 study from the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy had reported that 20% of teens had engaged in sexting but this study included 18 and 19 year-old adults. A more credible 2009 study from the Pew Internet & American Life Project found put the number at 4%, but they surveyed 12 to 17 year-olds which eliminated the very low-risk 10 and 11 year old population.

The CACRC study also found that older teens are far more likely to send a sext than younger kids. More than seven in 10 (72%) of the kids who had sent nude or partially nude images were 16 or 17.

About 7% of youth had received a nude or nearly nude image in the past year, but a single image could be sent to multiple kids.

Typology of sexting

The same researchers also published a separate study of law enforcement agencies which found that two thirds (67%) of the nearly 3,500 cases investigated by law enforcement “ involved an ‘aggravating’ circumstance beyond the creation and/or dissemination of a sexual image.”  A third of the cases (33%) were categorized as “experimental,” meaning that adults weren’t involved and there was no evidence of “intent to harm or reckless misuse.”  These images, according to the report, “appear to grow out of typical adolescent impulses to flirt, find romantic partners, experiment with sex and get attention from peers.”  The researchers concluded that “what has come to be called sexting, is a diverse phenomenon,” ranging from “serious criminal dynamics” to “experimental romantic and sexual attention seeking among adolescents.” While sexting may be new, that general type of behavior, I might add, has been going on since the beginning of recorded history.

Reassuring

The study’s lead author, Dr. Kimberly Mitchell called the results “reassuring.”  She added, “as a parent I think it’s good news that this is not as widespread as we have been led to believe.  There is this tenancy especially when it comes to kids and technology to be very alarmed with the newest thing that’s out there.”

Let’s give credit to cops as well as kids

Just as some people have panicked over kids who sext, others have focused on some well publicized cases where police and prosecutors over-reacted by charging kids with production, distribution or possession of child pornography, which can result in a prison sentence and being listed on a sex offender registry, perhaps for life.  But the good news is that just as most kids are pretty sensible, so are most police agencies and prosecutors.

Sixty two percent of the cases involving adults resulted in an arrest as did 36% of the youth-only aggravated cases.  But arrests were made in only 18% of the experimental cases. That’s still a risk factor and one reason why, in our “Tips to Prevent Sexting,  ConnectSafely.org advises parents to “consider that, while intending to protect your child, you could incriminate another – and possibly your own child. I serve as co-director of ConnectSafely.

The survey found that 21% of the kids who appeared in or created these images “reported feeling very or extremely upset,” but to put that in perspective, that’s 21% of 2.5% of all kids which comes to about 1 in every 200 kids. About 25% of the kids who received images were embarrassed or upset.

Podcast interview with Dr. Kimberly Mitchell

You can read more and listen to the entire 20 minute interview with Dr. Mitchell at my CNET News blog.

This post also appears on Forbes.com

Attention parents: Are  you craving a new PC or cell phone? Well, if you’re like a quarter of your fellow parents, you can just buy yourself a new one and give the old one to your kids.  That’s what PBS KIDS found out from a survey of parents of 2 to 10 year-olds.

Of those devices handed down, 54% are computers and 38% mobile devices.

Read More

by Larry Magid

The Federal Trade Commission and Facebook have reached a settlement on charges that Facebook deceived consumers “by telling them they could keep their information on Facebook private, and then repeatedly allowing it to be shared and made public.”

The settlement will require that Facebook must:

• Not make misrepresentations about the privacy or security of consumers’ personal information
• Obtain consumers’ affirmative express consent before enacting changes that override their privacy preferences
• Prevent anyone from accessing a user’s material no more than 30 days after the user has deleted his or her account
• Establish and maintain a comprehensive privacy program designed to address privacy risks associated with the development and management of new and existing products and services, and to protect the privacy and confidentiality of consumers’ information
• Every two years after that for the next 20 years, obtain independent, third-party audits certifying that it has a privacy program in place that meets or exceeds the requirements of the FTC order.

The FTC alleged that Facebook:

• Changed its website so certain information that users may have designated as private – such as their Friends List – was made public. They didn’t warn users that this change was coming, or get their approval in advance.
• Represented that third-party apps that users’ installed would have access only to user information that they needed to operate. In fact, the apps could access nearly all of users’ personal data – data the apps didn’t need.
• Told users they could restrict sharing of data to limited audiences – for example with “Friends Only.” In fact, selecting “Friends Only” did not prevent their information from being shared with third-party applications their friends used.
• Promised users that it would not share their personal information with advertisers. It did.
• Claimed that when users deactivated or deleted their accounts, their photos and videos would be inaccessible. But Facebook allowed access to the content, even after users had deactivated or deleted their accounts.

In its 19-page complaint, the FTC pointed to numerous examples of Facebook’s claims that it never shares user data with advertisers. Yet, according to the federal agency, “Facebook has shared information about users with Platform Advertisers by identifying to them the users who clicked on their ads and to whom those ads were targeted.”

In its press release about the settlement, the FTC noted “The complaint is not a finding or ruling that the respondent has actually violated the law. A consent agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by the respondent that the law has been violated.”

Facebook’s response

In a blog post, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg didn’t respond directly to the FTC’s allegations, but admitted that “we’ve made a bunch of mistakes,” and said that he has appointed  two privacy officers to  ”further strengthen the processes that ensure that privacy control is built into our products and policies.” Zuckerberg also pointed out that the settlement with the FTC  has conditions that  similar to those established between the FTC and both Google and Twitter.

In an interview, Facebook’s spokesperson Barry Schnitt pointed out that some of the charges leveled by the FTC were incidents that were rare and inconsequential. “It is our policy and our intent not to share personal information with advertisers,” he said. When it happened it was a result of what’s called a ‘referer,’ that passes on the URL of the the page a user  is on when they click on a link. That passes on a user ID which, in theory, could be used by an advertiser to look up the name of the person. But, said Schnitt, “They would have to go to the web log and figure it out and then they would see public info from the user.  And we fixed it a year and a half ago on our own.” He said there is no evidence that any advertisers actually went and did this.”

What this should mean to consumers:

In theory, what this should mean to consumers is that they can rely on information about privacy from Facebook as being accurate and complete. It should also mean that the information will be presented clearly and in language that the average person can easily understand.

Facebook must also be very clear about information shared with third parties, including app developers and advertisers.

It further means that whatever privacy protections are in place when you sign up for Facebook will remain in place unless you specifically agree to accept the changes.

What I’m hoping this means is that Facebook can do this without further complicating its privacy policies or settings.

Users still have to be vigilant

Even assuming Facebook keeps its promises to the FTC, users will still have to be vigilant about what they post on Facebook and what they agree to share with other users and third parties, including advertisers and the thousands of Facebook app developers. This includes learning about Facebook’s default privacy settings, knowing how to change those settings if necessary and understanding it new simplified “inline privacy” tool that allows users to select the audience each time they post content. It also requires that users understand how third party apps work and what information Facebook passes on to those app developers.

Hopefully, Facebook will clarify its privacy policies and settings and better enforce them with third parties, but even if it does, there remains a strong possibility that information you share with third parties could be used to deliver targeted ads or be shared with others or that some of Facebook’s developers or partners could misuse your information.

And, as with any digital information, what’s posted online can always be copied and pasted so, regardless of what privacy settings are in place, never post anything that could get you into trouble or embarrass you now or in the future.

You can find general privacy advice in my Online Privacy Primer on SafeKids.com and in the Safety Tips and Advice section of ConnectSafely.org.

Related links:

Anne Collier’s NetFamilyNews post, Facebook’s agreement with the FTC: What it means for users

CNET News: Facebook privacy practices get FTC Shakeup

Disclosure: Larry Magid is co-director of ConnectSafely.org which receives financial support from Facebook.

by Larry Magid  (Scroll down for article — below slide show)

Privacy Primer Slideshow

• Use strong passwords, change them periodically and don’t use the same password for multiple accounts. Here is are some helpful password tips from ConnectSafely.
• Check your online credit and bank accounts frequently to look for fraudulent activity and report it immediately. In most cases you’re not liable. Check all three of your credit reports (for free) at least once a year.
• Use security software and keep it and  your operating system and applications up-to-date.
• Use the privacy tools associated with your social networks but be aware that anything can be copied and forwarded. Here are links to privacy settings on Facebook, Google+ and Twitter*
• Use encryption setting with your  WiFi wireless networks. Don’t enter highly confidential information when connected to a public network.
• Only provide personal or financial information to websites you know and trust. Never enter passwords on sites you’re not sure about, especially if you get an email asking you to do so.
• Be aware of the privacy policies of any sites or companies you deal with. The privacy policy is where companies will disclose if they sell or rent your name to others or how they may use your personal information.
• Be aware of the mobile and social networking apps you’re using. Check their privacy policy and make sure you only use apps from reputable sources.
• Know how to use your browser’s private or “ingonito” mode and how to erase the history from your browser.

And there is the issue of being followed around the web. Many websites, including ones operated by very well known companies, put little files, called cookies, on your machine for a couple of reasons. One beneficial reason is to store information such as your username and password so you don’t have to enter it the next time you visit, but they also use cookies — called tracking cookies – so that they can target ads that they think you’re likely to respond to.

How Tracking cookies often work:

• You visit a website that has an ad on it that’s placed by one of the advertising networks. The ad may appear on the site you’re visiting, but it’s actually being delivered from a server owned by the advertising network.
• The network then puts a cookie on your machine that records the ad that was shown and the site you visited.
• Then you visit another site that displays another ad from the same ad network and the cookie is updated with information about the current and current site.
• Over a period of time the network can get a pretty good idea of sites in its network that you’ve visited.

The good thing about tracking cookies is that they help give you ads you’re more likely to be interested in. If you’ve been shopping for, let’s say, sporting equipment, you’ll see a lot more sporting equipment ads which might be a good thing if you’re always on the prowl for new equipment. Also, you’re less likely to see ads for products or services that don’t interest you.

Still, it can be creepy to be followed around and, even though the major advertising networks claim they don’t use this information to personally identify you, the fact is that the data is being stored and could, at least in theory, be used to identify you.

Removing or opting out of tracking cookies

Many security products can be used to remove tracking cookies and the major browsers also have tools to remove them.

DoubleClick, which is owned by Google, offers instructions on how to opt out of cookies. Here are instructions for deleting stored cookies in Microsoft Internet Explorer,   Mozilla Firefox and  Google Chrome.

All the browser companies have agreed to include a “do not track” feature in future browsers, but tracking will be the default setting unless you change it.  Mozilla Firefox, the first to implement this feature, has posted instructions on how to use it.

Location sharing

Your cell phone knows almost exactly where you are via its GPS antenna and its ability to recognize nearby WiFi hotspots. And, an  increasing number of mobile phone apps are “location-aware,” which means that they are capable of tracking your location. Be sure to only use location-aware apps that you trust and be very careful how you configure them. Some apps are designed to share you location with friends or via social networks or Twitter. Use them carefully and only share your location with people you trust. Review your settings occasionally to make sure you’re still comfortable with the people you’re sharing your location with and be careful before you use your phone to “check-in” to a location.

Don’t overlook the “obvious”

There are certain privacy traps that are so low-tech that we’re likely to forget about them. These include:

• Watch what you say on your phone while you’re in public — people around you might be listening
• Be aware of others viewing your screen. It doesn’t take a hack to know what you’re typing or reading if someone is behind you or near you. If you do look at your create condidential documents, consider getting a privacy screen for your laptop.
• And, for the ultimate in low-tech privacy protection, shred your old financial records and other confidential documents before throwing them in the trash or recycling bin.

*Note about Twitter “privacy“: Although it’s possible to configure your Twitter account so that you have to approve anyone who follows you, that’s not how the service usually works. Think of Twitter as a public forum where everything you post can be seen by anyone.

Parents looking for information about video game suitability for their kids have a new tool from the Entertainment Software Ratings Board (ESRB.org).

The ESRB Search App lets you use you speak the name of the game or take a picture of its cover and provides you with the game’s rating plus a description.

In her NetFamilyNews blog, my ConnectSafely.org co-director Anne Collier suggests that parents “get details from the game-rating source on the spot, pretending you got a text message (feigning disinterest so s/he’ll be surprised later).”

Listen to Larry Magid’s 1-minute CBS News Tech Talk segment about the app

Video description of ESRB Search App

There has been a great deal written and said lately about bullying among children and teens. Some claim there’s an epidemic of bullying.

As it turns out, there is no evidence of any increase in bullying. If anything there seems to be a slight decrease over the past few years. Still, it remains a problem at least among a small percentage of kids.

But you don’t have to be young to be a bully. Adults can be culprits as well.

Take the recent case of University of California, Davis police dowsing students with pepper spray even though the students were sitting down in a peaceful protest as part of the “Occupy” movement.  The students — some of whom were teenagers — were in no way threatening the armed police. They weren’t even resisting arrest. But, as the video below shows, they were brutally attacked in what could be called police brutality but could also be called bullying.

And, then there’s the treatment that First Lady Micehlle Obama and Second Lady Dr. Jill Biden recieved when they appeard as grand marshalls at a Nascar race in Miami on Sunday and were booed by several members of the crowd.  I understand that not everyone supports the Obama administration, but booing the wives of the President and Vice President is not just rude, it’s mean and it sends the wrong message to our children.

If we are to expect our children to be upstanding citizens, we have to do more than just preach to them. We have to be good role models as well.  And that includes politicians who are running for office. It’s fine to challenge your opponents ideas,  policies and credentials for office, but not acceptable to demean, ridicule or lie about them for political gain.

Bustin Jieber app from 12-year-old programmer (Credit Thomas Suarez via Apple App Store)

In January I wondered outloud if the iPad will make us less creative.  I pointed out that there was a time when schools taught kids how to program computers but lamented that the vast majority of today’s kids are only learning to use tech devices rather than program them.

I still have this concern but after watching a Ted Talk by 12 year-old Thomas Suarez, I’m a bit more optimistic.

At the October 22 TED conference in Manhattan Beach, California, Suarez talked about a couple of iOS apps that he’s written including one called Bustin Jieber, which has become a popular wack-o-mole game for kids who are less than enthusiastic about the popular star.  He also suggested that schools need to be teaching kids not just to use technology but to help create it.

He pointed out that kids who want to learn soccer can find a team and those who want to play violin can easily find a teacher, but “not many kids know where to go to find out how to make a program.” Suarez, who already had programming experience, got his hands on Apple’s iPhone software development kit and started programming.  To get his first app published he had to persuade his parents to pay the $99 to put the app on the app store.

The video is only 4 minutes long and well worth watching.

by Larry Magid

Teachers need to think about how technology affects their relationships with students (Credit: Symantec)

A study from Symantec found that 21% of teachers had either been cyberbaited or knew a teacher who had.

Cyberbaiting, according to Symantec’s Internet safety advocate, Marian Merritt, is when students deliberately provoke a teacher into doing something stupid, then video it and post it online.  ”This of course has the net effect of embarrassing the teacher, taking a momentary lapse of judgement in a classroom and embedding it onto the web.”

As per that 21%, remember it includes teachers who know someone it happened to. Only 4% said it happened to them. Still, it’s one more thing for teachers to think about.

The study — which included interviews from kids and parents in 24 countries including the United States — also found that 62% of kids reported that they have had a negative experience online.  It also found that 95% of parents know what their kids are looking at online.

Visit my CNET Blog for a more complete report on the study and a podcast interview with Marian Merritt.

Listen to 1 minute segment

One 1-minute CBS News/CNET Tech Talk segment which includes a sound bite from Marian Merritt.

This post first appeared in the San Jose Mercury News

by Larry Magid

A study released last week by the Pew Internet & American Life Project had what might be surprising news about online teens. They actually listen to parental advice.

The big take-away from the report, “Teens, Kindness and Cruelty on Social Network Sites” was that 69 percent of American teens who use social media say people their age “are mostly kind to one another on social network sites.” Deeper into the report, you’ll find that 86 percent of teens report getting advice from a parent, and 70 percent say they’ve received online safety advice from a teacher or “another adult at school. Almost half the teens say they’ve received advice from siblings and relatives and about 54 percent say they’ve gotten it from television, radio, newspapers or magazines.

The study, which interviewed 799 teens and their parents earlier this year, was sponsored by the Family Online Safety Institute and Cable in the Classroom.

Despite the fact that nearly all of the teens surveyed were wired into social media and mobile devices, just over a third said they have gotten safety advice from websites and only 21 percent from Internet and mobile phone service providers. Four out of six kids had received advice from other adults, such as youth leaders, clergy and coaches.

It was also heartening to read that younger teens are more likely to receive advice from older siblings, along with other relatives and librarians and that “for teens of all ages nd genders, parents are the most commonly mentioned source for advice about online safety.”

The survey didn’t ask whether this advice was sought out, appreciated or effective. But it did probe into whether kids looked for advice after witnessing meanness or online cruelty. More than a third who have seen others be mean or cruel on a social network site said they looked for advice on what to do. More than half the girls looked for advice compared to 20 percent of boys.

Teens who have been bullied themselves were even more likely to seek out help. Of this group, 56 percent reached out for advice compared to the 30 percent of teens who had not been bullied.

It’s encouraging to note that 92 percent of the teens who asked for advice on how to handle online cruelty said the advice was helpful.

Nearly six in 10 said parents have the greatest influence. The study found some differences based on income and ethnicity, but what I found most telling is that parents who are themselves Internet users are more likely to serve as a teen’s biggest influence. That certainly confirms advice that I’ve been giving for years — that parents need to go online and learn firsthand about the types of media their kids use.

This research tracks with other studies about parental influence. Several studies have shown that kids, including teenagers, do listen to what their parents say and pay attention to what their parents do. Even college students, according to a 2008 study published in the Journal of Youth and Adolescence, are influenced by parental involvement.

But in order to be effective, advice from parents or any other adults also has to be accurate and actionable. Michigan State professor Kim Witte’s Extended Parallel Process Model is mostly designed to measure how people respond to fear messages, but it can also be applied to other forms of advice. What she found is that effectiveness of messaging depends on the “assessment of the threat and their perceived efficacy.” In other words, people tend to ignore warnings that don’t resonate with their perception of reality and they won’t take advice that doesn’t lead to actions likely to have an impact.

Much of this research is based on behavioral issues like smoking cessation, but it can also apply to online behavior. Giving advice that makes little sense to kids is likely to go nowhere. For example, much of the advice designed to keep kids out of the hands of Internet predators was largely ignored because the kids’ own experience correctly belied the perceived threats.

A few years ago, the media was filled with stories about teens being harmed by online strangers, even though research and the actual experience of the vast majority of teens failed to back up those fears. There is also widespread belief that putting personal information or even photos online can lead to danger, but millions of kids do that everyday and never hear about cases of kids they know having been harmed as a result.

While bullying can be extremely hurtful, 85 percent of teens questioned in this Pew study say that no one has been mean or cruel to them online in the past 12 months, and most don’t bully others. And despite some media reports of widespread “sexting,” only 2 percent of teens say they have ever sent a nude or sexually suggestive picture or video of themselves to others.

Presentation for Mediterranean Association of International Schools