SafeKids.com

Like a lot of young girls, singer/songwriter Rachel Crow knows what it’s like to be bullied, having been called “weirdo” and “freak, according to an interview on the AOL Music Blog.   The 14 year-old former X Factor contestant wrote and recorded Mean Girls as the lead song of a five song EP .  You’ll find the lyrics below the music video.

Lyrics

Do you ever go to lunch with no one by your side
Cause the moment you arrive they leave the table
Calling me everything but my name
Need I remind you again just call me Rachel
How would you feel if you running home crying
Lock yourself in your room, don’t want anyone to see ya
While everyone’s having fun outside, and you’re telling yourself

I won’t let it get to me no more
I don’t wanna feel this way
I can’t believe I let it go so far
No no, it’s not okay
What do you know about me?
Do you wanna know what I think?
Mean girls, mean girls
I’m a just comb you outta my curls
Mean girls, mean girls
You no longer run my world
Mean girls, mean girls
I’m a just comb you outta my curls

How would you feel every time you go to school
Someone’s looking at you weird calling you a loser
All these girls wearing bubble-gum pink
Guess I didn’t get the memo
Cause they’re laughing at my blue shirt
Well I hope you feeling good about you treating someone you know like a perfect stranger
Cause it’s easier than standing by my side

I won’t let it get to me no more
I don’t wanna feel this way
I can’t believe I let it go so far
No no, it’s not okay
What do you know about me?
Do you wanna know what I think?
Mean girls, mean girls
I’m a just comb you outta my curls
Mean girls, mean girls
You no longer run my world

Who do you think you are
Loud mouth, cafeteria star
Maybe somebody was cruel to you
So you think that’s what you’re supposed to do
One day, it might be you
When you need a friend, but you no longer cool
When everyone leaves when you walk in the room
I just hope they forgive you

I won’t let it get to me no more
I don’t wanna feel this way
I can’t believe I let it go so far
No no, it’s not okay
What do you know about me?
Do you wanna know what I think?
Mean girls, mean girls
I’m a just comb you outta my curls
Mean girls, mean girls
You no longer run my world
Mean girls, mean girls
I’m a just comb you outta my curls

Mean girls, mean girls
You no longer run my world

by Larry Magid

Common Sense Media just published a report that paints a mostly positive picture of social media’s impact on teens’ social and emotional well-being. Social Media, Social Life: How Teens View Their Digital Lives (PDF) points out that “Many more teens report a positive impact of social media use on their emotional well-being than a negative one,” and pretty much debunks the myth about “Facebook depression” with the conclusion that “Very few teens think that using their social network site makes them more depressed.”

Among the 75% of 13- to 17-year-olds with a social
networking profile, percent who say social networking
makes them feel more or less: (Source: Common Sense Media)

Not surprisingly the report found that 90% of teens have used social networking and that 75% currently have a social networking profile. More than two-third of kids (68%) are on Facebook, compared to 6% for Twitter and 1% for GooglePlus and MySpace. More than a third (34%) visit their favorite social networking site “several times a day” and 23% are “heavy” social media users.

The report is based on an online survey of 1,030 13-to 17 year-olds conducted between February and March of this year.

Social-emotional well-being

The study found that teens are much more likely to say that social media has a positive impact than a negative one on social-emotional well-being. About three in 10 (29%) say that social networking makes them feel “less shy” and “more outgoing” while 20% say it makes them feel more confident. About the same number (19%) say they feel more popular and 19% also say they’re more sympathetic to others.  The positives far outweigh the negatives with only 5% saying that social networking makes them feel less outgoing while “4% feel worse about themselves, less confident, and less popular after using their social networking site; and 3% feel shyer,” according to the report.

The report concluded “Among all teen social network users, only 5% say using their social networking site makes them feel more depressed, compared to 10% who say it makes them feel  less depressed.

Though use of social networking seems to help a lot more kids than it hurts, when it comes to social-emotional well-being, most kids (83%) say that social networking doesn’t make much of a difference to whether or not they feel depressed or better or worse about themselves (81%).

Sharp contrast to the naysayers

The report stands in sharp contrast to some naysayers who worry that Facebook might cause social and emotional distress, depression or social isolation. In  fact, more than half (52%) said that “social media users say using such media has mainly helped their relationships with friends, compared to just 4% who say social media use has mainly hurt their relationships.”

And, despite what some pundits have written, social media hasn’t diminished teens’ desire to maintain face-to-face relationships. Just under half (49%) of teens said that their favorite way to communicate with their friends is in person, followed by texting (33%) with social networking (7%) just slightly ahead of talking on the phone (4%). Still, there are some kids (43%) who agreed that they sometimes wish they could “unplug.”  The survey reported that “Most teens feel that, on balance, using social media has  helped rather than hurt their relationships. About half of all teens (54%) say social networking has helped them feel more connected with family and friends (2% say it’s made them feel less connected, and the rest say it hasn’t made much difference one way or the other).”

(Source; Common Sense Media)

Dark spots

There were some findings that raise the caution flag. For example, 44% of teens say that “they often or sometimes encounter sexist (44%), homophobic (43%) or racist (43%) comments online and 24% they they “often” encounter some type of derogatory speech.  But it’s important to put this in context. Just because someone finds negative speech online doesn’t mean that most or even a substantial portion of people are posting it. A single negative post could be seen by a great number of people. Besides, there is no evidence from this survey that online use encourages negative speech, it simply reflects it as it reflects all good and bad aspects of life.

Surprising results for ‘less happy teens‘

The study broke down responses between the roughly 90% of teens who are “in good emotional shape” and the 10% who fell into the category of “less happy teens.” Among those teens who are “less happy,” 50% report that social networking makes them more outgoing compared to 17% of the “happiest teens.”  Less happy teens are also more likely to feel more popular (34% vs 15%), less shy (49% vs.21%) but at the same time  these less happy teens are also more likely to report negative feelings such as “worse about myself (15% vs. 1%) and more depressed (18% vs. <.5%). These same less happy teens also wish their parents would spend less time on their and other devices (42% vs 17% of happier teens).

One size doesn’t fit all

The survey doesn’t attempt to explain why less happy teens have both positive and negative emotional reactions that differ from happier ones but it does reinforce the fact that how people respond to social media is very individual and personal which makes it very hard to generalize and even harder come up with a “one-size-fits-all” type of explanation or solution for any perceived problems.

The report illustrates that social media, while mostly positive, can have some negative impacts on some people, but that’s true for anything in life including watching movies, reading books, eating certain foods, playing sports or even going to school. We live in an increasingly complex world were generalizations and sound bites — while increasingly common — are increasingly irrelevant. That’s why it’s so important for parents as well as teachers and others who look after kids to consider the needs of each child individually. While it’s reassuring to know that the vast majority of kids are doing really well on social media, it’s also important that  we take extra time to support those kids who may be struggling.

(Disclosure: I’m co-director of ConnectSafely.org, a non-profit Internet safety organization that receives some of its funding from Facebook).

by Larry Magid

The conviction of former Penn State assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky on 45 counts of sexual abuse of children has, once again, put child sex abuse on the front page.

Like the vast majority of child sex abuse cases, Sandusky’s crimes took place in the physical world — they were not Internet related.  And, while parents do need to remind children about the potential dangers of talking about sex with strangers online, the fact is that in most cases, the victims and perpetrator have met each other prior to the start of the abuses.  Like Sandusky — it’s not uncommon for the abuser to be someone in a position of trust and authority.  That’s one of the reasons why child safety experts educate children not so much about dangerous types of people, but dangerous types of behavior.

The National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (NCMEC) has numerous online resources for parents including a Child Safety FAQ that advises parents to educate children to “Say no if someone tries to touch you, or treats you in a way that makes you feel sad, scared, or confused” and to “get out of the situation as quickly as possible.” Kids are also advised to “tell a parent, guardian, or trusted adult if you feel sad, scared, or confused.”

“Stranger Danger” is a myth

NCMEC also reminds parents that “stranger danger” is largely a myth: “In the majority of cases the perpetrator is someone the parents or child knows, and that person may be in a position of trust or responsibility to the child and family.”  The organization suggests that “It is much more beneficial to children to help them build the confidence and self-esteem they need to stay as safe as possible in any potentially dangerous situation they encounter rather than teaching them to be ‘on the look out’ for a particular type of person.” (I serve as an unpaid member of NCMEC’s board of directors).

Warning signs

Stop It Now! has a web page with warning signs of possible sexual abuse in children and adolescents and although one sign doesn’t necessarily mean that a child is sexually abused, “ the presence of several suggests that you begin asking questions and consider seeking help.”

Some of the warning signs, says the organization include unexplained nightmares or other sleep problems,  a child who is distracted or distant at odd times and a child with changes in eating habits. The organiation also warns parents and caregivers to watch out for “sudden mood swings: rage, fear, insecurity or withdrawal” or if a child ‘develops new or unusual fear of certain people or places.”

For Internet related safety advice, see ConnectSafely.org, where I serve as co-director, or my other site, SafeKids.com.

by Larry Magid
This article appeared in the San Jose Mercury News

When you go to download Skout on an iPhone, the tagline is “flirt, friend, chat,” and you’re invited to “join the fastest growing FREE social scene with millions of guys and girls waiting to meet you!” Skout’s iPhone icon is a heart. And, thanks to the phone’s location awareness, you can even find people who are nearby.

There is nothing wrong with services like this as long as they’re used with appropriate safeguards, and Skout does offer safety tips for meeting people offline. But there have been three reported cases of teenage users being raped by adults — posing online as teenagers — who found them on Skout.

After the reports surfaced, the service quickly suspended its teen services and, for the time being at least, it’s only open to people over 18. In a blog post, Skout CEO Christian Wiklund wrote “Under our zero-tolerance policy, we immediately ban users for inappropriate or suspicious behavior. Also, unlike many location-based apps, Skout provides general rather than specific location information, empowering each community member to decide if, when and where to meet in person.”

But he added, ‘it’s become clear to us that these measures aren’t enough. In recent weeks, we’ve learned of several incidents involving a few bad actors trying to take advantage of some of our younger members.”

Skout was initially set up for adults only but added teens about a year ago. Wiklund wrote that “we thought long and hard about how to set up a safe network for teens,” which included efforts to separate teens from adults on the service.

That strategy hasn’t been entirely effective. Some adults have apparently lied about their age to hang out with kids and it wouldn’t surprise me if some kids lie about their age.

I don’t know a great deal about Skout, but as founder of SafeKids.com and co-director of ConnectSafely.org, I do know a few things about Internet safety. And one of them, as noted by Crimes Against Children Research Center (CRCC), is that “talking about sex online with strangers is a big risk factor for encountering problems,” as is “interacting indiscriminately with a lot of unknown people online.”

Research has also shown that adults sexually abusing children they first met online is relatively rare and that, in most cases, adults don’t lie about their age or, if they do, it’s by a few years. Although it happens, it’s rare for a 40 year-old to claim to be a 16 or 17 year old. We have also learned, from several studies, that aggressive behavior can lead to risk. When there are issues, they often arise when young people are going out of their way to engage in online sexual banter with strangers.

According to CRCC Director David Finkelhor, “even if an adult does show up at a teen site to troll for kids, the adults typically clarify their age at some point in the conversation.” Finkelhor stressed that “An important component of safety messages should be to help teens understand why it’s a bad idea to have a romantic relationship with an adult.”

It’s important to remember that Skout is designed for flirting, which is often accompanied by sexual banter. So, without knowing a lot of details of the reported cases, I can nevertheless see why there could have been problems associated with this service.

It’s not clear to me how Skout’s location-aware features may have contributed to the alleged crimes. On its website, Skout says that it “provides general rather than specific location information” which should minimize the risk of a stranger actually tracking you down. Still, as a general principal, when you combine location awareness with sexual conversation, the risk does increase.

Skout was smart to suspend services for teens, but there remains the possibility that some teens will lie about their age to join this and similar services. Finkelhor questions whether Skout should resume its offering for teens.

“If we’re going to have teen dating sites, they should be designed and managed by people who do only that and (should) be connected to functions other than just hooking up,” he said.

But it’s not entirely clear that trying to separate teens from adults is a good strategy. Kids are more often harassed by other young people and, with the exception of flirting services, there could be legitimate reasons for kids and adults to interact online around topics of common interest.

While caution is always wise, it’s important that parents not freak out, overreact or generalize what happened on Skout to other social networking services like Facebook or Twitter. According to Pew Research, about 74 percent of American teens are on Facebook, yet the number of reports of Facebook-related sexual abuse of teens and children are extremely low. But, once again, it’s time for parents to sit down with their kids and have “that talk,” not about the “birds and the bees,” but about the “bits and the bytes,” helping them understand how to safely use the Internet and mobile phones.

Nationwide, 32.8% of students had texted or e-mailed while driving a car or other vehicle on at least 1 day during the 30 days before the Centers for Disease Control conducted its 2011 Youth Risk Survey (PDF).  That percentage jumped to 43% for 11th graders and 58% for high school seniors.

In a seperate report, the CDC found:

• In 2009, more than 5,400 people died in crashes that were reported to involve a distracted driver and about 448,000 people were injured.
• Among those killed or injured in these crashes, nearly 1,000 deaths and 24,000 injured included cell phone use as the major distraction.
• The proportion of drivers reportedly distracted at the time of a fatal crash has increased from 7 percent in 2005 to 11 percent in 2009.
• When asked whether driving feels safer, less safe, or about the same as it did five years ago, more than 1 in 3 drivers say driving feels less safe today. Distracted driving—cited by 3 out of 10 of these drivers—was the single most common reason given for feeling less safe today.

There are apps for cutting back on texting while driving, but no silver bullet

The Associated Press looked at several smartphone apps designed to cut down on texting while driving and found that “The industry doesn’t have a surefire cure.”

Videos

The following “Mom Gone Wild” video is part of a series from ConnectSafely and AT&T. Others in the series are Parent Behaving Badly and It’s Legit to Quit.  All videos are designed to encourage parents to be not only safer drivers but also better role models.

Two years ago — long before there was much public discussion about Facebook admitting children under 13 — I had the opportunity to interview Mark Zuckerberg. But, before I did, I asked a group of educators, Internet safety advocates and youth risk experts to suggest questions.  Two experts suggested I ask him about whether Facebook would consider creating a safe environment for kids under 13, not because they had any vested interest in helping Facebook open a new market, but because they knew that millions of young children were already on Facebook and they wanted to see if there could be a way for Facebook to create a service that could safely serve younger children.

In the interview, Zuckerberg said “It’s something we’ve talked about a little bit, but the restriction and regulation around it make it very difficult so it’s just never been one of the top-of-the-list of things we’ve wanted to do.” (Click here for that segment or the entire interview from May 27, 2010).

More than a year later, in July 2011,  Zuckerberg told an audience at the NewSchools Venture Fund’s Summit that he would like to see kids under 13 on Facebook, because  ”my philosophy is that for education you need to start at a really, really young age.”  He said it would “be a fight we take on at some point,” but neither he nor anyone else at Facebook ever revealed specific plans to change the rule that requires people be at least 13 to get a Facebook account.

But in Monday’s edition, the Wall Street Journal reported that “Facebook is developing technology that would allow children younger than 13 to use the social-networking site under parental supervision.

 The Journal called Facebook’s move “a step that could help the company tap a new pool of users for revenue but also inflame privacy concerns” and shortly after the article went live on the web, Common Sense Media CEO James Steyer, who was quoted in the story,  issued a statement that Facebook “appears to be doing whatever it takes to identify new revenue streams and short-term corporate profits to impress spooked shareholders.” He added that “there is absolutely no proof of any meaningful social or educational value of Facebook for children under 13,” and that “there are very legitimate concerns about privacy as well as the impact on the social, emotional, and cognitive development of children.” He likened Facebook to “Big Tobacco  in appealing to young people – try to hook kids early, build your brand, and you have a customer for life.”

But the Journal also quoted Maryland Attorney General Douglas Gansler who said “We would like to see Facebook create a safe space for kids,” with “the extra protections needed to ensure a safe, healthy, and age appropriate environment.”  General Gansler echoed my own sentiments from a year ago when I argued that Facebook “should offer special privacy settings, educational tools and parental controls to assure an appropriate environment for younger children.”

What the law says

Legally, it has always been possible for Facebook to allow children under 13, but to do so it would have to comply with provisions of the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) that requires commercial sites to “obtain verifiable parental consent for the collection, use, or disclosure of personal information from children.”  But complying with COPPA is difficult and expensive.  Although some child centered sites, operated by Disney and other companies, do go through the hoops to be COPPA compliant, most social networking sites, including Facebook, simply ban anyone who’s stated date of birth indicates they’re under 13.  But because it’s based on what people enter, it’s easy to lie and there is no generally accepted way to verify the information.

Parents help kids lie about their age

Not only do millions of kids lie to get on Facebook, but most are doing so with the knowledge and help of their parents. Last May, Consumer Reports found that “of the 20 million minors who actively use Facebook,” 7.5 million were younger than 13 and more than 5 million were younger than 10.   A 2010 study by McAfee that found 37 percent of 10 to 12 year olds are on Facebook and a study (PDF) released last April from the London School of Economics’ EU Kids Online project that found that 38 percent of 9- to 12-year-old European children used social-networking sites, with one in five using Facebook, “rising to over 4 in 10 in some countries.”

Last fall, a group of researchers from Harvard, University of California, Northwestern University and Microsoft Research published a paper, Why parents help their children lie to Facebook about age: Unintended consequences of the ‘Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, that pointed out that, for kids who were under 13 at the time they signed up, 68 percent of the parents “indicated that they helped their child create the account.” Among 10-year-olds on Facebook, 95 percent of parents were aware their kids were using the service while 78 percent helped create the account.

In an interview, the study’s lead author, Dr. danah boyd, told me that parents “want their kids to have access to public life and, today, what public life means is participating even in commercial social media sites.” These parents, boyd added, “are not saying get on the sites and then walk away. These are parents who have their computers in the living room, are having conversations with their kids, they often helping them create their accounts to talk to grandma.”

FTC Chairman calls it a “complicated issue”

Even the head of the Federal Trade Commission acknowledges that parents should have a role in determining whether their kids should be on the service. FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz spoke at the Wall Street Journal’s All Things Digital Conference in Palos Verdes, California last week and, during the question and answer session, I asked him about the negative unintended consequences of COPPA, including the fact that parents are helping kids lie to get on Facebook.  He acknowledged that “sometimes the parents are actually permitting their children to go on Facebook.”  But, calling it a “complicated issue,” he added “at least they’re having a conversation with their parents and at some level the parents have to be the gate keepers of their young children’s Internet access.” He said that he doesn’t “think the obligations of COPPA are very difficult to follow” and pointed out that COPPA is currently under review by the FTC. In response to my follow up question, he said “yes it concerns me, absolutely” when I commented that  millions of children are being encouraged or condoned to lie,  often by their own parents.

Memo to Zuckerberg: Do it right

I think Facebook should allow children under 13 but, as I said last year, it has to be done carefully and thoughtfully with extra precautions. There needs to be parental involvement and control and Facebook needs to provide extra privacy protections for young children that would include more secure defaults than it has for teens and adults. There are already additional privacy protections for users under 18, but the company needs to be even more careful for younger children.  Ideally, I would like to see children under 13 have an ad-free experience and Facebook certainly must avoid collecting and storing personal information about children other than what is needed to provide them the service.

Do it for the children

Whether we like it or not, millions of children are using Facebook, and since there doesn’t seem to be a universally effective way to get them off the service, the best and safest strategy would be to provide younger children with a safe, secure and private experience that allows them to interact with verified friends and family members without having to lie about their age.

(Disclosure: I’m co-director of ConnectSafely.org, a non-profit Internet safety organization that receives financial support from Facebook).

Facebook has made some changes to what it calls its “data use policy,” which is essentially the same as its privacy policy. The company has also added a  ”Facebook Terms and Policies” hub that serves as a central landing page for all of Facebook’s policies, including a link to its Data Use Policy.  Facebook also published an ”Explanation of changes,” and posted a track changes document that shows the changes with additions and deleted text highlighted in red.  The company’s  data use policy document has little light bulbs to highlight important points that it thinks people need to pay attention to.

Mostly minor changes

Most of the changes are fairly minor and some are designed to provide extra information per an agreement between Facebook and the Irish Data Protection Commission.

For example, the company added language that states exactly what information about users is always made public such as name, profile picture and cover photo, networks you’re part of and your user name and ID. It also says that “your age range, locale (or language) and gender can also be made public.  Some of that public information, such as your profile picture, can be deleted from your timeline.”

Showing ads on other sites

The company previously stated it we might place ads on other sites but clarified that those those “may or may not include social context (such as whether your friends have “liked” a particular business).”  What this means is that it’s possible that if you “Like” something  on Facebook that information could appear in an ad on another site, just as it can now appear on Facebook.  It’s important to know that clicking a “Like” button is making a public statement.

The company clarified that it can retain data about you “for as long as necessary to provide services to users and others,” and that inlcudes information from advertisers.

In its explanation on data use, the company makes it clear that you can control the audience for everything you post on the service, each time you post.

There is also a clear explanation of what data Facebook recives about its users. This includes every time you look at another person’s profile, send a message, search for a friend or click on an ad. They also can receive metadata  associated with what up upload such as the time and location of where a photo was taken. And, of course, they receive data from the device you’re using such as your IP address or your GPS coordinates from a mobile device.

Facebook acknowledged that it sometimes gets data from advertising partners, customers and other third parties “that helps us (or them) deliver ads.

Apps and third party websites

The company now says that “If an app wants additional information, they must get your permission. If you do this, the app can access, store and update that information,” but “Once you haven’t used the app for a while, however, that app won’t be able to continue updating this additional information until you give it permission again.” But they have added a tip ” to remind you that apps have their own policies around how they handle the data they receive and that you should contact an app directly if you want your information deleted.”

Facebook says that when you use the “login with Facebook” option in apps or other sites that it will “scramble your email address and then instruct the other website to scramble it in the same way.” That allows Facebook to identify it’s you without having to send your email address to the other site.

Targeted ads but not shared information

Facebook says that it doesn’t share information with advertisers but it does target ads based on who you are. So, you could see an ad that’s targeted to your gender, age-range, where you live or even who your friends are but Facebook is delivering that ad — the advertiser is not given that information.

What you let them share

Facebook, its advertisers and its app developers may share information about you if you allow them to through permissions that you’re asked to check when you install apps which is why it’s important to pay attention to those permissions and know how to change them which you can do from the Ads, Apps and Websites section of your Privacy Settings page.

For more, see this on News.com, this  AP story and this on TechCrunch.

Disclosure: I’m co-director of ConnectSafely.org, a non-profit Internet safety organization that receives financial support from Facebook.

Facebook, like all sites with user content, has had to battle against people using the service to post and distribution illegal child pornography.  In my CNET News post, I try to put the issue in perspective and quote law enforcement experts and the President of the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children who say it’s an Internet-wide problem.

Read the post here

by Larry Magid

When Consumer Reports writes about home appliances, it tells you their strengths and weaknesses but I’ve never seen any dire warnings about how you can lose your hand if you stick it in a garbage disposal. Even when they review cars, they don’t fill their articles with awful statistics about how thousands die each year as a result of drunk or reckless driving. There are lots of reviews of cell phones but never have I seen headlines about how easy it is for strangers within earshot to hear your half of a private conversation when you’re on the phone.

Yet, when the popular consumer magazine decided to write about Facebook, it focused extensively on how it’s possible for people to use the service in ways that jeopardize their privacy even though — based on their own statistics — the vast majority of users – just like people who use home appliances — have mostly positive experiences with Facebook. The story appears online and in the June issue of Consumer Reports.

It’s certainly true that some Facebook users post things they later regret – just like some people use phones to say things they wish they could take back. It’s also true that some people are careless about their privacy settings – just like some drivers fail to use seat belts. And just as things sometimes go wrong with even the highest rated appliances, there are, of course, going to be some people who have bad experiences while on Facebook.

Yet, more than 900 million people use Facebook including many politicians, thousands of non-profit groups, celebrities and even religious organizations. Even Consumer Reports has a Facebook page where, according to their article, they “host live chats with our experts, share articles, and query visitors to help in our reporting.” They have even “bought ads on Facebook to tell users about our activities.”

To its credit, Consumer Reports did point out that Facebook has been a boon to commerce, has helped the U.S. government deliver services, helps reunite people and pets separated in disasters and enables active duty military to keep in touch with their families. I’m sure the article was written before Facebook announced last week that it’s making it easier for people to save lives by becoming organ donors, resulting in a huge spike in registrations. Unlike the washing machines that Consumer Reports so competently reviews, Facebook can’t get your clothes clean but – like a vital component in those washing machines – there are agitators among Facebook’s users who have helped to topple oppressive regimes in Egypt, Tunisia and other countries.

What can –but probably won’t — go wrong

 The magazine spoke with privacy advocates and others about what can possibly go wrong when it comes to privacy and its first – rather obvious – conclusion was that “some people are sharing too much.” Based on a survey, it extrapolated that 4.8 million Americans have shared where they are going and that 4.7 million had “liked” a page about a health condition. What they didn’t mention was that this represents about 3% of the 150 million U.S. users. That means that about 97% of users didn’t do those things nor did they acknowledge that not every one necessarily considers those activities to be risky. Sure there is a very slight risk that your house could be burglarized if you disclose that you’re away, but there are also great advantages to sharing your travels. I recently posted that I was in Qatar, and got a Facebook message from a fellow journalist who lives there, offering to take me on what turned out to be a great tour. People who choose to “Like” pages or sites about medical conditions often benefit from incredible support and sometimes even life-saving advice. This is one of the web’s greatest strengths.

We all have the right to protect our privacy but we also have the right to share information. What’s important is that Facebook offers controls such as the pull down menu for every post that allows you to decide who gets to see what you’re posting

Consumer Reports statistics tell a positive story

The magazine reported that “Almost 13 million users said they had never set, or didn’t know about, Facebook’s privacy tools.” If that’s true it means that more than 91% of Facebook users don’t fall into that category which strikes me as a pretty impressive statistic that Facebook ought be brag about. And I’m proudly one of the “28 percent (that) shared all, or almost all, of their wall posts with an audience wider than just their friends.” Being careful not to post information I don’t want to share, I post almost everything to the public because I want to. While Facebook can be used to share privately or just to your friends, it can also be a way to share with the public. That’s a good thing if that’s what you want to do and if the other statistics are true, then the vast majority of those 28% clearly know what they are doing.

Questionable methodology

Even though its statistics are more positive than the story Consumer Reports tells, I do have questions about what they actually asked. The magazine did not publish the survey instrument nor would they agree to provide it to me when I spoke asked their publicist. It’s very unusual for companies that report on surveys not to provide a full report including a copy of the survey itself. One issue, for example, is the statement “Eleven percent of households using Facebook said they had trouble last year, ranging from someone using their log-in without permission to being harassed or threatened.” But the word “trouble” is is vague and it’s not at all clear what was in that “range” they’re talking about. Also, according to Stanford Graduate School of Business Associate Professor Neil Malhotra, ”One of the most commonly documented problems in surveys is acquiescence bias, or the tendency for respondents to simply agree or say yes to the interviewer’s question.” It’s easy, he added “to lead people into saying that privacy is a problem if you simply ask, ”Are you concerned about privacy.” It’s better to “compare privacy to other concerns to set baselines.”

I would expect Consumer Reports, of all publications, to be completely transparent with its methodology.

There are some things in the Consumer Reports story that people may not know, such as “Facebook collects more than you may imagine.” I don’t know what people do imagine but it’s true that “Facebook gets a report every time you visit a site with a Facebook “Like” button.” But that’s also true with for the companies that place most ads that appear on web pages or even pages that don’t have third party ads. I wish Consumer Reports pointed out how true this is across the web. In fact, your Internet Protocol (IP address) is reported to every site you visit. That was true long before Facebook was founded and it’s one of the ways law enforcement catches people who commit online crimes. I can look up the IP address of people who visit my websites, though without a court order it would be nearly impossible in most cases to identify them by name.

As my ConnectSafely.org co-director Anne Collier pointed out in her post at NetFamilyNews, Consumer Report’s non-profit advocacy arm, Consumer Union, is pushing for stronger privacy laws. While there may be a place for legislation, I agree with Anne that “new laws as solutions all by themselves perpetuates a false dependency.”
Always room for more consumer awareness

There is a lot more in this extensive report and much of it is worth considering. We do need to be aware that when we install third party apps, we are sometimes giving them permission to share our information, but we also need to know that Facebook has ways to limit and control that information. And, Consumer Reports is absolutely correct that employers, insurers, the IRS, colleges and criminals can see what you post publicly on Facebook and might possibly use it against you. That’s important for people to know and it’s one of the reasons Anne Collier and I wrote A Parents Guide to Facebook and why Facebook has extensive privacy controls.

Just as we have learned to use the safety features built into cars, washing machines and garbage disposals, we do need to learn to use Facebook, Google +, Yahoo, email, cell phones and other technologies in ways that help us control our information. It’s what we call digital literacy and it’s essential knowledge for thriving in the 21^st century.

Disclosure: Larry Magid is co-director of ConnectSafely.org, a non-profit Internet safety organization that receives financial support from Facebook. 

Embracing Digital Youth sponsoring a free cyberbullying webinar on April 26th at 7:00 PM ET

A free two hour webinar, scheduled for April 26th at 7:00 P.M. Eastern Time, will address “How can educators ensure the development of a positive school climate and support positive actions by peers that will be necessary for prevention and early intervention.”

You can register here.

Schools, according to the webinar’s moderator Nancy Willard, “are struggling to address a new challenge–the hurtful behavior of students when using digital technologies.” Willard said that “addressing this new challenge is difficult because much of this hurtful behavior occurs in digital environments where adults are generally not present. Hurtful interactions frequently occur when students are off-campus, with the damaging impact occurring at school.” The webinar is sponsored by Embracing Digital Youth.

Presenters:

• Patricia Agatston, Ph.D. Licensed Professional Counselor with the Prevention/Intervention Center, a student assistance program in the Cobb County School District, Georgia. Co-Director of CyberbullyHelp: Preventing Bullying in the Digital Age. Co-author of Cyber Bullying: Bullying in the Digital Age.Patti has been pioneering a peer-based prevention approach that includes utilizing peer leaders to facilitate class lessons on cyberbullying as well as utilizing peer leaders from the Sources of Strength suicide prevention program to develop anti-bullying messages.
  
• Nancy Willard, M.S., J.D. Director of the Center for Safe and Responsible Internet Use/Embracing Digital Youth. Author of Cyberbullying and Cyberthreats: Responding to the Challenge of Online Social Cruelty, Threats, and Distress, Cyber Safe Kids, Cyber Savvy Teens: Helping Young People Learn to Use the Internet in a Safe and Responsible Manner, Cyber Savvy: Embracing Digital Safety and Civility. Nancy is developing a new program called Be a Friend ~ Lend a Hand.
• Karen Siris, Ed.D. Professor at Adelphi University, Garden City, NY
  Principal at OceansideElementary, NY. Currently serving on the New York State Education Task Force charged with designing and implementing the new Dignity for All Students Act, anti-bullying legislation. Karen has demonstrated significant success in creating a caring majority of “upstanding students” in her Long Island school.
• Torin Hovander is a senior at Sandia High School in Albuquerque, N.M. who established a very successful bullying prevention club. This program has increased peer intervention and reporting to the school. It is now being spread to other high schools in the region.