Fear of Internet Predators ... unfounded?

Sometimes smart people say that darnedest things …

This morning I got up to write about kids and what we can do to protect them in this wacky internet enabled world, and for a few minutes – I had one of those rare bursts of good news!

I read lots of different blogs, and news streams – everything from MS/NBC to Computerworld, to Schneier on Security. I generally like Schneier on Security and am reading a couple of his books now.

But today I’m not a fan. His headline Fear of Internet Predators Largely Unfounded sounded great!! But then after reading it, it didn’t smell quite right to me. I checked on the sources and found a link to this article from the Crimes Against Children Research Center at UNH and finally a press release from UNH -

Here’s an excerpt

For example, in spite of public concern, the authors found that adolescents' use of popular social networking sites such as MySpace and Facebook do not appear to increase their risk of being victimized by online predators. Rather, it is risky online interactions such as talking online about sex to unknown people that increases vulnerability, according to the researchers.

From my (admittedly limited) time on those two social sites, they seem to be established largely for the type of personal connectivity between both people you know and people you don’t know that would enable the risky behavior that increases vulnerability. While it's true they could meet a predator in class, or related to a sports team - it's a lot riskier online because of the lack of visual and other types of validation.

"what do you mean by this?"

When you or I see someone on the street, or buy something in a store - our eyes and ears can tell us things like "the store is clean, it's been here for years, many people shop here. The owner is here every day, and the merchandise feels like it has a quality to it". Online - we are missing all the tactile senses, and have to develop a sense of validation through other means. eg. other people rate the site highly, they are certified to be who they say they are ...

With meeting people it's the same. I'm coaching kids sports - when they show up for the first practice, I've got a good idea they are who they say they are. If I were to meet the same group online for an online class I'm teaching - then I really wouldn't know.

This 'not knowing' is why I caution the use of the social sites. While many people use them for their daily news, gossip and jokes - as soon as your pool of friends is extended beyond people you've personally 'validated' (seen them etc) it's contaminated. The internet is a great tool - but it is like a sword and needs to be respected.

Back to my thoughts on the article - just like any statistical article, it's great to get some numbers - but the conclusions are suspect. From my perspective, it's great that there aren't as many predators or negitive experiences as perceived - but it's still a risky environment that one should be carefully prepared for.