Hi,
Thanks to my course requirements I can now say that I am an active member of the participatory web, and here is my contribution, enjoy.
In this post I will discuss two online sources of two different organizations that deal with children privacy (from different angles). The first: ParentalRights.org focus on the parents 'role' and the potential legal danger of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. The second: Privacy Rights Clearinghouse Fact Sheet 21 is a Children’s Online Privacy Resource Guide for Parents, which provides tips and resources for parents on how to be pro-active in protecting their children privacy online.
ParentalRights.org (PR) is an American NGO, which advocates for parents’ right to direct the upbringing and education of their children. PR sees the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) as an International law that seeks to empower the government to intrude upon the child-parent relationship.
According to PR although, the UNCRC seems like a harmless treaty, it has dangerous implications for American families. PR argues that treaty empowers the government to intervene in any child's life. Therefore, it poses a serious threat both to parental rights and to US sovereignty, as the UNCRC dictates "not only that the federal government must intrude into the family sphere to an unprecedented degree, but also how the federal government is to monitor and govern the actions of our families. Parental rights would be replaced by ‘the best interests of the child’ as defined, ultimately, by an international committee of 18 people in Switzerland” (PR website).
Article 16 of the official UNCRC document has two sections: (1) “No child shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his or her privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his or her honour and reputation”. (2) “The child has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks”.
Although some of the links on PR’s website are broken, the American NGO’s examination of the UNCRC comprehensively explains why article 16 invokes the power of the government in ways that the America’s legal and political history has never seen.
PR explains that the US Supreme Court has been trying to balance between the privacy rights of the child and the role of parents. However, in contrast to UNCRC’s article 16 the Supreme Court never stated that children have an absolute right to privacy (even from their parents…). Therefore, the article presents a conflict between the parents’ responsibility to guide and direct their children and the children right for privacy (ParentalRight.org – article 16)
Since Somalia announced its plans to ratify the UNCRC (as reported by Reuters a few dats ago). The United States is about to become the only country at the UN that does not ratify the UNCRC. Canada however, was one of the first nation to sign the UNCRC and a leader in its development.
Another interesting American NGO that deals with privacy issues is the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse (PRC), which is a nonprofit consumer organization that focuses on consumer information and consumer advocacy. PRC aims to raise consumers' awareness of how technology affects their personal privacy, and empower consumers to become proactive in matters concerning their personal information by providing practical tips on privacy protection ('about us' page).
PRC’s Fact Sheet 21 - Children’s Online Privacy: A Resource Guide for Parents (the guide) deals with children related online privacy issues. The guide goals are to “provide resources for parents to maximize the benefits of cyberspace for children and minimize the dangers”. As PRC explains many web sites collect significant amounts of personal information from the large percentage of American’s school age children, which use the World Wide Web.
[A "warning" about that kind of marketing-practices can be seen on this youtube video].
The guide privacy tips section focuses on a number of pro-active activities for the parents, and it explains that there is no technology-based solutions since there are no substitutes for “parental involvement in children's exploration of cyberspace”. The guide articulates the importance of knowing and understanding the site’s privacy policy statements, and provide parents information about the American laws and other “web seal programs” such as TRUSTe.
The guide mentioned the importance of establishing a contract between the parents and the child. Such an action may encourage the child to take responsibility for his or her online activities. The guide provide a couple of links for templates of such contracts (however, one of those links are broken).
The guide discusses the main items that should be included in the “family rules for online computer use”. Such as: protecting identifying information; not sharing passwords; online credibility; what to do when child encounters a threatening message; setting limitation for the child usage of the computer; making the online use a family activity; and 'knowing' the children online ‘friends’.
As the guide articulates, “the interactive world of cyberspace is a highly seductive and potentially manipulative environment for children". Therefore, in order to protect children form that kind of manipulative online marketing, the guide discusses the browsers privacy settings adjustments and the US Congress Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), which dictates the requires from web sites and online services directed to children under age 13.
To conclude, the guide names a few parents-control software and applications that block advertisements, and provide further resources for parents to learn about the privacy laws and other related organizations.
I believe that the PRC’s guide can be very useful tool\resource for parents. Personally I really like its new-media literacy approach, especially the Internet Use Agreement (contact) between the parents and the child. Even if the child will not follow the contact completely (as I would expect), establishing such a form provides the opportunity for both the parents and the children to discuss together the issue online privacy. I believe that the activity of working together in order to articulate the contract enables a space for discussion and mutual understanding between the child and his or her parents.
As I was watching the “Privacy and Social Networks” youtube video, which explains the way corporate uses personal information from the social web, I was concern about how much of those marketing-practices are known to the average social networking users. I believe that providing that kind of New-Media literacy and the tools\skills for 'critical consumption’ of the social web is CRUCIAL as learning to cross the street is...
Thank you for reading.
5 comments:
Dori, your post reads more like an information resource centre than a blog post... v nice, v useful!
I like the emphasis you (and the PRC guide) place on the 'contract with the child.' This seems like a particularly useful idea for the 11-15 yo types. As you point out, it's not just about whether children will follow the contract, it's also about creating awareness about the potential issues.
Also, I completely agree with you that media (and tech) literacy is the only way to go. All other solutions seem stopgap (NetNanny type stuff, ie). Presumably, the issue now becomes how to convey that content to children (and it needs to be done young, of course). Parents may not be prepared, either due to time constraints or lack of current knowledge about the issues. Maybe this is a role for librarians? Personally, I think schools need to play a bigger role. I still remember the eye-opening concept of bias when we were told to review a newspaper article in grade 5. I think there is certainly sufficient need and content to fill a course about media literacy directed at young people.
I totally agree with Colin and Dori on this issue. I think the concept of a contract may be a very effective tool for educating children and youth about internet use and illustrating some potential problems with web use, as well as solutions. Children and youth need to feel like they aren't simply being "talked to" about net issues or that their parents/teachers are simply watching their internet behaviour for infractions. If it becomes too much like surveilance I don't think youth will appreciate the very real dangers that exist online, or how to evaluate internet information and sources for themselves. We discussed earlier in the term about evaluation of online information by young people. I think these guidelines and sample contracts are another effective way to teach youth to evaluate the web on their own. I also agree with Colin that maybe this is a really appropriate place for the information professional to step in and educate.
Hi Dori,
Rhonda asked a good question in class about what we would do as parents if our child wanted "in" on the whole Facebook phenom. As a parent, I liked your idea about sitting down and putting together a contract with your child b/f engaging in Facebook. I think this not only sets down clear parameters but also promotes a sense of understanding about the responsiblity of using digital communication. It sets a good precedent for the future.
As parents, today's digital explosion means they cannot afford to be ignorant about technology nor can they turn a blind eye to the inevitable "coming of age" between thier kids and the discovery of social networking sites. It used to be that sex was the topic that all parents needed to educate and talk to their kids about, now, its not just sex but also sociotechnical communication too. It certainly adds a whole new diminsion to child-rearing and makes being a parent much more complex.
Just like with sexual education, A huge part of protecting kids relies on the parent's ability to accept the inevitable, educate themselves so they can teach their children, stay involved with your child and keep the lines of communiation open, help them understand the pitfalls and consequences, and armed as such then let them grow and explore the medium so that they can make a responsible decision on their own. Most parents at this point, hold their breath and hope they they have done a good job.
I also think that libraries and information professionals have a great opportunity to fill a void. They should create programs to help educate parents about the ins-and-outs of social networking sites. What does it mean, where are the pitfalls, how to talk to your children about it, how to set up guidelines to simultaneously protect and allow them to explore this digital medium etc. I think it would be a very popular program.
Li
Hi Dor,
I think PR’s perspective of the Convention on the Rights of the Child has some great insights but it is a bit skewed. Although, the treaty positions the child outside the direct ownership of the parent (i.e. the child is not the parent’s property – as normally conceived in many cultures), the convention recognizes that parents have the most important role in brining up children (article 5). For that reason, I am less struck by PR’s argument that the treaty disempowers the parent. The parent will always be the child’s immediate guide in how to survive in the world. There are also benefits to the treaty that are overlooked in PR’s analysis. The treaty encourages governments to make children more visible in the policy development process by introducing child impact assessments and making sure that adequate funds are spent on children. If anything, the treaty makes governments more accountable to the child to ensure that each child develops to his or her’s full potential. I know that policing of international treaties are always put into question, but I think the treaty’s overall message is more positive than negative.
Post a Comment