Last month Minister for Broadband Senator Stephen Conroy said that he was “encouraged” by news that lab tests of ISP-level internet filters showed “significant progress,” since 2005. But what the Senator failed to acknowledge, was that even if the government matched China’s efforts in restricting online access, filters fail to address the major problems that adolescents face online. Filters don’t address the real problems that kids face online: addiction, bullying, security and privacy.
That is not to say that filters are useless. They can be a deterrent to viewing p-rnography and suicide sites, particularly with less tech savvy kids who have not yet learned to bypass filters. And they may reassure the 55% of parents who fear child exposure to p-rnography.
But filters will not help the 30% of Australian kids who are becoming addicted to the internet or the 22% of youth experiencing online harassment. It does nothing for the 17% of adolescents who are concerned about downloading viruses. Filters fail to educate the 34% of kids who do not limit public access to their social networking profiles.
Rather than investing in restricting access, we-schools, parents, and communities-need to teach young people how to minimise potential online risks. Former hacker turned cyber safety advocate Tom Wood said:
The real problem is the lack of knowledge kids have on how to prevent and resolve online issues. Instead of the government mandating filters, cyber-safety education should be mandated in all schools. And young people must play an instrumental role in developing them.
Clearly, the best approach is equipping young people with knowledge to make informed decisions online and avoid risks. The rub will be implementing a meaningful and sustainable cyber-education initiative nationally. To accomplish this, we need to join IT experts, educators, youth psychologists, lawyers, and importantly young people to engage schools and communities.
While we wait for a national initiative to start, we can implement a few simple initiatives at home to help minimise risk. Working with schools, students and parents, I have found the following preventative strategies to be useful:
1. Limit the amount of time spent online, e.g. through family internet ‘contracts’. See netaddiction.com more information on managing addiction
2. Report online harassment to website administrators and never respond to aggressors. See Tom Wood’s complete guide to stopping cyber-bullying
3. Set social networking accounts to private and use tools to block or ignore unwanted attention in messaging applications
4. Use judgement when publishing photos or videos. If a future employer (or relative) would cringe, don’t put it online
5. Use partial names or aliases when creating a profile or user name to make it harder to be identified. Avoid identifiable photos in the public headline profile and protect accounts by creating secure passwords.
Tena Panizza is a Melbourne based psychologist. She conducts the “Cyber Savvy” education programme in Melbourne schools. She is conducting a research Ph.D. and works in private practice with cyber-related difficulties.
‘That is not to say that filters are useless. They can be a deterrent to viewing p-rnography and suicide sites, particularly with less tech savvy kids who have not yet learned to bypass filters. ‘
They don’t need to learn how to bypass a filter — Even the most computer illiterate kid will be able to access pornography after 12-13 attempts. That’s how bad the filters effectiveness was.
Tom Wood a former hacker? I doubt even Tom Wood would describe himself as a hacker.
Education is the best as well as moitoring them while online. I blocked all social network sites on my kids computer except for http://www.iland5.com. I know there are no predators on this site. It is only for kids ages 5-18 and the kids school must verify their identification. It is content monitored so I know my kid will never see pornography or encounter a predator nor deal with bullies as long as he is on this site. The site for parents is http://www.safewave.org. They have good information and statistics.
Re strategies:
1 – online time isn’t a good guide to addiction. Certainly, one who is addicted will spend a lot of time on th e internet, but one who spends a lot of time on the internet is not necessarily addicted. Some weeks I’d spend 40+ hours online (combined work hours and home) others, I might be on zero hours. It’s the ability to ignore it, and not have it bother you. Really, it’s up to parents to just use good sense.
2 – assumes the website is in your jurisdiction and that the webmaster is not the culprit.
3 – social networks. Explain why an online social network is substantially different to a RL social network. They both can do harm.
4 – Don’t use real names, or images that tend to identify. That combines with 5. I wouldn’t use my real name if it was not already effectively anonymous. 🙂
Education is the best as well as moitoring them while online. I blocked all social network sites on my kids computer except for http://www.iland5.com. I know there are no predators on this site. It is only for kids ages 5-18 and the kids school must verify their identification. It is content monitored so I know my kid will never see pornography or encounter a predator nor deal with bullies as long as he is on this site. The site for parents is http://www.safewave.org. They have good information and statistics.
While Tena Panizza gives some very good advice in her article “The best internet filter is education” (Crikey 27/8), I find it hard to believe that nearly one third of Australian children are becoming addicted to the net and nearly a quarter of youth are victims of online bullying.
Could we have some sources for these statistics?