toolbar

Dear Subscribers:

Here's our lineup for this third week of July:

* * * *

That sticky kids' privacy issue

A lot of people in Washington were talking about our children's online privacy this week. The Federal Trade Commission held a workshop Tuesday to take a close look at a very sticky issue: how Web sites for kids are supposed to obtain parents' consent for their kids (under age 13) to give out personal information about themselves. And parental consent is now law. The workshop was part of the process the FTC has to go through to carry out the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) that the US Congress passed last fall.

We call the issue "sticky" because ensuring parents' consent over the Internet (i.e., without our signature on paper) is no easy task. Even the Web publishers who tell kids to have us email our consent or who email parents directly can't be sure they have our permission. Kids can "pose" as us by using our email accounts and emailing our "consent."

In its report on the workshop, PC World cites several ways around this problem, both high- and low-tech: having a parent give the site a credit card number, having parents call a toll-free number, or requiring a parent's "digital signature" via e-mail. Parry Aftab, executive director of CyberAngels and a lawyer who focuses on children's online issues, said at the FTC workshop that those consent procedures could cost Web sites more than $50,000 a year, according to PC World. (For Parry's personal take on the workshop, see just below this item.)

Of course, technology companies stand to gain quite a bit from COPPA's parental consent requirement. As Parry Aftab reports below, some of them demo'd their products and services at the workshop. For the FTC, it was good to look at the options. Toby Levin, an attorney with the Commission who specializes in privacy and other consumer issues, emailed us: "I was pleased to see that a number of new electronic consent mechanisms are being developed to enable parents to control the online collection of personal information from children."

Ultimately, technology like digital signatures will probably drive Web publishers' costs down, but not in the short term. A Wired News article leads with one start-up publisher of kids' content arguing that costs like that (his estimate was much higher) could kill startups - leaving only big companies like Disney and Nickelodeon to publish for children. (There is also a broader Wired piece about government regulation of Web sites, folding in the FTC workshop.

On the other hand, children's advocacy groups argued at the workshop for "stringent" requirements of kid-content publishers, citing very lax privacy standards at these sites so far. The Center for Media Education (CME) has a press release in its site about two surveys it's just conducted of children's Web sites, one a random sample. Here's what CME says about the random sample, starting with the finding that "a disturbingly large number of children's sites are still collecting personal information from children without providing notification of their privacy policies or obtaining parental permission."

CME reports, "The survey showed that while 95% of sites in the random sample collect personally-identifiable information from children, nearly three-quarters of those that collect personal information (73%) post no privacy policies. Less than 6% attempt to get any permission from parents at all; less than 3% use methods for obtaining verifiable, prior parental consent that are consistent with the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act." (Here's a New York Times article on the CME surveys.)

You see what we mean by "sticky"! Where do you stand on this issue? Would you be sorry to see the barriers-to-entry for startups much higher, or is there plenty of content on the Web just from Disney and Nickelodeon? Do you agree with CME that regs concerning young children should be very strict? Are you satisfied with the privacy measures being taken by the kids sites you've visited? If so, tell us what you like about what you're seeing. Just email us at feedback@netfamilynews.org. We consider all subscribers' comments for publication and appreciate every one we receive.

Meanwhile, the FTC, too, would very much welcome parents' comments. The deadline is July 30. The Commission provides instructions on a page of its Web site for emailing your comments. Toby Levin tells us that, after the comment and "rulemaking" period is over, "the FTC will prepare a number of informational materials to help educate parents and businesses about COPPA and the final rule."

* *

From one who was there

Here's the view of Parry Aftab, an attorney and executive director of CyberAngels:

"Members of the non-profit, advertising, regulatory, and child Internet industry met in DC on July 20, 1999 to share their concerns and information about online privacy and data collection models. When I'm not wearing my CyberAngels or author hats, I actually earn a living as a cyberspace lawyer focusing on children's Internet regulatory and safety issues. I was asked by the FTC to testify at the hearings and rulemaking workshop and share my experience and those of my clients and others with whom I work closely. I provided the following to the FTC, which was read into the record.

"MaMaMedia and Kidscom shared their experiences. I shared those of PBS, Children's Television Workshop, Bonus, Headbone, FreeZone, iCanBuy, and JuniorNet.

"The only issue discussed at this workshop was the verifiable parental consent requirement of the new Children's Online Privacy Protection Act, which goes into effect April 2000. The law requires that parents be notified when their children under age 13 supply personally identifiable information to Web sites and that the sites get parents' consent to the collection or use of this information, as well as for any high-risk activities like chat or pen pal programs. The FTC has determined that replying back to an email notice isn't sufficient for verifiable consent, since they suspect many children will 'forge' their parents' email. (As a parent of two former high school students, I explained that my kids could forge all types of media and aren't limited to emails! ;-) )

"Companies that provide technology solutions testified that the technology is already available to send email using digital signatures and certificates. However, the processes for widespread use in the marketplace aren't fully developed yet. The children's e-commerce company iCanBuy.com explained in detail how they strive to keep children's safety and privacy concerns paramount as they develop the kids' commerce model. They explained the steps they have instituted to make sure parents are involved in all the decisions. They said they're also committed to making sure kids, tweens, and teens learn how to manage money.

"On the technology side of things, a representative from VeriSign explained digital signatures and PKI ("public key infrastructure") technology in a way that even I could understand. Cybersmart described their new program to work with schools to verify that children are really children, providing schools with a digital certification to that effect. The FTC wants more information about what parents think. Email Net Family News or me this month, and we'll report the results to the FTC. The FTC also has instructions for emailing them your comments directly (though sometimes it's easier just to email us!).

"Here's what the FTC wants to know: Would you be comfortable providing consent, via email, to Web sites about your children's use of their chatrooms, pen-pals programs, and other immediate communication technologies, and allowing the Web sites to collect personal information about your children under 13? If email consent is not enough, what form of permission would you be comfortable with?"

* * * *

Health care and the Net

The breaking news this week was that the Internet and a poison control worker may have saved a little boy's life. According to Wired News, a three-year-old boy in Georgia ate three berries from an unidentified plant. His very fearful parents contacted poison control. A specialist there went to where the boy found the plant and took pictures with a digital camera, then emailed them to the University of Georgia's Herbarium for identification. The plant was quickly identified as one that can be fatal for small children. The child was treated successfully. You can read the story at Wired, but it's good to hear that - amid all the talk of online risks to children - there are ways the Internet can help them, too. Of course, the Internet could've had no role without the practical wisdom of a Net-literate poison control specialist.

This was just the most heart-warming of many news stories we're seeing these days about health and the Internet. They all point to one powerful message: the explosion of medical knowledge - and misinformation - we're seeing on the Internet "is changing how medicine is practiced more profoundly than anything since the advent of managed care." That's from USAToday, which has a roundup of extensive reporting on "How the Internet is changing medicine".

The Internet is making the same kind of mark in health care as it is in many fields and industries. Really what it's all about is giving "the customer" more control. The Internet is helping to break down monopolies of information, products, services, and distribution. That's scary for industries and governments. What's fascinating is watching to see which companies, publishers, providers, etc., are nimble enough not only to keep up with but to capitalize on this tectonic shift. As for medical patients and all other consumers, it's the critical thinkers who benefit most (see our lead item last week).

To that end, among the links on the report's index page is a useful piece on how to evaluate the credibility of a health site. Teachers and parents, note that the criteria on this page can be used to check the validity of information in almost any Web site. You could almost print out and tape the page on any computer you and your kids use to do research on the Net.

* * * *

A measured look at online hate

This week SafeKids.com founder Larry Magid wrapped up his online-safety series in the Los Angeles Times confronting a tough but important topic. Headlined "Internet's Hate Sites Can Be Hidden, but They Can't Be Ignored", the piece points out that there's a fine line between hate and violence on the Web. Some hate sites go beyond bigoted ridicule to publishing articles about bombs and other weapons, Larry points out. His article also includes:

Let's encourage our kids to come to us if or when they run across bigotry on the Net, Larry says. Then, we can make good use of a "teachable moment," as one of his sources put it, to see the material for what it is.

Though hype in the media is not useful, exposing hate to the light of day (and rational thinking) can indeed be useful. As the experts behind two useful Web sites we've found agree, hate groups thrive under cover.

1. The Hate Directory tracks hate and bigotry mailing lists, newsgroups, FTP sites, chatrooms, and other Internet venues, as well as on the Web.

2. HateWatch, which began as a Harvard Law School Library Web page, monitors the Web, tracking hate groups that use it to recruit and organize. The nonprofit organization also tracks media stories about hate groups and maintains a list of Web space providers that have a voluntary "no hate page policy" as part of their user terms-of-service contracts.

This week we interviewed Ray Franklin, publisher of The Hate Directory, to understand this subject better. His credentials are a mouthful, but they're not easy to find on his site, so you should know that Ray is assistant director of the Maryland Police Training Commission, project director for Maryland's Web Based Public Safety Information Access System, and a frequent lecturer at the FBI Academy in Quantico, Virginia. We learned a lot from his answers to the questions we emailed him, so we're providing them for you in full:

Why are you publishing and maintaining this site?
Ray: The Hate Directory is maintained and distributed as an aid in identifying and tracking the exploitation of the Internet by organizations and individuals advocating violence against, separation from, defamation of, deception about, or hostility toward others based on race, religion, ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation. It seeks to assist law enforcement in the investigation of crime and the general public by raising public awareness.

Why do you maintain the site?
Ray: I developed the Hate Directory as part of a multidisciplinary law enforcement seminar on hate crime that I organized in cooperation with the Baltimore County Police, Maryland State Police, Human Relations Commission, and Goucher College. It was part of my presentation on the proliferation of hate sites on the Internet. I have continued to maintain the site as a personal endeavor and at my own expense.

What's your own position on hate sites?
Ray: While I find these sites to be personally abhorrent, I do not believe it is philosophically appropriate to restrict the freedom of expression on the Internet. The Internet is a great resource for democracy and can be a powerful tool in exposing and combatting individuals and groups that have always espoused hate and prejudice.

Some parents might be concerned that it makes hate sites even more accessible. Could you respond to that?
Ray: On the contrary, the Directory can serve as a guide for exclusion and has, in fact, been used by producers of parental control software. In the end, however, the only effective way to combat the influence of these sites is through education and the continuing involvement of parents and educators. I believe the Directory is an important tool for parents and to guide instruction.

Do you have any sense of the frequency of new hate sites appearing - a certain number of new ones every month or year?
Ray: I continuously monitor sites, search the Internet, follow newsgroups and mailing lists, and often receive recommendations for inclusion. While I can't give you an average number of new sites per month, I can say that they continue to appear and, in fact, I don't catch them all…. While some sites exhibit a half-life in terms of days, many sites, e.g., National Alliance, Stormfront, Zundelsite, have lasted for years with constant revision.

And now a question for our subscribers: Have your children or students run into sites like these on the Web? Have you had a chance to discuss the experience with them? Or have you worked out a family or classroom policy to deal with hate or violence online? If any of you have had such an experience, we'd love to what you and your children have learned. Please email us!

Here's a directory of Larry's whole online-safety series.

* * * *

Share with a Friend!! If you find the newsletter useful, won't you tell your friends and relatives? We would much appreciate your referral.

To subscribe, they can just send an e-mail to subscribe@netfamilynews.org - no need to type anything in the Subject field or the body of the message. We are always happy to hear from potential sponsors and distribution partners as well - via info@netfamilynews.org.

That does it for this week. Have a great weekend.

Sincerely,

Net Family News


HOME | newsletter | subscribe | links | supporters | about | feedback


Copyright 1999 Net Family News, Inc. | Our Privacy Policy