E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Why parents help their children lie to Facebook about age
msnbc.com
"Perverts."
That's the (incorrect) reason why Facebook has a minimum age requirement, according to parents in a peer-reviewed study, "Why Parents Help Their Children Lie to Facebook About Age: Unintended Consequences of the 'Children's Online Privacy Protection Act' (available from FirstMonday.org).
Other wrong responses included "because it’s more for adults," "children don’t need to have a social media presence" and "due to adult content and language." Still, "I don't know" was the most common response from parents who were even aware Facebook has an age restriction.
Of the 1,007 parents polled (all with kids aged 10-13), only two referenced the correct answer: "Privacy." More specifically, the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA).
Live Poll
Should Facebook have an age restriction?
Enacted by U.S. Congress in 1998 (practically the Paleozoic era of the Internet), COPPA requires commercial websites to obtain parental permission before collecting the personal info of any user under the age of 13. Facebook and other popular social networks avoid COPPA's costly, cumbersome restrictions by simply restricting user age.
Thirteen years later, parents know little about the government restrictions meant to protect their kids' privacy, and many allow their children to lie about their ages to join Facebook, while losing the intended protections of the government.
That's not how it's supposed to work, according to the study which published these findings:
- Half of parents in the study reported that their child is on Facebook, even in cases where children do not meet the legal age requirement for use of the site.
- Among parents of children who are old enough to be on Facebook — the parents of 13– and 14–year–olds — almost three quarters (72 percent) report that their child uses the site.
- Almost a fifth (19 percent) of respondents who were reporting on their 10–year–old child’s online experiences also noted that the child has a Facebook account. This number increases to nearly a third (32 percent) for children age 11 and over half (55 percent) for 12–year–olds.
- While only 53 percent of parents believe that there is a minimum age, most (89 percent) parents stated that they believe that there "should" be a minimum age for Facebook use.
- Of the 89 percent who believe that there should be a minimum age, the average age that they suggest is 14.9, which is considerably higher than the current minimum age (13). Interestingly, this age is also higher than what these same parents suggest is an appropriate age for a child to join Facebook: 14.
Why parents help their children lie to Facebook
But it's not Facebook and other such sites that need to change, or even parents, the study concludes. It's COPPA.
For the most part, Facebook and other social networks respect COPPA by promptly dumping any account tied to an underage user.
"Facebook removes 20,000 people a day, people who are underage," Facebook privacy czar Mozelle Thompson asserted in March, following a study by the Pew Internet & American Life Project that found nearly half of all 12-year-olds in the U.S. are using social network sites.
"If you are reporting a child’s account registered under a false date of birth, and the child’s age is reasonably verifiable as under 13, we will promptly delete the account. If the reported child’s age is not reasonably verifiable as under 13, then we may not be able to take action on the account," Thompson said.
In May, Consumer Reports said that 7.5 million Facebook users are under age 13, and "a majority of parents of kids 10 and under seemed largely unconcerned by their children’s use of the site.” Further, the magazine's survey found "found that their accounts were largely unsupervised by their parents, exposing them to malware or serious threats such as predators or bullies."
These findings don't differ much from the new study:
Although many sites restrict access to children, our data show that many parents knowingly allow their children to lie about their age — in fact, often help them to do so — in order to gain access to age–restricted sites in violation of those sites’ Terms of Service (TOS). This is especially true for general–audience social media sites and communication services such as Facebook, Gmail, and Skype, which allow children to connect with peers, classmates, and family members for educational, social, or familial reasons.
Parents equate age restrictions with maturity, and many considered that the litmus test as to whether they allowed their kids to violate Facebook's Terms of Service by lying about their age to join, according to the study. It also found that parents are indeed concerned about privacy and online safety issues, but they also may not understand the risks that children face or how their data or how their data are used."
Perhaps parental unawareness of privacy issues speaks well of COPPA's initial effectiveness. "COPPA has succeeded both in stopping some egregious predatory data practices and in raising some level of awareness of the issue of collecting data about children," the study points out. "The FTC has actively enforced COPPA, leveraging civil penalties against those who fail to obtain parental consent or ineffectively implement its provisions."
Of course, when kids lie about their age to get on Facebook, their personal data is collected, no parental consent needed. Indeed, a lot has changed since COPPA launched in 1998. "Social network sites, mobile communication technology, geo–locative data (i.e., a child’s physical location as known to a Web service or mobile device), and interactive media," are the examples cited in 2010 by the FTC calling for public comments revisiting COPPA.
"Perverts" will always be an Internet danger parents need to be concerned about. "Adult content and language" is now unavoidable in any media form, and arguably "a social media presence" is now a fact of life. Laws can't replace parents when it comes to safely shepherding children through the unavoidable Internet, but there online privacy has its place for both children and adults.
As the government continues to wrestle with Internet regulation and online privacy, the study points out that age restriction — given both the difficulty in online age verification and parental willingness to allow kids to lie — is not a realistic solution. Instead, the study proposes that "policy–makers shift away from privacy regulation models that are based on age or other demographic categories and, instead, develop universal privacy protections for online users."
Note:"Why Parents Help Their Children Lie to Facebook About Age: Unintended Consequences of the 'Children's Online Privacy Protection Act' (available from FirstMonday.org) is authored by Berkman Center for Internet & Society members danah boyd, Eszter Hargittai, Jason Schultz, and John Palfrey.
More on the annoying way we live now:
- Celebrate Kill-A-Zombie Day with a computer exorcism
- Facebook adds 'trusted friends' and app-specific passwords
- Internet talks about 'Occupy Wall Street,' media listen
Helen A.S. Popkin goes blah blah blah about the Internet. Tell her to get a real job on Twitter and/or Facebook. Also, Google+.
Leave a Comment:
I have a rule you should follow. Don't complain about something unless you are going to offer a solution.
Checking "I am 13 or older" is no different than when I'm asked "Did anyone help me pack my bags?" or "Has anyone offered to carry my bags for me?" or "Have your bags been left unattended?".
No one really cares. (If you said yes, yes and yes, they probably wouldn't even know what to do. )
Here is the solution........ www.safevilleusa.info check it out
I don't see why Facebook doesn't wake up and have the system designed for parents to allow, say ages 10-13 to join facebook as a "sponsored" account, requiring it to be linked to the parents' account with certain parent controls such as parents having to approve friends, etc. This is the age group that usually lies about their age to get an account and the age group that the parents allow them to do so because after about 10 or 11, the parents often think their kids are mature enough to handle it with supervision and why not? Why not create a window there?
A "sponsored" account? Why do kids under 13 need facebook anyway?
Mandy, my kid uses as a way to keep up with his dad's family. Not all of them feel free to go through me. (drama of their own creation.)
Yea, I mean, but that young, I mean, they don't really need to network or keep up with old pals, they can use a telephone.
He's 11. It's his way of keeping in touch with with is extended family. Because of some past issues, I like the abilty I have to monitor things on facebook.
Yes, it's very important not to let kids on Facebook, but they can watch all the television and play all the video games they want.
What's a few expletives among friends, anyway?
You, like the parents polled, must have missed the point:
If you really feel that kids should be able to join any website, whatever, then agitate to have COPPA repealed. Otherwise, educate yourself.
Except there is no way to report underage profiles to the powers that be at facebook. You can click to report a profile, but the only available reasons to select are things like "this person is harassing me" or "this doesn't represent a real person." There is no "this person is under the required age" option. I see profiles of kids of family members and coworkers and friends constantly on facebook, and I want to report them all, but there is no easy way to do so.
While I agree that a good method for Facebook would be to allow "sponsored" 10-12 year olds, that isn't Facebook's choice. COPPA is what the article is about, the law that would specifically prohibit that bit of common sense in the face of greater security.
I just saw a story on a new internet world that is coming called SafeVilleUSA. They have an information site at www.safevilleusa.info Go there and look at the parent's video. They have a safe social media site called SafeCircles. It is fascinating and it is crime free and bully free.. Schools also make the money off of this site helping with the reduced budgets. There is an anti-bullying system for schools there too that is great. I was blown away by it. I can't wait for it to open. Every school should register in this program.
It might be a nice idea if kids were to learn to get along with the friends in the physical world and if parents would actually limit the amount of time their kids spend on the internet. Yes, it is important that they learn to navigate the internet and how to use a computer. But kids need physical activity and interaction with people; to deny them that leads to poorly toned bodies and lack of real social skills.
"The job of any parent is to get their child/children to adulthood safely."
Dr. Phil
(Says it all)
Gee, it would be so great if parents would parent their children. Unfortunately it just doesn't happen that way. Most parents are so self involved that the barely know if the kids are in the house, let alone on the computer. Most parents just think they are doing a good job, but really want TV, Wii and the Internet to do the job for them. Sad to think what problems this next generation will suffer through because of their lack of socialization.
Although I hate to admit it, I think mctappy might be right. But I do have some sympathy for parents today - life seems to so much faster and busier. I do have to say however, that what annoys me is that some of the same parents have no problem going public when friends of the kids on facebook say rude things about them, or they say that other children are bullying the kids online. Well....then.....protect your kid from online abuse by shutting down their accounts. Don't depend on some corporation to parent for you. It may not solve the playground and classroom situation but the least you could do is handle whats going on under your own roof!
"Perverts" will always be an Internet danger parents need to be concerned about. "
Please cite statistics to support this assertion. There are about 60 million children in the US alone. How many verified cases are there where an online "pervert" (must be a stranger) has done serious harm to a child online?
Now that you have an actual number, is this danger higher or lower than being struck by lightening? If lower (and it is lower), then shouldn't we be more worried about letting them outside in the rain than signing up for Facebook?
Fear sells, doesn't it? And the media has to make money somehow. Not true? Then why do they make blanket statements rather than cite the actual statistics? One would think the media would be more interested in telling us the truth, eh? One would be wrong.
The gvt should have nothing to do with this. There should be no law. However, there is a law and it needs to be taken seriously.
This is the kind of thing that happens when over protective people push for laws that do not actually protect anybody.
The parents of children with accounts should be prosecuted. It's the parents responsibility to make sure their kids follow the laws of this country. Failure to do that, even allowing it to happen, should result in prosecution.
It's not easy to "hide" a facebook page, I have an account that I use just so I can go into my kids facebook pages and capture pictures of my grandchildren. I have never made a page or accepted friends other than family. I have had very little activity on my facebook account. And STILL it is evident I have an account all over my pc. It would be easy for parents to find a facebook page belonging to their child.
Until the law is thrown out as a rediculous excess of gvt interference in our lives, parents need to be held accountable. Maybe then some of these laws will be tossed out and the gvt will be less willing to write them.
Sure... 10-13 year old kids need a Facebook account, just like they need designer clothes, adult makeup,
boyfriends/girlfriends, smartphones, etc... have you watched TV lately, do you understand what media is doing to our children (probably not, as your already part of the converted). Children need to focus on family controlled interaction/integration, then academic development, then cultural/citizen responsibilities
(tongue softly planted in cheek), and enter the world of adult social interaction when they are prepared to be responsible and good citizens. Our society is hedonistic, and morality is the new evil... everyone is so arrogant
that they can't possibly be given guidance by anyone else, despite the fact that they lack the intellectual prowess and will-power necessary to change the channel when Jersey Shore comes on - but they can make babies!
Oddly enough, a lesson to the majority... sorry if I appear preachy.
Look around… child models, child pageants, Gossip Girls (sorry, had to), 12 year olds in adult makeup... and yes, Facebook... what’s normal about any of this? Little by little our unbridled, ill-defined, corporate controlled society becomes the greatest influence on our youth. Values and virtue replaced by brand names and a salacious social aristocracy, we should be wary of anything that seeks to interface directly with our children, usurping and subverting what remains of parental control and guidance. Facebook isn't the face of evil,
but it is a symptom of a much greater disease afflicting our youth. Parents - use control and protect interchangeably, and worry less about how much they like you now versus how happy and healthy they will be as future parents and citizens.
You are what you do - what will you become today?
Nobody NEEDS a facebook. Facebook is a want, and its free. Also on a side note gossip girls isnt about pre-teen girls its about a group of petty girls in their late teens/early twenties.
I make it my personal policy not to accept friend request from anone not a teenager. Some kids in church have FB accounts as young as 2nd and 3rd grade and I have had friend request from one of them (a 2nd grader). Ironically, his mom homeschools him to protect him from the worldliness of the public schools. I would think to be consistant, she would want to keep him off FB, too, because some of the stuff from older teens and young adults are pretty inappropriate for an 8 year old.
DUH. obvious news is obvious
My issue with "underage" kids having Facebook accounts is that, if the parents are aware and approve, then they are also approving of the kids telling a lie to get what they want. Granted, it is a "little white lie," if you categorize untruths. I feel my job as a parent includes teaching my son to be truthful, even when it seems ok not to. It is a small thing, but I cannot expect my son to appreciate the value of truthfulness if I am not consistent.
This film is set to release next year and is based on exactly these internet issues.
It was just posted a few days ago and seems to be very interesting... and creepy...
Search: "(AmI) Live" on Facebook