It really annoys me off! Just been watching the news and it's about how kids are getting groomed etc on internet chat rooms....Since when was MSN an internet chatroom?!

The dude on the news said he created an account and then added a profile pic of a teenage school girl...and then he got Perverts talking to him and sending him indecent images, and one even went on webcam! and what forces the person to click 'accept' on a webcam invitation!

Wait a minute! Don't you have to add people on MSN to talk to them? He obviously a) added loads of people in hope of getting a Perv on b) Posted his pic somewhere!


But they don't go on about how you can just block the person, or not accept them when they add you! And how stupid is the kid to sit there and let these people send them pictures...unless of course they want the pictures in which case it's there own ###### fault!!! Otherwise just block them!

Then they go on complaining about sites like Bebo and Myspace not having safety information on their first page! Why should they?! If someone wants to know about internet safety then they should bloomin' research it themselves!

Argh! Why do people a.k.a adults think that these sites are soooo dangerous! They are only dangereous if the kid has no god damn sense!!!

LOL at the bit where it said that parents should find the out the passwords and log in details etc and check who their kids are talking to!

Anyone else agree

Yes and no,

The media always feel the need to sensationalise EVERYTHING, panic mongering is pointless in my view and illustrates how the media 'dumb down' issues.

However I think it is important that awareness is raised, particularlly for parents, Sarah you have grown up with computers at school, and home as well (at a guess) so all of these things are old hat to you. Some parents won't even have heard of MSN let alone know what it is. When you consider children as young as six surf the internet at home, I do think its important to be aware of what kind of sites children network on. I really dont see how you can expect a six year old to be worldy wise and have common sense, or even an eight or a thirteen year old.

Im playing devils advocate for this next point so dont think I mean this or am accusing you of anything.
How do I actually know you are a young lady called Sarah who likes Saxaphone, I dont because I only know what you tell me, for all I know you are a middleaged man who hates saxaphone (I don't think that is the case).

For children looking on sites such as Beebo etc they see profiles with pictures of young girls or boys who appear to have the same interests as them, why wouldn't they befriend them? The awareness factor comes in so adults can let children know, what is appropriate or not to post on these websites. If you have a mobile phone Sarah I guess that you have given your friends your phone number. Well how do you expect a child to diferenciate between giveing their phone number or email out to a friend at school and a friend they have been chatting to for six months on the internet?????

Yes, it's up to parents to be aware of what is safe for a kid and what is not. Because even teenage girls have been lured by what they judged to be a 'friend' and even prospective 'boyfriend' online to go out and meet them. And in real life, they were crooks.

So one has to be wary when meeting strangers and talking to them, and that's up to the parents if the child is underage. Good communication in the home is essential and the child should not be made afraid to share with their parents about what they do online. And parents should not be negative about the web totally either, but teach their child safe networking skills.

I agree parents should be aware of these things, however I agree with Sarah that sensationalising everything, and stirring up panic only makes parents scared and paranoid.

Portraying MSN as a scary thing where children habitually talk to strangers, and paedophiles and are constantly in danger is ridiculous. Parents should be educated as to what MSN actually is, and then should teach their children to be safe and responsible by NOT adding strangers, and NOT accepting pictures from people they don't know.

Rather than saying parents should spy on their children, they should give parents the information necessary to talk to their children.

And MSN isn't dangerous, as Sarah said, unless you go out of your way to make it dangerous. Any child that doesn't know the dangers of talking to people they don't know, and giving out information to people they don't know on the internet is... severely behind.
The amount of times this sstuff is repeated at any school, the amount of times it's spoon fed to children (at my school there are numerous assemblies on the subject) means that anyone giving out personal information is well aware of the risks of this - so very few people do it.

The fact is, children are in far more danger from people they know than people they don't because "STRANGER DANGER" has been around for so long that children KNOW not to court danger... so all this scaremongering is really unnecessary.

(I'm so tired today I don't know if this makes sense, but if it doesn't, please ignore it...)

Is it just me or are we more likely to go looking for trouble the more we are warned about it?

The problem with the internet is exactly the same as the one that comes in real life - there is always a point at which you have to use your judgement and skill and decide whether you trust a person or not.
And of course, despite what the scaremongers say, most people are genuine, nice and trustworthy.
But...the particular problem of the internet is that a lot of the cues we use to tell whether a person is genuine or not are missing. Face to face you can see the shifty expression, ask the awkward question and see the hesitation. Over the net there is no such chance.
So the only cues we can use to make that decision are the info they choose to post. Then once the decision is made (that's a nice person) we let our guard drop and tend to stop looking.

Here is a small story as food for thought...

Years ago I used to cycle to work along a main road. Most days I would see a guy on his bike doing the same journey in reverse. We used to smile and wave at each other. This went on for years.
One day, we actually met at a junction and started to speak. He invited me to tea. I went. By then, in my mind, I knew him well.
It all started OK but when he started going on about Hitler and showed me his Nazi uniform I realised that he was a fairly serious wierdo.
Luckily for me, one of the "mostly harmless" variety (his mum was in the house and I was never in any personal danger).

But after making my excuses and leaving I realised that I'd made the fundamental error of mistaking familiarity (I'd seen him every day for years) for actual knowledge.

So in answer to the original post, yes there's a lot of stupid OTT hype about internet dangers. As lucky045 says "Any child that doesn't know the dangers of talking to people they don't know, and giving out information to people they don't know on the internet is... severely behind"
Possibly the message that doesn't get through so well is that, yes indeed, the bigger danger is from people we think we know, and over the net it is so easy to build up a wide group of "friends" who actually come into that category.

This has suddenly become a 'Big Issue' in our house, literally over the past few days.

I think the media concentrates too much on the negatives. Yes, I know that there are a lot of them, but they don't need to focus wholly on them. Take for instance this forum. Ok, so it's not aimed specifically at the younger generations, but we're not discouraged from using them, it would seem we're valued almost as much as some of the older members. The forum concerts - if the media were to talk about them, they would be classed under 'meeting strangers from the internet', wouldn't they? Has anyone here ever gone to a forum concert to find that multiple people have been lying about their identity? Not as far as I know.

The point my parents constantly make to me is that it doesn't matter how responsible one person may be, all it takes is for them to be fooled by another. But in this day and age, surely we know how to spot the warning signs? Why anyone would give out their home address/mobile number to a complete stranger, let alone arrange to meet them, is beyond me.

That said, I'm probably going to be meeting up with a member of this forum this week, and was meant to meet another one last weeked. Does that mean I've put myself at risk? Possibly - how do I know that both of these people aren't completely lying about who they are, what they do, where they live? I'd like to think that I can trust my instincts, but it concerns me that some people can get it so wrong.

To answer the original question, yes the media do tend to over-emphasise issues for effect. However, I think it is important that everyone employs a certain amount of caution when using any form of electronic comunication. I followed this forum for a few weeks before I started participating - it allowed me to get a gut feel for various posters. I now feel that I've got to know quite a few people on here quite well. Well enough to have no problem with meeting them. I arranged to meet one fellow forumist just last week, and even though we couldn't find each other at the venue, I can guarantee that she is perfectly well and has not been disposed of!

Contrary to popular belief, most people are not axe-weilding murderers. However, I must advise anyone (especially our younger friends) to practise caution.

There is allways an element of risk in anything that we do. There is inherent risk in crossing the road. To make that risk zero, we must ensure that we never try to cross any roads ever. Or ever get in an aeroplane. Or..... You get my drift!

Just be careful. But don't stop living!

Hubby and I have made friends as a result of discussion lists and forums, but then we're a pair of adults who don't hide out identities, and the people we've made friends with are similar.

We are, however more careful about the children... one reason that the family computer is in the dining room, that way I can glance over the boys shoulders if and when they get the chatroom bug.

There are some real sickos out there, but then there have always been some real sickos out there. I hate the media sensationalising everything, but yet agree as a parent it is your responsibility to insure your kids are safe.

Speaking of which, there is a good side to the internet. I was looking for a violin teacher last year. And in my area it's very hard to find good violin teachers. And if not for the internet and the AB forums, I wouldn't have met my friend, who is a violin teacher and actually living not that very far away from me! We actually took the plunge and met up before I was looking for a teacher and so we became friends and then I asked her to teach me.

I think this is a valid point. Jod, myself and a few others have URLs on our profiles, 'real' photographs. One click and you can find our real names, addresses, phone numbers etc.

Partly because of the hype we "cotton wool" our youngsters too much and they don't learn to recognise danger and assess it for themselves. "There is always an element of risk in anything that we do" - (thank you Phil) - and we have to learn how to handle that.
As Phil also says "Contrary to popular belief, most people are not axe-wielding murderers" - in fact the truth is positive: most people are decent.
Of course we don't want horrors to happen, but how much do we 'invite' or 'provoke' or fear needlessly?

I do agree with the points above, but Wossy for example, you happen to be a mature 16/17 year old (sorry I could remember exactly ) My point was leaning more towards very young people using the net. How can they be expected to understand the difference between giving a good internet friend personal contact info and giving a school friend personal contact info? IMHO they probobly can't unless it is explained to them, therefore the parents have to know about these things, in order to explain how to use sites safely.

Some people can get it really wrong because they just are simply not old and wise enough to realise what they are doing could be putting themselves at risk.

Eeer anyway scaremongering aside, hopefully most people are aware now of the risks adults and children alike. Unfortuntley with the older and wiser thing will come the realisation that the media are 99% of the time, sensationalists, because that is what sells, the whole truth or the mature perspective on things is sadly not seen to be marketable to the majority of the population. So use your own judgement, ignore the crazy headlines, and if it really gets your goat then just think there is probobly afew parents out there that had not been aware of the risks, and have now been able to advise their children on safe useage.

Exactly, go to my profile, and you can link to my web page, go there and you get access to my email account. Google my name and the same person keeps cropping up on the list... me - telephone numbers, address and all.

My details are not exactly private, and I don't feel I'm jeopardising personal security. After all anyone can go to the parish office and find my details on the electoral roll.

The photo on my profile actually is me. But then I teach and if I hid myself away, I would get no pupils.

Sorry, I think I slightly misunderstood your original post, Katy.

Not a problem, it is more than likely my wording, I am a big talker and find it hard to articulate a decent point on the internet as my brain is going 3 times faster than I can type

I don't like this cotton wool approach to kids. Unfortunately as my boys have not been wrapped in cotton wool, they are not your conventioal 6 and 8 year olds. They answer back, have opinions on everything and have some freedom.

I want them to have "sicko radar" and feel comfortable talking to thier mummy and daddy as well as making other friends real or virtual.

The journalist was an idiot.

If he'd gone online as himself using his own picture no one would have bothered him.

He only has himself to blame!



best wishes

barry

(But seriously ... 90%+ of child abuse happens within families, close family friends and known associates. However risky it might be for kids on the internet, it's much riskier in the sitting room.)

I recommend a book by Bruce Schnieder called "Living in Fear", its all about security particularly post 9/11.

The thing about it is that it highlights how important human radar is at catching out the neer-do-wells. I normally can tell if someone is a fruad, like most users here can spot a troll. Now children don't have that experience, but just like the homo-sexual community have gaydar, I wonder if the nature's paedophiles have "perv.dar" and picked up that this reporter was a hoax.

The internet is evil

EVIL I say!!

MUAHAHAHAHAHAHA

*dons alumnimum foil hat to block out the radio waves and thought suckers*

Don't forget that there are people out there who can be astonishingly naive when it comes to things like this. Just think of all the people who've been caught out by the various Nigerian scams, phishing e-mails etc. Appeal to someone's vanity or greed and people are suckered, even when scams have been well publicised and most people are thinking "How could someone be stupid enough to fall for that?".

Close to 10 years ago a work colleague e-mailed me a Word document that I was expecting, when I clicked to open it I got the "Caution contains macros, do you want to Enable?" dialogue box - I did think twice because it wasn't usual to have macros in Word docs, but not 3 times because about 80% of the spreadsheets we worked with did have macros in them and I presumed this colleague was doing something fancy with a Word template. I was wrong - it was a virus. When I called to tell him his reply was "That's not a virus, it's just a piece of code that attaches itself to all your Word documents and makes them crash". He wasn't stupid, and was highly technically literate but just didn't believe he was in danger of being infected by a virus and even convinced himself that he wasn't despite all the indications to the contrary.

then I bet you are glad you don't often use the Forums, or msn or the Internet or maybe even email...

user to help desk... my car won't go any further....helpdesk: have you tried putting petrol in it? User: what's petrol?


Why are people soo gulible when it comes to computer.

Help desk to idiot user: I suggest you disconnect your modem and or broadband?

User: Why?

Help desk: Because people like you shouldn't be allowed access to the internet.
(rest of computer support team using anti-virus software exterminator programme to get rid of "bit of code that makes computer crash" aka a virus.)

Now you know why I gave up help desks and started teaching!

Some would say that I misguide people with my handle, indicating a different gender. Is this wrong of me?

Can I just point out that there have been any number of mis-interpretations of intentions even on this site - people finding insults where none have been intended, for instance? Misunderstandings like these happen because we can't see the whole person, and have no idea what they have made up and what is real. Even the folks who tell us their profile pictures really are themselves don't have to be what or who they say they are - I for one choose not to have a recognisable image or contact details because, as a medical practitioner, I could be targeted at home by those who would like to have access to my medical bag, for instance...
Kids are more innocent than adults, and more inclined to take things at face value than those with more experience - because of the way computers have exploded into our consciousness over the last decade and a half, they also imagine that their superior techie knowledge somehow imparts superior radar when it comes to detecting weirdos - and that quite simply is not true - I've seen evidence of this first-hand. I'm not supportive of the paranoia peddled by some sections of the press, but I do see the need for parents to inform themselves, and to go a little more cautiously than their impatient offspring would like them to go in case of doubt. Sure, the horror cases are rare, but the point which comes up again and again in discussions is that the kids in those cases have not been properly supervised or had suitable discussions at home about safe practice online.

I'm not allowed MSN!!

My parents let me get MSN a few years ago now, but I only was allowed to talk to people whose addresses I got from school. Since then I have a few forum members on there, but if I don't know someone or dislike what they are sending me, they get blocked. SImple enough! My parents still do keep tabs and make sure I don't give out my real name/address.

that sounds quite reasonable - keeping you safe as much as possible while allowing you (guiding you?) to develop your own judgement

It is pretty reasonable. But they still won't let me come to forum events! When I get to university....

that's a shame - won't they bring you to one? to see how odd nice musicians really are?

No chance, I'm afraid. They'd be bored stiff by it all!

and nobody else they would allow to bring you to a concert, I suppose

No adults I know would bring me Still, only 2 years until I'm at university!

you are looking forward to that I think

Yes! Although I will still be careful, it'll be nice to be careful myself and not have my parents being careful for me.

exactly - part of what parents call 'growing up'

My thoughts exactly!

I thought Miss Ross' post was a perfect example of how the two aspects of online life conflict!

Obviously, people are going to meet up in real life - the point is what conditions and safeguards they use.

I've met valued friends via the internet, and I think it is possible for young people to do so too...but we should also remember that we're skipping several of the steps that a normal offline friendship goes through. It doesn't hurt to let everybody know what and when you are doing if you plan to meet somebody, and for both parties to meet in a very public place, and to take somebody else along too.

I recently encountered a truly scary example of kids' internet access and parental supervision gone way wrong! No details, sorry, but here's an example of what happens when kids are more scared of their parent's anger/discipline/possible restriction of computer use than they are of the huge but largely unknown risks of contacting online friends secretly.

One young person, A, invited another young person B along on a trip - they'd known each other online for 2-3 years. B agreed, on condition that they didn't tell each other their real names, phone numbers etc. B was so scared of what his/her parents would say about meeting an online friend that s/he told his/her parents that s/he had suddenly decided to make a 5-day trip all by him/herself. A didn't stop to think that B might not be the same age or even the same gender as s/he said s/he was, and at first respected B's plea not to tell anybody. Luckily, A told his/her parents, they vetted the situation, and it was all above board. But...

Who would imagine that an apparently intelligent and sensible teenager would think it was a better idea to go off for 5 days with a total stranger without telling anybody, than to discuss the idea with his/her parents?