The director of a British child protection agency, Ceop, wants Facebook to install a “panic” button on every page, in order to give under-age users a means to report suspicious activity. The director, Jim Gamble, and the agency have a campaign on to convince Facebook to do something about a variety of issues children face on the site, including cyberbullying, “distressing material,” luring them into real-life meetings and other behaviors.
Jim Gamble, director of the Ceop (Child Exploitation and Online Protection) center, who previously mounted an anti-bullying campaign, feels the need for a panic button is even more of an urgent matter after the recent death of a 17 year-old user who was lured by a predator with past history. While Facebook executives have resisted pressure from the UK government, including the Prime Minister and Home Secretary, they are now willing to consider solutions, and will meet with Gamble in Washington, D.C.
While his intent is good, the Ceop director seems a bit naive in believing that the bulk of Facebook’s 400M+ users — most of whom are likely above 21 — would want to see a “Panic” button on every single page. If you’re of legal age, wouldn’t you find that disturbing and disconcerting to see, every time you browsed Facebook? Not seeing said button doesn’t mean we care about child safety any less, but there possibly other solutions. While cannot always protect children from experiencing or seeing things they shouldn’t on Facebook, there are some measures Facebook could take. Here are just a few:
- Educate more parents in the benefits and dangers of Facebook, so they’ll hopefully be compelled to monitor their minor children’s use of social networking sites. With more children spending considerable time online, it’s important that every parent knows as much about Facebook as they do about TV. Just take note that if you change your child’s Facebook password and post things about him/ her, it might get you sued.
- Use an age-based filter for displaying the “Panic” button that Ceop’s director wants “on every page” of Facebook. That means that if a user’s profile info shows that they are under the age of minority in a certain locale, they should automatically see the “Panic” button. Unfortunately, kids sometimes lie about their age when creating a Facebook account. It really falls on parents to monitor use. (Despite what some people say, that Facebook does not have a minimum age requirement, just try signing up a test account under a certain age — I’ve heard 13 — and you’ll get the message, “You are ineligible to register for Facebook.” I know several 10-12 year olds in my community who say they signed up for a Facebook account but admitted lying about their age to do so.)
- Use Wall status analyses to guess at age. This is a far more complex solution that would involve having algorithms in place to determine if the text of a Facebook user’s status updates suggests they are minors or at least within a certain age range that having a “Panic” button might benefit them. This is not something that could necessarily be implemented in a short time frame, without considerable research, but it is possible. (Note: Pete Warden’s now-destroyed Facebook user data set might have been partially useful in this regard.)
If you have minor children, do you let them use Facebook? What measures do you think Facebook should implement to help protect children using the site, whether or not the sign up with a fake age in their profile. Should the site placate Ceop’s director and install a “Panic” button on every page?
Hello Raj,
I am president of AssertID, Inc. a US company providing web-based identity verification solutions. We currently offer a free application available on Facebook which could immediately address item #3 from your article by providing a easy, low-friction means to verify the self-asserted identity attributes (including age) of Facebook users. Please take a moment to visit http://www.assertid.com for more details and please contact me if I can answer any questions or assist in any way. I have also reached-out to Jim Gamble at Ceop to share the same information.
Regards
Keith Dennis
keith@assertid.com
Comment by Keith Dennis — April 12, 2010 @ 4:49 pm
By looking at their FaceBook profile pictures or by developing a fun game that requires the age of an individual.
Comment by Jerome — April 12, 2010 @ 7:47 pm
Yeah, like that wouldn't be trolled at all. I can just picture some kid hitting every panic button on every profile he or she sees.
Comment by Ally — April 13, 2010 @ 5:44 am
This is absurd. A "panic button"? Really? And how often do you think that said panic button will be hit for reasons other than legitimate ones? I disagree with that page, hit the panic button. I don't like that person, hit the panic button. I want to get my friend in trouble because I'm mad at them, hit the panic button. Let's be realistic, it would devolve into another way to harass people.
Comment by Monique — April 13, 2010 @ 6:06 am
There is no need for a Panic Button because CHILDREN SHOULD NOT BE USING FACEBOOK!!
Those who allow kids to use facebook should instantly be investigated for neglect. Kids hsould not be using this site.
Comment by Phil — April 13, 2010 @ 6:10 am
isn't there a "report/block this person" or "report this page" already on the bottom left corner of every page? And what is face book supposed to do once alerted? Where is personal responsibility? If someone you are "friends with" posts something suicidal hopefully you'll do something, or you aren't really friends now are you?
Same with bullying, block the person. It ain't that hard to click "block" This isn't like the school yard where you can't hide from the offending bully. Why would a kid stay "FB friends" with someone who isn't nice to them?
What about the parents of the bully? Where is that parent? "Good job Billy! Poke that loser one more time! I saw that joke about his mom, well done!" Really?
If you want your kids protected, protect them. That's your job as a parent.
Comment by Mike — April 13, 2010 @ 6:57 am
Installing "panic buttons" has to be one of the most absurd ideas I have heard yet. Aside from the obvious issues of adults having to see them too, there are other reasons not to so this. Principally, the panic button would be used as a way to harass others and stifle free speech. Don't like what this page says, hit the panic button. Don't like that person, hit the panic button, mad at your friend, hit the panic button. This panic button is targeted to exactly the demographic who would do these things.
Comment by Monique — April 13, 2010 @ 8:10 am
This is a no brainer to me. Surely protecting children and vulnerable adults is the highest priority of any social networking site (as Facebook claims it is). Yes parents should monitor and control their children's internet use but we know that not all parents can or will do this.
As an adult user of Facebook and UK citizen I would be wholly re-assured that children, who are rightly or wrongly using Facebook, have somewhere to turn to if they find themselves in a frightening situation and that they can do that literally at the click of a button without having to search for it.
Yes you can block someone but we need every weapon in our armoury to prevent the abuse of children. Let's make the internet as safe as it can be! Often abusers are really nice to children and build up great 'friendships' and trust in order to get close. Why would a child block such a person?
Beebo, Myspace and other sites have installed the CEOP 'panic button', why not Facebook?!
As for stifling free speech etc., Please give the UK police some credit to investigate any allegations sensibly.
If you agree with me please add a comment. Hopefully the senior management team will see sense and provide the necessary CEOP link on every page.
Comment by John Milne — April 13, 2010 @ 12:58 pm
@John Milne: the fact that you and others would be 'wholly reassured' by the presence of the panic button is precisely what the problem is.
See the article I've written at http://www.chrisbardell.com/?p=1681
Comment by Chris Bardell — April 19, 2010 @ 3:31 am
@John Milne: We make crossing the street as safe as possible too, and there are still pedestrian deaths. Bottom line, no place is 100% safe and installing a panic button, which if other articles are to be believed, merely link to help and actually do not do any reporting is not going to help either.
Yes, parents are not always there to guide children. They should be. No, it is not my responsibility to personally protect every child on this planet.
As for "giv[ing] the UK police some credit to investigate any allegations sensibly": why on earth should I when it is clear that in sexual predation cases a person is always assumed guilty until proven innocent?
Can you give me one reason (on your own) as to why you think this will actually protect anyone? And what weapon is a link, precisely? At least a report button actually does something.
I would also point out that "making the internet as safe as it can be" would most likely violate a whole lot of laws currently on the books, not just in the UK, but also in the US, Australia, France… need I go on?
Comment by Monique — April 19, 2010 @ 9:25 am
1. It’s business as usual for the Commies: Force compliance at the forcee’s expense.
2. Who is going to handle the traffic this “button” creates? Oh, the forcee gets to pay for that too.
3. Free advertising on high for CEOP… another commie tactic.
4. Where are the parents? The internet is not a babysitter!
CEOP, get over yourselves. You provide NOTHING, you demand everything and expect everyone else to pay for your ignorance. I suggest you all get a real job, learn something about EARNING and get off of other’s backs.
Comment by MoeJoe — April 25, 2010 @ 12:15 pm
Thanks for the responses to my comment. Some valid points. I will just add one observation at the moment. That is that CEOP do go into schools in the UK to educate young people about safe use of the internet and how to use their link/panic button. UK kids will recognize this link as a safe place to get help. No not completely fail safe or a 'magic bullet' I agree but, I feel, re-assuring none the less.
John
Comment by John Milne — April 27, 2010 @ 2:59 pm