Archive
An Izzy-torial: ADD N Me
So, recently I’ve been experiencing moments of mental “fubar”-ness. There’s rhyme and there’s reason for it, and it goes well beyond what I chose to discuss today [there’s a time and place to discuss heartache, personal frustration, and bereavement – and its called ‘vague facebook statuses’ Lolzerbot]. But, I digress…
In my attempts to logically understand some of the chaos I’m trying to sort through in my brain, I’ve come back to a small nugget of a “disability” (and I use that term lightly, as it’s more of a “unique ability”) I’ve grown up with… and that’s what I’m going to dive a bit into. Oh bless cathartic posts.
If you have ADD (Attention Deficit Disorder), or a child with ADD, or a loved one with ADD… maybe what I will share will help you understand a bit of process or frustration they experience. This is, of course, just my point of view… but you never quite know who may identify with it.
College photography “self portrait”.
There’s a whole lot of “god knows what” going on in that brain/expression.
I grew up with ADD (and no, against popular belief, NOT ADHD), and I probably still have some forms of adult ADD. I do not conceptualize the knowledge around me the way that others might consider “normal” (case in point – the phrasing of that statement), or in a way that the greater populous might understand/identify with.
“Nobody realizes that some people expend tremendous energy merely to be normal.” – Alber Camus
Before I was diagnosed at age 10 with ADD, I was “not correct”. Weird statement, right? Lemme explain: I didn’t hear things the way they were meant to be, I didn’t understand directions the way they were given, and I didn’t complete tasks the way they were required. Not on purpose, mind you. You know the phrase “reading between the lines” – it was as if I’d read all the wrong parts, heard non-existent intentions, created context unsaid, and imagined another method for an end result (an end result of my own determination). None of these were consciously chosen.
It was very difficult trying SO HARD to be a good student, a good child, a good person when my interpretations were SO far off. Which goes back to – I was incorrect. I’d go as far to say – I was incorrect about 65% – 75% of the time. Not very good odds, and very hard on a mushy child’s brain in the middle of “formation”. And I haven’t even introduced the fact that I was a stubborn force-to-be-reckoned-with, if not “passionate” child.
The “less awesome” things I learned (or adapted to) from having ADD (tough to swallow for the aforementioned child):
- Never immediately trust my (first) instincts,
- The majority of the world is “correct”, and I am not ,
- “At least my failure is well-intentioned”,
- With context and lots of over-explaining, I too can curb my understanding to eventually match everyone else’s!
When I was diagnosed with ADD – it was a bit of a god send. I wasn’t stupid, and I wasn’t lazy (as were mentioned by some twit-teachers). I had something to cling to – an explanation, a CONTEXT of why I wasn’t “correct”. We started seeking alternative methods to help support my learning disability – finding my strengths in the play patterns I naturally gravitated to — STORIES. Me and my world-o-Barbie? Oh man, no Soap Opera could have EVER compared to the epic, dynamic events that I created in my own wee little world.
Nothing was EVER so powerful as the opportunity for fantastical creation by an imaginative child grasping at “reality” straws.
I made my rules, I made the logic, I got to play GOD and I learned what it felt to be CORRECT. Yay for self-contrived self-confidence! (Lol, sure, but its true). Additionally, writing provided me an opportunity to appeal to others with context, emotion, and creative expression – I discovered the existence and the magic of possibility through another perspective. WHAT? Two people can be correct but with different statements? <- strangely, this is a foreign concept to SOME children who end up having to go by structure and set-statements made by others because they were always made to feel inferior, stupid, or incorrect.
It wasn’t until I started taking my creative writing in college seriously that my soul blossomed and life started to FIT. With a little creative logic, I was able to give context and structure to the things in life I was misunderstanding or failing. With story – it was no longer “memorize this word because everyone else understands it”, but facts and information became tools within a larger story that formed a general understanding – one that I created and could identify with (or “understand”).
Things I learned that benefited me long-term:
- Imagination is so powerful in the entertainment world (occupationally speaking, lol)
- Self-deprecation & humor
- The ability to apologize & accept responsibility (this is actually a fault too, as I’m quick to appeal for an apology for things I shouldn’t apologize for… but I prefer to assume responsibility myself, then be accused)
- Mediation (beyond people, but mediation of differing concepts)
- Reading people and treating judgements carefully
- “There’s always another way” – one door closes, there’s probably 12 more down the hallway (if you will).
- Question. Everything. But respect the populous for their structure.
- EMPATHY EMPATHY EMPATHY
The strange result of me HAVING ADD, and me ADAPTING my ADD to the world is that I approach everything with 2 reactions. This can be very tiring, and at times like a thunderstorm of frustration internally. Occasionally one perspective comes swiftly – like a locomotive train, full of tunnel-vision and speedy determination (and if proven wrong… the subsequent reaction is just as powerful with spiraling questions and epic self-doubt), while the other moseys through the devil’s advocate debate of context and understanding like a Sesame Street skit of silly, imaginative rationals [this is near, this is far. Near. Far. See it?]. Also, when the spotlight is on and your knowledge is questions – there’s a certain measure of insecurity and defensiveness that can come through — but that’s not too far off from how the majority of the world feels, I know. The difference is… growing up with ADD, you already know that you’ve been proven to be “wrong”, and you know the world knows you have a greater % of actually successfully being accused as such. Sure that definition of “wrong” changed over the years to a “unique perspective” (empowerment) – but there are times you can never shake that 3rd grade F because you misunderstood the question or the directions.
I’m thankful for a great many things that ADD empowered me with — as it was a fault that increased my talents. But learning how to “overcome” is much like “success” – it’s a path, a roving goal, and rarely a destination. So, maybe I don’t have adult ADD, and maybe I’ve learned how to adapt to certain things in life… but that doesn’t mean that events from childhood ever truly go away. Every action has a change for thousands of reactions… some you don’t see right away, and some you live with every time your feet get nailed to the floor.
Find outlets, support each other, be empathetic, be certain, and be creative – and help others do the same. I think I have to learn a bit more about self-forgiveness, and I would encourage you to do the same for your child who may or may not have ADD. There’s no better way to end a post like this then with one of the BEST quotes of all time, from my person deity – Jim Henson:
“Watch out for each other. Love everyone and forgive everyone, including yourself. Forgive your anger. Forgive your guilt. Your shame. Your sadness. Embrace and open up your love, your joy, your truth, and most especially your heart.”
It’s Arrived! FTC’s Proposals for COPPA amendments
FTC Seeks Comment on Proposed Revisions to Children’s Online Privacy Protection Rule Changes in Technology Drive Proposed Updates
The Federal Trade Commission is seeking public comment on proposed amendments to the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Rule, which gives parents control over what personal information websites may collect from children under 13. The FTC proposes these amendments to ensure that the Rule continues to protect children’s privacy, as mandated by Congress, as online technologies evolve. The Commission proposes modifications to the Rule in five areas: definitions, including the definitions of “personal information” and “collection,” parental notice, parental consent mechanisms, confidentiality and security of children’s personal information, and the role of self-regulatory “safe harbor” programs.
Wow… so, after a year of research and reflection from the COPPA round table in DC, the FTC has come forward with some proposals / amendments to the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act. This should be VERY interesting, considering the upcoming push for kids to participate in Social Media platforms (*cough* Hearsay… Facebook *cough). Take a look at the link above for full run down from the FTC website. Otherwise, here’s a quick bullet list.
Proposed changes include, my notes in RED:
- Updating the definition of “personal information” to include geolocation and persistent identifiers such as tracking cookies for behavioral advertising. (Wow. I actually think this is GREAT for all those platforms now collecting location. Seems like a no brainer in regards to children. As for Behavioral Advertising? Man oh man, this should be an interesting shake-down.)
- Modifying the definition of “collection” to allow children to participate in interactive communities without parental consent. (Sites must employ reasonable measures to delete all or virtually all children’s personal information before it is made public) (I’m not sure how different this is from what is already practiced? I will need to do a deeper dive to understand what this is in exact reference to, or what this actually affects – if anything at all).
- Streamlining/clarifying information that websites give parents prior to collecting children’s personal information (adding more information in the notifications, and not hiding in only in the Privacy Policy) (This is great in “theory” – but let’s be honest… it’s hard enough to get parents to see the BIG GREEN CLICK HERE / URL at the TOP of a welcome email, regardless of the information buried within the email. I feel this is a “good policy” amendment more than something that will prove helpful, which is sad.)
- New Parental Verification / consent opportunities (Yay! we need new methods!):
- Electronic scans of signed parental consent forms (The modern “fax”, lol. No brainer here.)
- Video-conferencing (Bwaha! Dear gawd almighty – this is BONKERS for scaling… Great for quick-fire Customer Service & Skype, nuts for staffing and sustaining large groups)
- Government-issued IDs checked against a database (note: promptly deleted after verification) (Interesting! Lots of “Big Brother”-esque thoughts stream through my head, and I don’t necessarily think its a bad thing in regards to children… But that’s because those actions help me do my job in protecting my audience).
- PROPOSED DELETION OF EMAIL-PLUS (This is a HUGE FTC proposal. It could affect a LOT of businesses and platforms for kids. Seriously. Not to mention, marketing emails & virtual worlds… People who have been using email plus + great policy are about to lose a LOT of numbers in registrations! Oooo doggy!)
- New 180-day proposal for companies seeking “new” types of verification processes to be vetted and approved (or rejected) by the FTC
- Safe Harbor programs must do annual audits. (Um. Yeah. I feel like there should be biannual audits done, but in a cooperative, friendly manner.)
Zuckerberg wants children under 13 on Facebook?
Zuckerberg said he wants younger kids to be allowed on social networking sites like Facebook. Currently, the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) mandates that websites that collect information about users (like Facebook does) aren’t allowed to sign on anyone under the age of 13. But Zuckerberg is determined to change this.
“That will be a fight we take on at some point,” he said. “My philosophy is that for education you need to start at a really, really young age.”
But just how would Facebook’s social features be used by younger children?
“Because of the restrictions we haven’t even begun this learning process,” Zuckerberg said. “If they’re lifted then we’d start to learn what works. We’d take a lot of precautions to make sure that they [younger kids] are safe.”
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/05/20/zuckerberg-kids-under-13-should-be-allowed-on-facebook/
Here are my first thoughts.
1. PESSIMISM: Of course Mark Zuckerberg wants kids on Facebook – Facebook is a advertising & trend analysis GOLD MINE dressed as a happy, friend-connecting social network. Kids are the largest licensing group, and advertisers would LOVE to get their hands on that kind of market.
So much for the ENTIRE POINT OF COPPA – which wasn’t created for your immediate privacy, but created to PROTECT CHILDREN FROM MARKETERS STEALING OR SWINDLING PII.
Fail.
Also see: Facebook Forced to Address Legal Gray Area of Kids and Advertising from AdAge. http://adage.com/article/digital/facebook-forced-address-kids-advertising/227633/
2. FEAR: Oh, that’s a GREAT idea. Why not make more PERSONALLY IDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION ABOUT MINORS available? Tre sigh. Yes, education is VERY important – particularly about secret identities. But, children under the age of 13 DO NOT HAVE THE COGNITIVE CAPABILITIES TO BE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR PUBLIC PERSONA. Part of being young is that you’re protected and allowed to make mistakes – by allowing that on Facebook – a public platform that reaches far beyond the lunch room, and far beyond your mom telling your aunt about that stupid detention you got? BOO. Not ideal.
3. LOGISTICS & CONCERNS: MODERATION. SCALABILITY. COST. Even if Facebook DID man up and start pre-screening all content contributed by U13 sources, what a nightmare! Staff to cover something like that? Insane. And neither revenue nor cost efficient.
4. HOPE: Any sort of “educational program” that comes with U13 on Facebook would have to be an entire new entity. Think: Facebook Junior, profile training wheels. It would have to be limited, with tutorials and information, and educational guidance. Leverage the sort of YouTube content that SweetyHigh has created (worth checking out). But in no way, would Facebook be able to cruise right into allowing U13 without redesigning the fundamental/core use of Facebook.
4. REALITY: I deal EVERY SINGLE DAY with kid chat, and kid posts, and kid interactions, and behavior crises from U13. I worry about social networks for children that do NOT rely on fantastical role play or themed-content. Those two elements help protect direct attacks (or even mistaken, indirect attacks) on a sensitive and underdeveloped child by allowing creative persona & identity hiding (to a certain extent, of course – real friends playing in fantasy worlds blends that reality vs role play, and takes interaction to a different level). Children are still in the process of social learning. Social learning CAN be expanded – and I do applaud the idea of social network education… but tossing youth into the deep end, where there are daily Trojan attacks on accounts, stolen identity issues & account phishing, cyberbullying, advertising lures, and STRANGERS is not ideal. Think about it: not even normal, rational adults can successfully navigate Facebook accurately…
If there is a way for Zuckerberg to incorporate social networking education, with Facebook structure, I’m eager to see it – but there are quite a few MASSIVE problems in his path. And with this audience? Bowling through the ideals without proper guidance, understanding, or safety nets = not a safe agenda.
I hope Zuck collects his facts, has the necessary research concluded, and (excuse the phrase) gets his shizzz straight before he really dives into something like this. For as much as I applaud optimistic philosophy, I desire educated practicality.
Engage! Expo Conference Prezzie
Hello, hello. Long time no talk. Yes, I realize this, and I send my apologies.
Last week (Sept 22nd), I spoke at the Engage! Expo conference in Santa Clara on User Engagement – aka, the art of engaging users (specifically online gamers 13 and younger, although you could argue for a General rating). It wasn’t one of my most stellar performances, I drown a bit in having FAR too much to say… but I successfully rambled a few decent points & tales, and hopefully shared some new understandings as well.
I am always grateful to the Engage! Expo team (Tonda you’re amazing), and it was great meeting some new people.
Now, prepare yourself for some Heavy. Duty. Slide. Action. I Powerpointed it up HARD CORE (my speech teacher would be throwing ninja stars at me if he knew). Luckily, many people have contacted me asking for my Powerpoint slides… so, I am providing a video of them here.
Questions, comments, problems, scenarios, rambles, quips, complaints, queries, and soliloquies should be directed to the comment section of this post. I’ll do my best to get back to you.
Things I’m kickin’ myself for leaving out: Monetization and the “velvet rope”, How to use live staff well, the Parental Unit, and The fine art of event planning and support. Thank god there’s always future conferences – I can do a “Part Two” slide set 😉
Let’s Chat: COPPA
Twitter. I promised a rant on twitter. I promised a rant due on Thurs. It’s Sunday.
My apologies for the lateness and the possible lack of DRAGON FIRE that I was spittin’ on Thursday. Indeed I was angry, and it had to do with weird (if not troubling and disappointing) rumors spread about COPPA. But like the fear-mongering such rumors create – a tantrum is not what is needed here either. Clarity is what is needed.
So, my dear poppets – lemme share the facts about COPPA: Past, Present, and Future…
PAST
COPPA is the only “real” legislation we have to enforce/protect children under the age of 13. COPPA stands for: Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act. It was created to stop marketers from collecting and exploiting personally identifiable information from children. What is personally identifiable information (or PII)?
First name / last name, phone number, email address, social security number, home address.
It’s also to good to consider the following PII:
School name, instant message clients, usernames for other sites, sister/brother/parents/teacher full names, zip code, small town + states, after school activity locations. – These are not held as stringently as the first group, but they’re equally as important since you can locate any child regarding this information. Basically: if I can find you easily with the info you provide… that could be argued as PII.
Remember this tip for the kiddies and yourself: Tangible/Open Air (non computer) life = Clark Kent, Online life = Superman.
COPPA is upheld by the FTC, who regularly posts announcements on their page: http://www.ftc.gov/. There is a program governed by the FTC called “Safe Harbor”, and it is upheld by four organizations (CARU, ESRB, TRUSTe, Privo). If you wish to be a part of the Safe Harbor program – you will get aid in meeting regulations, suggestions for “going beyond” and being better than bare minimum, and you will have legal representation if your compliance comes into question. I have had the privilege to work with CARU and the ESRB (whom I am very happy to work with now), and I know the fine folks at Privo. I would definitely suggest that any company or individual wishing to learn more about Safe Harbor reach out to these companies.
At one point they tried to make additional legislation: COPA (Children’s Online Protection Act) and DOPA (Deleting Online Predators Act) – both of which have been dismissed due to First Amendment (COPA) and sheer impossibility due to variables (the latter).
PRESENT
How is COPPA being used? Well, no longer just a deterrent for Marketers, it is the sole legislation for anyone collecting any information regarding children under 13. But why would someone need to collect info from kids?
1. Newsletters
2. Registration for games
3. submitted in conversation (chat), pictures, audio, etc (basically – UGC, “User Generated Content”)
I exist in the epicenter of business, safety, entertainment, common sense, community, and I’m telling you… there is no real arguable reason to collect PII from children. The decision regarding the sharing of any such PII information belongs to the parents. Ahh, now there’s the rub – how do parents make/enact/provide/receive that permission?? Lemme get to that in a sec.
What I forgot to mention in the “Past” section is that – COPPA legislation pinpoints 4 acceptable ways to gain PERMISSION to collect PII: a fax with a parents signature, valid credit card, phone call acceptance, and email-plus. Naturally there are problems with all four methods.
- Fax = expensive, not “earth” friendly, and who really owns a fax anymore? Not to mention – kids attempt to sign and fax themselves (the wily things they are). You lose more customers than you gain when you expect them to stop at KINKOS to fax something out – too much time, so long future customer.
- Valid Credit Card = No one wants to put their digits in (and they had the 1 dollar charge, despite the fact we dismiss the charge), kids as young as 9 are toting their parent’s credit cards, it’s an opportunity to collect PII inadvertently from a child (AGE GATE MEMBERSHIP, pls), and kids have been known to take the card from mom’s purse (the cheeky things they are). Strangely enough – for parents who do not have any intention on purchasing a membership – they don’t really want to put in any CC information. Do I blame them? Nope. Too many “but what if my kid can access my number” or “But I don’t want to tricked into paying” or “Ugh, I have stuff to do. Dinner is almost ready. I don’t want to do this now, let’s go eat.” deterrent!
- Phone Call Acceptance = Heavy lifting on the part of CS, expensive call services, and how do you determine an adult’s voice if the adult happens to be squeaky? Or a child who has low tones? And, kids attempt to call in pretending to be parents (the sneaky things the are). One of the easier methods “in theory” – parents can just pick up and dial and say “yes” or whatever. No biggie. Except that – parents can’t make those phone calls if they’re at work, and sadly, from what I’ve heard, more kids call in than actual parents.
- Email Plus = The least rigid, most used, least reliable method. You request the parent’s email during the kid registration, you send a “Welcome” email that includes a click-through link that will open up UGC possibilities, the adult visits the link and chooses to allow or not allow UGC, and 24 hours later the parent gets another email reminding them that they did this (in case kids invade the family email, they will be caught “unawares” by the follow-up – or at least that’s the theory). The problem is that – a certain percentage of kids are putting their own email into the Parent Email slot, and trump the whole parent connection.
Personally, I lean towards Email Plus as a method these days. As I said – I’m in the epicenter of a lot of needs. My first and foremost goal is: SAFETY, followed by ENTERTAINMENT (kid style), and then the business, etc. Granted Email Plus isn’t the “safest” – but that’s why I have POLICY AND PROCEDURE. I have moderation toolsets and staff, and, well me (cue chip on shoulder, my apologies). We work behind the scenes during the live existence of the game to ensure that privacy remains active, despite the audience themselves. AND TRUST – this ain’t no walk in the park.
Children DO NOT understand what they should / should not speak about, nor do they get (en masse, I’m talking about now) why they should / should not speak. So… you can pretty much guarantee that kids will attempt to share SOMETHING – the way around collecting this is:
- Pre-screening & scrubbing content,
- Filters that block anything close to PII (heavy, heavy black lists, or CLEVER dictionary chat that also reads phrases),
- Filters that jedi-mind-trick the user (have you tried chatting with another user in Club Penguin? Only like 25-30% of what you try to say actually shows up to the public – this lowers frustration from users while safety guarding them from the public),
- Scripted chat (Poptropica is still uber-popular and there isn’t an ounce of open or filtered chat
- Post-hoc moderation – LIVE 24/7 staff on the look out for kids who figured out “work arounds” (like toe tree fort hive stick stephen for two three four five six seven)
- Reporting mechanisms for kids to pinpoint those who are cheating the system
You don’t have to have all of them… but it’s a big decision to make, and not lightly either. Get council (from someone not selling you a product, please).
Once I have my front-line and behind-the-scenes methods in place – my next goal is to make sure kids come in and play the game… that they’re active and enjoying it. If I don’t have kids on my site, I have no audience: no money, no sustainability, no kids to protect, no job. And where does that leave kids? Instead of at Disney World with the families and the attention to detail and overpopulated staff, they’re at Six Flags with the gangs and high school peer pressure (seriously, have you BEEN to a Six Flags in the last ten years? What is up with that? Um, NO, I don’t want to watch fourteen year olds try to make babies while I’m in line to ride on Batman, thank you. And no, I didn’t bring my Latin Kings sweatshirt today, darn I don’t fit in).
I do not, not, not recommend “Email Plus” for who has no intention of truly backin’ up the LIVE safety on their site.
If you do not have valid parental sign off for your online experience: you cannot allow UGC of any kind unless it’s screened first by staff and scrubbed of possible PII. That means: usernames, chat, forum threads, forum posts, blog comments, guest books, comment walls, upload pictures, upload video, upload audio. Basically: anything a user can submit needs to go through filters and screening. Anything considered PII needs to be scrubbed.
What’s good policy? Well, even when you GET the “valid parental permission” – you still filter the content, and you still have staff moderating. This is YOUR brand and YOUR audience.
BTW: If anyone comes to you and tells you that a toolset will solve all your problems and that it will replace human staff – you better get your warning flag up. THEY’RE SELLING YOU. Gross.
THE FUTURE
So, about two months ago I had the EXTREME privilege to sit on a stage at the Engage! Expo conference in NYC with Phyllis Marcus. Phyllis is from the FTC and had been commissioned to look into behaviors in virtual worlds. She has an interesting report here regarding the behaviors that were found.
When I spoke with her – the majority of my questions were around: How, when, what. This was just an initial peek for the FTC into behaviors, and much of what they found was from first time viewing. We talked a fair bit about COPPA, and what was next for the FTC.
Both Congress (on April 29th) and the FTC (June 2nd roundtable) are re-examining safety and privacy – and what that means from their standpoint. Okay, their standpoint… but what about OUR standpoint, what will that mean for us?
- COPPA HAS NOT CHANGED.
- Talks are beginning: People are looking to open up conversation, reassess, get feedback about COPPA
- If changes are made to any part of COPPA it will not be immediate
- If COPPA does receive some changes, adds, tweaks, deletes – it will have a “Goes into Effect” date
- If there is a “Goes into Effect” date – companies will have a GRACE PERIOD in which to react
- But most importantly: NOTHING HAS BEEN PUT INTO LAW YET. And regardless of any rumors regarding: “So and so said this” or “I heard that the FTC has already decided” – etc. Stop perpetuating rumor that scares others into reacting.
IF COPPA changes, it will probably change due to parent verification – either attempting to find better methods of verification or deleting old methods of verification considered ineffective.
This shouldn’t affect any LIST (be it black, white, etc) that you have on your site. As long as kids who ARE NOT PARENT VERIFIED are set to default “Scripted Chat” (or pre-written chat) you’re fine. DO NOT ALLOW KIDS TO CHAT (filters or no) WITHOUT VALID PARENT VERIFICATION. How to do that? Talk to company offering the Safe Harbor program. Lawyers know a lot – but they’re NOT workin’ on this side of the biz daily, and it’s basically they’re job to be paranoid about the law (not necessarily how kids are using it). With the exception of a handful (@steph3n , @amymms , @mikepink , Liisa Thomas – yes two i’s, and Jim Dunstan, etc), I’d be mindful. Don’t overreact because of fear. Be proactive in finding out how, why, when, what it means to address kids online, to collect information, and to safeguard kids online (people to follow: @annecollier , @joipod , @twizznerd , @amymms , @tlittleton , @larrymagid , @shapingyouth , @chasestraight to name just a small handful, there are many more).
You have the parent’s permission – now it’s about upholding that parent’s permission and your brand and the safety of your audience. Robust chat filters are great – THERE IS NO ONE SINGLE COMPANY SELLING THE ONLY APPROVED LIST THAT FOLLOWS THE LAW. If you hear that? That’s bullshit. Straight up. Someone is scaring you into buying a product, and that just breaks my heart…
I would LOVE LOVE LOVE LOVE to get into a discourse about my hopes, intentions, and goals for our industry. I have met some really amazing, dedicated, SMART people – and together we’re continually trying to improve. But when people come in and say things to “sell”? That. Just. Guts. Me. I know I live in the country of capitalism… but that doesn’t mean I have to support it.
I’ve put a LOAD of information in here. My apologies for a lengthy, not so cheeky, probably boring post. But let’s be honest – I needed to ramble on this topic. Clarity is good. If you don’t believe me, or wish to dispute any claims I’ve made… please feel free to GOOGLE COPPA YOURSELF, and/or talk to lawyers AND safe harbor folks. Heck, place some comments, questions at the beep and we can walk/talk through it together. 🙂
Digital Downloading in Diapers
According to the NPD Group’s study of women with children age 2 to 14 in their household, marketers need to focus their marketing campaigns as much on the parents as they do the children. Why? Because 43% of children obtained their first digital download at the tender age of six, or under.
NPD Group: Digital downloading starts age 6 and under – Trends & Ideas – BizReport
The article also states: 79% of children age 2-14 have obtained some form of digital or physical content.
Wowza. There you have it – they just keep getting younger and younger. Digital education for both YOUTH and FAMILIES continues to be more and more important.
props to ypulse for the find.
Top Points in the latest FTC Report
This is pioneering stuff on the part of the US government. The Federal Trade Commission today sent to Congress its close study of 27 online virtual worlds – 14 for children under 13 and 13 aimed at teens and adults – looking at the level of sexually explicit and violent content and what the VWs were doing to protect children from it. I think it’s important for parents to keep in mind when reading the study or just the highlights here that “content” in virtual worlds means user-generated content (which is why, in “Online Safety 3.0,” we put so much stress on viewing children as stakeholders in their own well-being online and teaching them to be good citizens in their online and offline communities). Here are some key findings:
http://www.netfamilynews.org/2009/12/ftcs-milestone-report-on-virtual-worlds.html
As I rambled (extensively) earlier, the FTC report has been making its way across the web today. The oh so wonderful Anne Collier at NetFamilyNews.org has picked up the pdf and given it a good read over… click the link above to read her top points.
I’m so jazzed to see what comes of these findings, and how they improve digital citizenship, or enlighten those who did not realize the power of TEXT online.
w00t.
Thought to Chew of the Day: Accountibility of Language
I’m stuck pondering language, words, meanings, and MEANings.
When I was in high school, I had this amazing teacher named Father Paul (yes, I went to a Catholic high school). Father Paul gave us these AMAZING tests on Fridays, such as “Compare the reign of Mickey Mouse to that of Jesus”, and then we’d have to sit and think and write a 4+ page paper reasoning out the differences and similarities of Mickey Mouse and Jesus, using the knowledge we’ve gained regarding Jesus in class, and then our understanding of Mickey Mouse in pop culture. For as silly as comparing Mickey Mouse to Jesus seems, it’s actually a really great exercise, and one of my favorite lessons (although, at the time, I hated it). It was an interesting test. On one hand, as long as you had SOME understanding of both Jesus and Mickey Mouse – you could complete the task. If you actually were able to grapple with and then form opinions on content both learned in class, as well as experienced in life, you would ACE the test. Strangely enough, not many ACED FP tests… lol. Oh, the high school brain. Anyway —
So… taking a leaf from the tree of knowledge that FP helped plant in my brain, I thought about presenting the same sort of challege to anyone willing to pick it up here on the ole blog…
Should we ban the phrase (and concept) Sticks and stones may break your bones but words will never hurt you from ever being taught to children?
There’s no right or wrong answer here, and I do realize that the word “ban” is excessive (or is it?)… I used it for a reason. And heck, if you don’t think it’s excessive enough to warrant (or provoke) any thought, then add “under penalty of law” on there for spice.
There’s a whole slew of possible reactions depending on how your willingness to consider such a statement based on your knowledge of youth, web safety, language, entertainment, socialization, comfort, protection, current state of social media & privacy, and your opinion of the First Amendment.
Even if you don’t wish to comment, all I ask is for you to take a moment to processes and consider the various sides of the question and how deep it could go, from devils advocate ideas and passionate opinions, to aloof statements and irreverent humor.
I don’t know… maybe it’s a lame brain exercise, but I like it… it touches on a lot of different areas I deal with regularly in moderation, community, and protecting (and ENCOURAGING/TEACHING) children online. If you have a better concept to ponder, I happily invite you to add it in the comments below too.
Virtual Worlds and Youth: Accessing Explicit Content
FTC Report Finds Sexually and Violently Explicit Content in Online Virtual Worlds Accessed by Minors
Recommends Best Practices to Shield Children and Teens
The Federal Trade Commission today issued a report that examines the incidence of
sexually and violently explicit content in online virtual worlds. The congressionally mandated report, “Virtual Worlds and Kids: Mapping the Risks,” urges operators of virtual worlds to take a number of steps to keep explicit content away from children and teens, and recommends that parents familiarize themselves with the virtual worlds their kids visit.The report analyzes how easily minors can access explicit content in virtual worlds, and the measures virtual world operators take to prevent minors from viewing it. According to the findings, although little explicit content appeared in child-oriented virtual worlds, a moderate to heavy amount appeared in virtual worlds that are designed for teens and adults.
Virtual worlds are popular with children and adults because they blend 3-D environments with online social networking, allowing users to interact in and shape their own online content. Through avatars – digital representations controlled by humans in real time – virtual world users socialize, network, play, or even conduct business in graphics-intensive landscapes using text or voice chat, sounds, gestures, and video. Despite the educational, social, and creative opportunities virtual worlds offer, the FTC’s report found that explicit content exists, free of charge, in online virtual worlds that minors are able to access. In fact, some virtual worlds designed for teens and adults allow – or even encourage – younger children to get around the worlds’ minimum age requirements.
“It is far too easy for children and young teens to access explicit content in some of these virtual worlds,” said FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz. “The time is ripe for these companies to grow up and implement better practices to protect kids.”
The FTC surveyed 27 online virtual worlds – including those specifically intended for young children, worlds that appealed to teens, and worlds intended only for adults. The FTC found at least one instance of either sexually or violently explicit content in 19 of the 27 worlds. The FTC observed a heavy amount of explicit content in five of the virtual worlds studied, a moderate amount in four worlds, and only a low amount in the remaining 10 worlds in which explicit content was found.
Of the 14 virtual worlds in the FTC’s study that were, by design, open to children under age 13, seven contained no explicit content, six contained a low amount of such content, and one contained a moderate amount. Almost all of the explicit content found in the child-oriented virtual worlds appeared in the form of text posted in chat rooms, on message boards, or in discussion forums.
FTC Report Finds Sexually and Violently Explicit Content in Online Virtual Worlds Accessed by Minors
HEEEEEEEEEEEEEERRRRRRRREEEEEEEEEEEEE WE GOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
Okay, for as much as I would love (and you know I would) to ramble ramble ramble about my opinions on this piece, I am going to stay MUM.
Why, you ask? Well, because according to engageexpo.com, I am (and very happily so) speaking on this VERY topic with Phyllis Marcus, who was commissioned by the FTC to research and report on youth and virtual worlds.
Safety in Online Worlds: How the Federal Trade Commission Sees It
In March of 2009, Congress mandated that the Federal Trade Commission study the types of content available in online virtual worlds — paying close attention to explicit sexual and violent content — and the mechanisms those worlds use to manage access by minors. In this unique session, the Commission’s senior most attorney assigned to the 2009 Virtual Worlds Report to Congress will present results and discuss the agency’s recommendations for strengthening access controls to virtual worlds while allowing free expression to flourish online. This first-ever analysis of virtual worlds by the FTC will be discussed by senior attorney Phyllis H. Marcus who heads the Commission’s children’s privacy program and is responsible for enforcing the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA). Marcus expects this session to be the first detailed public reveal of her division’s nine-month study of virtual world content. She will present data, offer recommendations, and participate in a lively one-on-one interview with virtual world child safety advocate and online community activist Izzy Neis.
Phyllis H. Marcus, senior attorney, Div of Advertising Practices, FTC’s COPPA lead
Izzy Neis, Senior Community Safety Lead, Gazillion Entertainment
http://www.engageexpo.com/ny2010/schedule/track2.html
Score, right? Right. Couldn’t have asked for a better opportunity 🙂
I’m looking forward to this, especially after reading the article on the FTC page, and subsequently skimming through the document while printing (it’s a relatively good sized print, fyi).
I’ve never been shy to discuss the social (and sometimes sexual) exploration of youth in free, identity-less (or identity-filled) web environments – from Language play in phrases to bumping to sexting to warplay. Playgrounds can be a very confusing/odd place for those who do not understand or are not a part of the intricate socialization patterns and learning curve. And even for those of us who DO understand these same things, it’s still nerve-wrecking and frightening to behold (don’t even get me started on my 13 year old cousin’s behavior on facebook). But, we react that way because we MUST. It’s the elder’s duty to help guide and educate the young. But, that’s not always enough (this doesn’t mean stop, it just means, more is needed).
We cannot expect kids to just inherently know NOT to behave certain ways – especially if that behavior or action can illicit some sort of euphoria or adrenaline rush. They don’t learn “No, don’t do that” through osmosis. Fire = bright & warm & pretty & powerful, but you don’t know it hurts until you touch it… you could listen to your folks who say “don’t touch the fire, it burns”, but the curiosity will always be there because you don’t precisely understand the magnitude of “it burns”.
Naturally, someone has to say it – NO, don’t do that. And when youth refuse to listen (and when they decide to touch the fire), we have to be there to guide, educate, and then PICK THEM UP once they learn their lessons, or after they suffer the consequences… and then, encourage them to share their lessons with others – peer mentorship.
Also, as businesses we need to EMPLOY WELL EQUIPPED, HIGHLY CAPABLE, HIGHLY TRAINED MODERATORS & COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT STAFF… and give them time to DO THE JOB RIGHT.
Moderation is expensive. It just is… Before you even contemplate the idea of “moderation” and how to lower the cost for a teen & younger site – companies really, truly need to accept it. Say it out loud. Do a little jig. Throw a party. Make a badge and wear it everyone “YOUTH MODERATION AND ONLINE COMMUNITIES ARE EXPENSIVE”, and then swallow that pain. NO amount of cheating or pinching the system is going to replace the expense without putting your audience or your brand at risk, UNLESS you employ full restrictions. Full. Restrictions. As in, no UGC – this includes user created avatarnames/usernames, open or filtered or dictionary chat, no pictures, or uploads, no fan fiction, no forums, no blog posts, videos, podcasts, art, nothing. Kinda takes the community out of community, doesn’t it? Yep – remember that jig you did and that badge you wore… there’s your reason.
If a user can type or upload and submit – that’s UGC, and it needs moderation before it ever appears on any live site.
User Generated Content is a privilege for your audience, but also a privilege for your site/brand/ip/experience as a company. With privilege comes someone else’s responsibility, and that lies with the company to offer opportunity. Think about it 😉
Anyway… take a look at the FTC article (link above) and follow the white link rabbit to the pdf itself. Happy reading!!
Annnnnnnnnd, if you’re going to be in attendance for Engage Expo on February 16th & 17th in New York City, please bring some of your lovely and oh-so-brazilliant questions to the 3:30-4:30 chat on Weds the 17th. I would love to see your smiling faces and bask in your question-filled glory. 😀
The Unmentionables: Sexting & Surfing
New national sexting numbers that have sparked headlines all over the Web about higher-than-ever sexting rates among US youth actually show that 90% have not sent naked photos to someone. Sammy, a San Francisco 16-year-old cited in the Associated Press’s coverage and one of the 10% of youth who have sent “sexts,” told the AP that he probably wouldn’t do it again knowing that sexting could bring felony charges. I think all the above says a lot about the importance of 1) educating teens about this (see ConnectSafely’s tips for starters ) 2) reporting surveys accurately, and 3) applying some critical thinking to breaking news. [In CNET’s coverage, ConnectSafely.org co-director Larry Magid points out that the MTV/AP study of 1,247 14-to-24-year-olds “confirms what many Internet safety experts have been saying for the past several months: Young people are far more likely to experience problems online from their peers or from their own indiscretions than from adult predators.”]
Wow. Youth are exposed to some serious behavior online (and hell, why not through TV in there, thank you HBO & Cinemax), and there are not enough outlets of education ready & at hand for guidance for youth to understand what they’re emotionally experiencing when confronted with this aggressive/stimulating (enticing?) information they’ve surfed across… That same information affects behaviors on the playground, at lunch, in the halls at school, in games, on the phone, in texts, etc. A friend of mine had some great insights on this topic as well. She said,
This goes back to a lot of the content you can see across the net (obviously), phones (sharing or net), tv (anything from over sexualized prime time to HBO/Cinemax), to books (mangas, etc). There’s a lot of curious information that teases and excites youth made readily available. How they consume that, and then repurpose on their own? That’s what we will continue to encounter for some time.
I haven another blog in prep-mode for this conversation that I’m trying to work through.
Izzy Neis 