Transcript The risks of going online: What are children and young people really up to? Sonia Livingstone Professor of Social Psychology, Department of Media.

The risks of going online:
What are children and young people really up to?
Sonia Livingstone
Professor of Social Psychology, Department of Media and Communications
London School of Economics and Political Science
Project director, UK Children Go Online and EU Kids Online
Board Member, Internet Watch Foundation
Member, Home Secretary’s Task Force for Child Protection on the Internet
[email protected]
Sonia Livingstone, Presentation to the London Grid for Learning E-Safety Conference, 20th April 2007
Considerable public anxiety









Rapid diffusion
Fear of the new
Scary press coverage
Difficult to regulate
Technology changing fast
Children are the experts
Parents most concerned
Even children worried
Serious efforts being made
______________________________________________________________________
Sonia Livingstone, Presentation to the London Grid for Learning E-Safety Conference, 20th April 2007
Yet we race to go online
Policy
 UK policy to get everyone online
 Schools online (digital curriculum, etc)
 Competitive, skilled labour force (UK plc)
 European Information Society (Lisbon agenda)
______________________________________________________________
Access
 75% of 9-19 year olds have internet access at home (ahead of adults)
 92% have internet access at school (and few have no access at all)
 84% use the internet at least weekly (use habitual, frequent, multi-sited)
 Younger children also users (37% 5-6 yrs, 64% 7-8, ChildWise 2005-6)
 13% 12-15 yr olds (& 3% 8-11 yrs) have access in bedroom (Ofcom 2006)
______________________________________________________________
Sonia Livingstone, Presentation to the London Grid for Learning E-Safety Conference, 20th April 2007
Opportunities and dangers

Access to global information

Illegal content

Educational resources

Paedophiles, grooming, strangers

Entertainment, games and fun

Extreme or sexual violence

User-generated content production

Other harmful or offensive content

Civic or political participation

Racist/hate material/activities

Privacy for expression of identity

Commercial exploitation

Community involvement/activism

Biased or mis-information

Technological expertise and literacy

Exploitation of personal information

Career advancement or employment

Online-bullying, stalking, harassment

Personal/health/sexual advice

Gambling, financial scams

Specialist groups and fan forums

Self-harm (suicide, anorexia, etc)

Networking and new friendships

Invasions/abuse of privacy

Share experiences with distant others

Illegal activities (hacking, terrorism)
Sonia Livingstone, Presentation to the London Grid for Learning E-Safety Conference, 20th April 2007
What do we know?
Part of everyday life





Increasingly a daily activity
First port of call for homework
Draw is online communication
Myspace 5.2 million UK users, Bebo 2.7 million
2006 USA survey of 1487 8-18 yrs) 13-18 yrs: average number of
‘friends’ (SNS) = 75; of IM buddies = 52, mobile contacts = 38)
______________________________________________________________
Research

Not enough research; difficult to research; but there is some …
______________________________________________________________
Sonia Livingstone, Presentation to the London Grid for Learning E-Safety Conference, 20th April 2007
Incidence of risks
Findings – content risks
Eurobarometer (2005-6)
 18% European parents/carers believe their child (<18) has
encountered harmful or illegal content on the internet (more for teens
than children)
______________________________________________________________
Ofcom (Media Literacy Audit of Children, 2006, UK)
 16% 8-15 yr olds have come across ‘nasty, worrying or frightening’
 31% 12-15s make checks on new websites (more if taught at school)
 67% 12-15s trust most of what they find online (just less than TV news)
______________________________________________________________
UK Children Go Online (9-19 yr olds, 2004)
 57% internet users have seen porn online, via pop-ups (38%), junk mail
(25%), email from contact (9%); 10% had visited porn sites on purpose
 Over half ‘not bothered’ by porn, one fifth ‘disgusted’
______________________________________________________________
Findings – content risks
UCLA Digital Futures Survey (2003, USA)
 12% 12-19 yrs seek porn online on purpose
______________________________________________________________
SAFT (2003, Europe)
 Quarter to third of 9-16 yr olds had accidentally seen violent, offensive,
sexual or pornographic content online
_____________________________________________________________
Flood and Hamilton (2003, Australian survey of 16-17 yrs)
 38% boys, 2% girls have searched for sex sites; 60% girls and 84%
boys found explicit sex sites accidentally
______________________________________________________________
???
 Little known about type/level of porn viewed, or about incidence of
other problematic content (self-harm, race hate, etc)
_____________________________________________________________
Sonia Livingstone, Presentation to the London Grid for Learning E-Safety Conference, 20th April 2007
Findings – contact risks
National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (1501 10-17 yrs, USA 2000)
 1 in 5 received sexual solicitation online in past year
 1 in 33 receive aggressive sexual solicitation
 1 in 17 was threatened/harassed
 Few reported incidents or told parents
 19% were involved in online aggression
 Depressed teens more likely to receive unwanted sexual solicitations and
to be emotionally distressed by such incidents
__________________________________________________________________
Online Victimization of Youth (2006, update on above, N=1500)
 Increased exposure to sexual material (34% vs 25%) and online
harassment (9% vs 6%), less unwanted sexual solicitations (13% vs 19%)
 4% had been asked for nude/sexually explicit photos of themselves
 Those who were distressed increased (9% vs 6%)
 Unwanted solicitations increasingly from acquaintances not strangers
__________________________________________________________________
Findings – contact risks
Webwise 2006 (9-16 yrs, N=848, Ireland/SAFT)






27% met someone new online who asked for their photo/phone/etc
26% had visited hateful sites (mostly boys)
35% had visited pornographic sites
23% had received unwanted sexual comments online (more boys)
19% of chatters were harassed/bothered/upset/threatened online
7% met online contact offline
___________________________________________________________
CEOP (2006, discussions 10-16 yrs, UK)
 Social networking experiences include verbal abuse, unwanted sexual
advances, unwanted/problematic info, impersonation of identity;
 Teens unclear about security of info they post, they often feel
pressurised into uploading info by others;
 Parents often ignorant of children’s activities
______________________________________________________________
Findings – contact risks
Remco Pijpers Foundation (2006, N=10,900 teens<18 yrs, Holland)










30-40% has social networking profile
82% boys/ 73% girls flirted online in past 6 months
1 in 4 boys/ 1 in 5 girls had cybersexual experiences
72% boys/ 83% girls received sexual questions
40% boys/ 57% girls asked to undress on webcam; 1:3 boys/ 1:10 girls did
47% girls received unwanted request for sexual act on webcam; 2% did
62% girls/ 13% boys dislike receiving sexual questions online
35% girls/ 12% boys claim a negative experience
9% girls/ 3% boys posted sexual photos and regretted it
Most aware of ‘paedophiles’ but unclear about boundaries among teens
______________________________________________________________
Findings – online bullying
The National Bullying Survey (2006, UK, N=4772)
 69% pupils were bullied in past year (half of those were physically hurt)
 7% said received unpleasant or bullying emails/IM/text messages
_______________________________________________________________
MSN Cyberbullying Report (2006, UK, N=516)
 11% 12-15 yrs cyberbullied (18% girls, 7% boys), 74% told no-one
 62% know someone who’s been bullied online
 1 in 20 admit to bullying someone else online
______________________________________________________________
NCH Mobile Bullying Survey (2005, UK, N=770)
 20% 11-19 yr olds had been bullied via text/internet/email (73% knew
the person, 26% by a stranger)
 10% had a photo taken of them that made them feel uncomfortable,
embarrassed or threatened (17% said it was sent to others)
 Who did they tell? 28% no-one, 41% friend, 24% parent, 14% teacher
 11% said they’d sent a bullying or threatening message to someone
_______________________________________________________________
Challenges: teens’ risky practices












Post pictures that reveal identity/location (sports team, school, etc)
Post sexually provocative/indecent images (via mobile or webcam)
Circulate messages to ‘friends of friends’ whose identity is unclear
Take/circulate hostile or bullying content about peers
Make personal profile info public (or, misunderstand what’s public)
Trick others into silly/embarrassing/indecent acts on webcam
Peer-to-peer encouragement of suicide, anorexia, drug-taking, self-harm
Copy private messages to all contacts
Seek new contacts, ever more ‘friends’
Express insecurities and fantasies in blogs
Choose sexual nicknames (e.g. lolita)
Push boundaries, experiment with identity
_____________________________________________________________
Challenges: vulnerable teens

Who communicates more online? Older, girls, frequent users, skilled
users, sensation-seeking, those who value anonymous online
communication
_________________________________________________________
 Who more likely to have made an online friend? Frequent/skilled users,
dissatisfied with own life, more confident online than offline, value
anonymity online, more authoritarian parents
_________________________________________________________
 Who is more likely to meet an online friend offline? Older, new to the
internet, skilled, not shy, sensation-seeking, dissatisfied, more confident
online than offline, value anonymity online, more authoritarian parents
_________________________________________________________
 Who is more likely to have sought personal advice online? Older,
infrequent users, skilled users, dissatisfied, value anonymity online
___________________________________________________________
 Who is more likely to have given out personal information online?
Older, frequent and skilled users, sensation-seeking, dissatisfied, value
anonymity online, more authoritarian parents
Challenges: parents’ role
Risks and opportunities linked
 The more teens take up online benefits, the more risks they encounter
 Like riding a bike, more skill means more, not less, risk
 Actions to reduce risk by restricting behaviour also reduce opportunities
______________________________________________________________
Balancing children’s protection against children’s rights
 Teens value their privacy online and seek to protect it
 They avoid telling parents of bad experiences for fear of restrictions
 They need private means of communication if threat within family
 Games families play – parental rules make for children’s evasive tactics
_____________________________________________________________
Parental regulation not (yet) shown to be effective
 Parents face range of challenges (expertise, privacy, democratic role)
 Parents implement informal regulation (share, discuss, restrict)
 But no demonstrable link to their children’s online risks
 Except banning most interactive activities restricts use (risks + benefits)
Challenges: schools’ role
UKCGO 2004 survey of 9-19 yr olds:
 30% no lessons on internet use, 23% ‘a lot’, 28% ‘some’, 19% ‘just 1 or 2’
 69% taught to search (but 41% only look at top 10; 37% compare sites)
 Younger and older had less guidance on safety, search, reliability
 Only 33% told how to judge the reliability of online information
 Few pupils would tell a teacher if uncomfortable with online experience
______________________________________________________________
Safety awareness:
 Parents prefer to get safety info from schools
 Optimism re internet literacy
 How much is enough?
 Gap between awareness and behaviour
 Hardest to reach those who most need it
 Don’t rely on parents
 Towards joined-up, multi-stakeholder solutions
Conclusions







Is the glass half full or half empty?
We live in a ‘risk society’, and young people are in the vanguard
Challenge to minimise risks while maximising opportunities
Policy favours the individualisation of risk
Multi-stakeholder efforts ongoing to raise awareness and reduce risk
Schools have a vital role to play in fostering internet literacy
More research needed to update knowledge and target interventions
Thank you
Sonia Livingstone
[email protected]
For more, see
www.children-go-online.net
www.eukidsonline.net
Sonia Livingstone, Presentation to the London Grid for Learning E-Safety Conference, 20th April 2007