In Context

A new report Enhancing Child Safety & Online Technologies by the Internet Safety Technical Task Force at Berkman apparently can support any interpretation of the issues. Here’s the spectrum:

Report Calls Online Threats to Children Overblown –NY Times on Jan 14th. where Brad Stone’s lead is “The Internet may not be such a dangerous place for children after all.”

to:

The Case for Age Verification –WSJ on Jan 16th. In that article WSG Bloomenthal (AG for Connecticut) is interviewed. He says:

I view the report as a step forward in the fight to better protect children from predators and inappropriate content on social networking sites. … The profoundly significant plus in my view is that it clearly acknowledges and advances technologies to better shield kids from predators and inappropriate content.

and more to the point (emphasis added):

The report identifies 40 technologies that can make sites safer now, including age and identity verification tools. I am going to be working with other attorneys general to urge social networking sites to immediately begin implementing these technologies, especially age and identity verification.

The social networks want to appear to be protecting children but actually doing so simply doesn’t make economic sense. It would cost money, it would introduce some friction in the login interaction, and it might reduce the number of duplicate user accounts (thus impacting their advertising rates). On the revenue side, they apparently don’t think that doing so will attract more users.

Lacking an economic incentive, the efforts of the AGs are critical. Sadly, the NY Times article works counter to their efforts.