CARE warmly welcomes the Report from the Independent Parliamentary Inquiry into Online Child Protection, published today.

Conducted by Claire Perry and a cross-party group of MPs, the Inquiry’s Report tackles the issue of protecting children online – a cause CARE has worked on for a number of years, most recently with Baroness Howe of Idlicote whose Online Safety Private Members’ Bill was recently introduced in the House of Lords.

The Howe Bill, which builds upon work begun by Mrs Perry, represents the first serious legislative attempt to introduce an opt-in system for accessing pornography.  In an internet-enabled age where children are increasingly technology-savvy, the Bill seeks to help parents bring up their children without them being able to access, whether purposefully or by accident, inappropriate content.

As the Inquiry’s Report makes clear, children accessing pornography online is not a baseless concern.  Indeed, according to the Report, six out of ten children download adult material due to insufficient filters on their computers.  Of equal concern is the finding that the use of filtering software in homes has fallen from 49% to 39% in the last three years.

The fact that children are able to access inappropriate content online is not a new revelation, but the findings of the Inquiry serve as a sobering and timely reminder of the need to equip parents to ensure children are protected as they access the internet.

CARE’s Chief Executive, Nola Leach, welcomed the Inquiry’s Report, saying: “I think we can all agree that the internet and mobile technology are wonderful tools but, as with all tools, they must be used with proper safety measures in place.  Both the Inquiry and Lady Howe’s Bill are encouraging developments which provide a wonderful opportunity for the Government and particularly Internet Service Providers to step up and help parents meet the ever-present challenge of protecting their children online.”

Notes:

1. The full Report from the Independent Parliamentary Inquiry into Online Child Protection can be found here: http://www.claireperry.org.uk/downloads/independent-parliamentary-inquiry-into-online-child-protection.pdf

2. Information on Baroness Howe’s Online Safety Bill can be found here: http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2010-12/onlinesafety.html

·        One in three children has seen hardcore internet pornography
·        Software to protect children absent from half of computers

New laws which will make it more difficult for children to access hardcore pornography were introduced in Parliament on Wednesday.

The legislation will introduce new controls to halt the rising numbers of children who have accessed hard core pornography on the internet.

The Bill was introduced in the House of Lords by Baroness Howe of Idlicote and has been warmly endorsed by Devizes MP, Claire Perry, who recently convened a cross-party enquiry into the subject of on-line child safety.

Lady Howe said, “My Bill will help parents protect their children from  access pornography by requiring internet Service Providers and Mobile Phone Operators to block pornography at the network level unless the customer buying access to the internet or mobile network is 18 or over and asks them to remove the block through an opt-in mechanism.”

Campaigners argue that this change would mean children surfing the internet could not visit ‘disturbing, harrowing and graphic’ websites.

Lady Howe continued, “Historically, most internet content has escaped regulation.  A laudable industry-wide effort in the UK resulted in the Clean Feed system that blocks illegal child abuse imagery, but there has always been a reluctance to block, or limit access to other forms of adult material due to the international nature of internet content.”

“We don’t accept this situation with any other form of media.  Our TV viewing is guided by clear Ofcom advice, our cinema screens are subject to British Film Board classifications and High Street hoardings and general print advertising are regulated by the Advertising Standards Agency.  And growing internet enabling of household devices and technological convergence – a quarter of TVs sold in the US are now internet enabled – means that the difference in regulation is going to come crashing into our living rooms,” Claire Perry added.

The campaign to change the law gained new momentum following a study that found one in three children had seen hard core pornography on the internet by the age of 10 and that four in every five children aged 14 to 16 ‘regularly’ accessed explicit photographs and movies on their home computers.

And evidence suggests that the problems are getting worse. Half of British computers are currently unprotected and one survey found that many parents felt intimidated by the ‘apparent complexities’ of setting up their own filter.

A YouGov poll found that the new generation of mobile phones was making accessing pornography easier with two-thirds of children admitting that they had accessed explicit material on their handsets. Worryingly most parents are oblivious to how easy it is for children to download images of the most extreme nature.

The Bill coincides with the new Safety Net campaign petition which states ‘To protect children I call on the Government to force Internet Service Providers to make accessing pornography an adult only opt-in service.’ It has gathered 40,000 signatures in just a few weeks.

Mrs Perry concluded:  “The Howe Bill addresses very effectively one of the greatest challenges for UK parents today, protecting children on-line. It is a timely and important piece of legislation that I hope will have a big impact.”

For media enquiries, please contact Alistair Thompson of Media Intelligence Partners on 07970 162 225, or 0203 008 8145.

Notes

1.You can find the bill on the Parliament website here: http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2010-12/onlinesafety.html

2. The Safety Net Petition backed by CARE, Premier and Safer Media can be accessed at www.safetynet.org.uk

Baroness Howe of Idlicote (pictured, right) introduced her ‘Online Safety’ Private Members Bill to the House of Lords today. It requires those companies that supply internet services – whether at home or on a mobile device – to filter pornographic content, unless an adult user specifically asks for access to such content. This mechanism is called an ‘opt-in’ system. The measure is intended to help parents bring up their children in an internet-enabled age without them being able to access, whether purposefully or by accident, such content. It would also allow those adults who do not want to access pornography, to surf the net more safely.

Because the internet is notoriously hard to police, due in part to issues related to where legislative boundaries begin and end, CARE believes that, at the very least, Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and Mobile Phone Operators (MPOs) should provide a service which empowers their adult customers to make decisions about what sort of content they don’t want on their home broadband or their children’s mobile phones. It should be offered to all adults, whether or not they are new customers or existing customers and should be promoted as a responsible mechanism to help children grow to maturity while enjoying the good that the internet can bring.

There is no reason why two separate approaches should exist for when children are walking down a high street, or when they are surfing the net. We do not allow children to buy films or computer games which are classified 18. We do this by verifying their age if it seems a person younger than 18 is attempting to purchase something they should not have. We should do it online as well. The technology exists. Talk Talk have implemented something which comes close to what we want to see, so other ISPs and MPOs should do the same.

Lady Howe’s Private Members Bill is the first legislative attempt to introduce an opt-in system for accessing pornography. It follows from the work of Claire Perry MP, who in 2010 introduced the idea to parliamentarians and was welcomed by Government Ministers. The Bill is a key milestone in the battle to secure a safe online environment for our children. The Government have so far said they are in favour of the proposals put forward by Mrs Perry, but would like the industry to self-regulate and bring about these changes without amending primary legislation.

Lady Howe made proposals that did not go as far during the passage of the Digital Economy Bill in 2009. Her suggestions then were to ensure ISPs and MPOs inform their clients, at the point of purchase and for the duration of the contract, about how they can help keep their children safe. These ideas were taken up by the Bailey Review of the Commercialisation and Sexualisation of Childhood. Reporting to the Prime Minister later last year, the Review’s author – Reg Bailey, Chief Executive of the Mothers’ Union – also said ISPs could do more to give parents tools to help protect their children online though he did not specify how this should be done.

The industry, responding to the review, made the pledge to bring forward self regulatory measures, but did not go as far as endorsing the requirement to have an opt-in to access pornography through a filter at network level.

That is why CARE is glad that Baroness Howe has brought forward this Private Members Bill, to encourage Government to require more from the industry to help parents bring their children up in the 21^st century.

A copy of the Bill can be found here.

Today, 7 February, is Safer Internet Day.  Coming, as it does, on the same day that the Police Federation expressed their fears over cuts to online safety work, Safer Internet Day is a timely and necessary opportunity for UK families to think about how they use the internet and engage with the online world.

This time last year CARE launched ‘Protecting Families Online’ to affirm the opportunities the internet provides but also to encourage families to think about how they can protect themselves from harmful and inappropriate content online.  That Safer Internet Day occurs in the same week as Marriage Week (which encourages marriage and commitment) is a happy coincidence as the link between strong, stable family life and childhood development and prospects is well documented.

Our approach to this complex set of issues has been to point toward the need for industry to step up and meet its obligations to its customers, for the Government to provide an appropriate legal and regulatory framework, as well as for parents to recognise the key they have to play in educating both themselves and their children.

What’s going on today?

Labour MP Alun Michael is inviting MPs to attend the UK Safer Internet Centre’s event at Portcullis House this afternoon and there plenty of ways for parents, teachers and young people to get involved too.

You can access advice and resources suitable for parents, children and teachers; take part in an Internet safety IQ test; listen to the 12 hour radio show with features from young people, parents, representatives from industry and the Government; and find out more about what is going on today by visiting the UK Safer Internet Centre website.

Also, do take a moment to read an opinion piece on the Christian Today website by CARE’s Lauri Moyle which can be found here.

You can also follow @UK_SIC and @marriagewk2012 on Twitter for the very latest news on Safer Internet Day and Marriage Week 2012.

All that content on the web you receive for free is because your behaviour online, i.e. the websites you visit, things you purchase and searches you make, is worth money. Your behaviour is being monitored and that information is then sold to folk who pay for it (for whatever reason). Other companies sell valuable advertising space on their websites. Don’t worry, in theory all this information is anonymous (though I cannot guarantee that), but it is primarily through this that companies like Facebook and Google make their money.

It should come as no surprise to learn that these companies want to incentivise behaviour that would allow them to collect as much information as possible. A lot of this is self-evident and many of you will already be very familiar with what to do, or what not to do, on Facebook to protect your privacy at an appropriate level, but it is the revelation that Facebook now allows gambling to be advertised that has sparked a worry in my mind. Some of my work at CARE relates to problem, or addictive, gambling and brings to the fore the pernicious nature of companies that make profits from those who have developed an obsessive compulsive addiction such as gambling.

Facebook, like other forms of online behaviour and platforms, changes the make-up of the brain when we use it. As I have blogged about before, using social media, such as twitter, or googling for information but not really staying on one website for long, means that we are being drawn from site to site, or place to place, shortening our attention spans, but at the same time getting a little hit of information. If done in a specific way this can create a sense of numbness or dullness that sucks us into the online world, allowing us to forget other worries for a time, distracting us from the here and now and placing our minds into another place.

A similar thing happens when we gamble. Tension is built up at the thought of an expected win or near win, which when released can lead to a feeling of victory or at least a feeling of relaxation from tension, if we did not win. Combining Facebook with advertising for terrestrial gambling (which is what Facebook has done) is not in itself what worries me so much. Yes, it will serve as a reminder to someone who has a problem with gambling and therefore stand in the way of a successful break from the addictive behaviour. But what is more worrying is that Facebook will now allow gambling-type games to be part of their “app” portfolio. Of course, the company maintains that gambling real money will not be allowed. Nevertheless I am sure the games will be simulations of the actual product that one can find in an online Casino. This will make it possible for a game to be the training ground for the real thing. All it would take is a couple of clicks away from your Facebook news feed and you might find yourself in an actual online Casino, perhaps making your way there via a website intermediary.

The compulsive nature of gambling, coupled with the compulsive nature of social media, needs to be addressed in academia, in the family and by Government if we are to take seriously the very real possibility that real, rather than seemingly virtual but very real, online problems could arise for some people because of this development.

A recent poll commissioned by Nominet Trust found that parents are worried about their children’s use of the internet. Parents are worried about the time children and teens spend on Facebook and other social networking sites, while 80% believe that it is possible to become addicted to such sites. Unsurprisingly Nominet Trust, which is affiliated to Nominet who are responsible for the internet registry of websites ending with the “.uk” suffix, are keen to emphasise the benefits of the online world.

They recently released a report, written by Dr Paul Howard-Jones, Senior Lecturer of Education at Bristol University, entitled ‘The impact of digital technologies on human wellbeing‘ which can be accessed here. The focus of the report is to bust myths about perceived fear surrounding new technology and to show an overview of how technology effects the brain, sometimes even for good.

The report’s executive summary starts poignantly commenting on the importance of not oversimplifying what the internet and computer programs are: “Rather than label any type of technology as being good or bad for our brain, it is how specific applications are created and used (by who, when and what for) that determine their impact.”

The report continues:

“Existing forms of online communication for supporting existing friendships are generally beneficial for their users, with little basis for considering that social network sites and online communication, in themselves, are a source of special risk to children. Internet-related abuse (e.g. inappropriate sexual solicitation, cyberbullying) appears related to issues beyond the use of the internet.

“Internet use (including online gaming) is problematic when it regularly interferes with normal daily living and is difficult to control, although internet/gaming addictions have not been established as psychiatric disorders. No particular threshold has been identified that can be defined as excessive use, but research supports a guideline of maximum two hours total screen-based entertainment per day for children. Problematic internet usage is associated with a range of psychosocial difficulties, but the internet can also support mental health through online therapeutic treatment for a range of mental health disorders.

The report is worth reading in full and can be accessed here.

To read the news stories about the report and the poll of parents, the Telegraph has more here.

On Monday, the Bailey Review was launched in a South London school with a specialism for the performing arts. It was a fitting venue, as it highlighted the best of creativity and learning, which served as a marked contrast with the reality of sexualisation and commercialisation of childhood in the UK today.

One of the recommendations made in the Bailey Review, which we are excited about as it is something we have been calling for, is the idea that companies that produce content for the internet and those that allow access to the internet should make it easier for parents to block adult and age-restricted material. The review reads:

“To provide a consistent level of protection across all media, as a matter of urgency, the internet industry should ensure that customers must make an active choice over what sort of content they want to allow their children to access. To facilitate this, the internet industry must act decisively to develop and introduce effective parental controls, with Government regulation if voluntary action is not forthcoming within a reasonable timescale. In addition, those providing content which is age-restricted, whether by law or company policy, should seek robust means of age verification as well as making it easy for parents to block underage access.” (Source here)

We have been asking for precisely that over the last couple of years because we believe that businesses are currently not taking their responsibility regarding families seriously.

Parents’ views

The Department for Education filmed a number of parent views on the day. Its good to see that these parents have already put into place parental mechanisms. However, many parents feel they need more help.

To read more about what you can do to help your children grow up using technology in the 21st century, go here.

Press Release

June 6^th 2011

Bailey Review Proposals Final Trumpet Call for Change, Says CARE

Christian social policy charity CARE has today warmly welcomed the publication of the Bailey Review into the Commercialisation and Sexualisation of Childhood.

Describing the review as the final trumpet call in a succession of reviews that have engaged with the issue of child commodification and sexualisation, CARE calls on both government and industry to now take the necessary steps to protect children’s innocence.

Nola Leach, CEO of CARE said, “We have had four reviews in recent years which recognise the fact that children are growing up in an increasingly complicated, commodified and sexualised society. Parents are worried and are looking both to government and business to embrace big-society values that protect the innocence of children into their business practices.

Dan Boucher, Director of Parliamentary Affairs, commented, “The time has now come for industry to have proper regard for child welfare and to put front and centre in their planning and creative process an appreciation that their products, goods and services might be seen or experienced by children. The psycho-geography of our communities, families and country – which include billboards, shop displays, the online environment and products themselves – need to prioritise protecting children.”

At the moment businesses fall a long way short. For example, it is not uncommon for ‘respectable’ online companies to put in their terms of usage an age restriction, but at the same time accept advertising revenue from websites occupying that age restricted space that are aimed at children. Similarly, companies that provide online games produced for a mature audience are often offered free-to-play without age rating or age verification. All too often, moreover, newspapers and magazines have sexually graphic images and are placed on shelves that are within the sight of children. Indeed, in the case of newspapers they are often placed very low down and more in the eye line of children than adults. These practices must come to an end.

The challenge to the business community to put its house in order fits very naturally in the context of the new Big Society focus on business ethics. On December 2^nd last year the Prime Minister, addressing business leaders, said ‘great businesses are not just a force for good in our economy – you are a force for good in our society too.  You have the power, the creativity, and the enterprise to help us tackle some of the most pressing social problems and challenges we face in our country.  By meeting our shared responsibilities, we can build that shared future: a stronger future and a better Britain”. He went on to launch a new initiative under the banner ‘Building the Big Society’ called ‘Every Business Commits,’ a charter for businesses to sign up to in which, among other things, they commit to encourage philanthropy, promote payroll giving, mentor a business etc. These Big Society ethical commitments should be added to the Every Business Commits pledge to ethical practice in product development and advertising, especially with respect to children.

Notes

1. You can access the Bailey Review here: https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/standard/publicationDetail/Page1/CM%208078

2. For more on the other four reviews mentioned above go here: http://www.education.gov.uk/b0074315/bailey-review/further-information

3. The Prime Minister’s Every Business Commits speech can be accessed at http://www.number10.gov.uk/news/speeches-and-transcripts/2010/12/business-in-the-community-speech-57805

4. Details about Every Business Commits pledges can be accessed at http://www.bitc.org.uk/business_and_the_big_society/business_commits/index.html

2011 Pulitzer Prize short listed Nicholas Carr asks the big question

In relation to protecting families online at CARE we take a broad approach to the joys and pitfalls of technology. We are on social media sites such as facebook and twitter. We evidently have a website and we blog. So we are not luddites, but we also recognize that the pitfalls which social networking can have on people are there and they are perhaps more pronounced among children and young adults.

Recently I challenged readers to think about technology and education. I encouraged the idea that we should use technology in the classroom more. I did this to challenge some assumptions about how we view the use of technology in the classroom and while children are doing their homework. The idea was sparked off by a talk I heard at the excellent annual conference put on by the Family Online Safety Institute, in which Tanya Byron, an eminent social psychologist, pleaded with policy makers to allow children to use technology. You can watch her whole, energetic and quite riveting video below. But do keep reading.

Now I want to put to you the other side. But with a slightly different twist. Byron acknowledges that children are increasingly less likely to be able to concentrate. I have the gut instinct that it’s in part to growing up surrounded by technology. So if I think it’s a good idea to use technology, I also think its wise to think about the consequences and promote moderation.

In a recently published book called The Shallows written by Nicholas Carr, the author of the rather provocative titled article “Is Google making us stupid?”, he challenges internet junkies to spend less time online and spend more time thinking and concentrating. He is particularly anxious about how the internet is rewiring our brains and what effect this might have on our power to concentrate.

This is perhaps most important in relation to thinking about how families relate to mobile phone, social media and the internet.

But perhaps the most interesting observation Carr makes is to really challenge some of our most basic assumptions about individual liberty. Carr believes, whether or not somebody decides to switch off, cannot be down simply to individual choice. If relatives, other members of the family and friends were always on line, “then you feel in many ways compelled to do so even if you don’t want to, because you don’t want to damage your career or your social life”.

Have a listen to what he has to say about changing technology and how it effects our brain. The video is from over at The Big Think:

What a question to ask, many of you might be saying. My children can do so much more than I can with our family computer. Indeed, a recent Ofcom report validates this: when asked, 70 per cent of parents of 12-15 year olds who use the internet at home thought they knew less about the internet than their children.

But the question I am positing is about education and creativity, more than knowing how to use technology or the internet. The question is a lot broader. But before attempting to answer it, let me set out the story with some context.

God created the world. The Genesis narrative is clear. He created people, male and female he created them, and he made them in his own image. He is a Trinitarian God, one who in his oneness, communes in perfect relationship: Father, Son and Holy Spirit. That is the image we are created in and because of the fall that perfect image is broken. Man no longer communes perfectly with woman or his fellow man. Yet that godly image which has been distorted almost to breaking point is still present in us. We have the impulse to want to commune together, to be in relationship. And the story does not end there either.

God is not just a relational being, he is a creative God. He created all things. Because we are made in his image he commands us to go forth and multiply, sowing seed and tilling the land. We are to be productive and that is as true now as it was before the fall when Adam was told to name the animals. We are to be relational and creative.

I think it is fair to say that in no other time has there been so much opportunity given to us through technology, to be creative and create collaboratively through social networks, often producing beauty, truth and goodness through the things that we work on. Not all the time. But if good men are silent, evil flurishes.

So I ask again, are we educating our children to be tech-ready, to be creatives, to be able to compete in the marketplace of ideas and skills in a time when geography is becoming increasingly less significant and when in Shanghai or New Deli, schools are empowering children to use their mobile phones, social media accounts and video cameras as tools to learn with, rather than asking them to put technology aside and memorise information? Are we allowing them to explore and be creative with technology?

Recently, at a conference on family online safety, I heard Professor Tanya Byron, a psychologist with a specialism in educational and developmental psychology, posit that our educational system is based around a model which was designed around modernistic enlightenment for the industrial age. Children sit in rows, are expected to sit quietly and attentively take-in what the teacher is saying, not collaborate (that would be cheating) and learn. I recognize she was painting a rather old fashioned picture for rhetorical flourish.

Nevertheless the point makes sense. We have moved on to an age where the creative potential needs to be encouraged and the technology at our everyday disposal needs to be used in order to foster creativity. Byron even gave examples where games consoles such as the Play Station or mobile phone apps such as bar code readers were being used to work on paper-based homework. Not what I was allowed to do.

But what is the take home message we still seem to be hearing from some people in the media? Have a look here:

What we learn here is that the use of technology is by-and-large entertainment, and even if it is used to do homework, the tools which we use then need to be more like the Dictionary or Encyclopaedia than technology which uses collaborative, relational and creative solutions to learning. These are fun and meet children where they are, so they must be wrong?

Of course I very much welcome what Talk Talk have done, more of which you can read about on the BBC news website. But there are aspects to the way we talk about technology which neither anticipate the future good of our children, nor really understand the complexities that might arise in a world where memorising the times table is no longer as important as learning how to conceptualise multidimensional virtual reality.

Prof. Stephen Heppell is inspiring on the subject on this video:

I raised the question in the beginning because I think there is something in what both Prof. Byron and Heppell are saying, but because I don’t have children and have been out of education for some time (and to be honest never in the UK education system), I want to do what I am preaching and collaborate with you, dear reader. Is there something to this? How should we view our and our children’s relationship to technology? Am I being unfair? Get in touch via our Protecting Families Online Facebook page or send an email to public.affairs@care.org.uk