Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Why is it everybody else's fault apart from parents regarding children online?

Announcements Posted on
    • Thread Starter
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I am mainly referring to the recent campaign to ban online pornography and introduce an opt-in system in order to 'protect' children, and now the revelations regarding Habbo Hotel and how a few journalists encountered sexual discussions.

    Granted, website owners should have a duty to place reasonable and sufficient safeguards to protect children from accessing inappropriate content; however, why does it seem that the role of the parents has been pushed to the side and forgotten and the companies who run these websites have received the scorn?

    Surely the best defence against inappropriate material online lies in the hands of the parents. Parents should have the primary responsibility to monitor what their children view online and install any appropriate parental controls, with safeguards maintained by website owners complimenting this parental responsibility.
    • 11 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I agree.

    It's like when parents complain about violence in games, sexual content or nudity on the TV, disagreeable themes in magazines.

    Bitches please! You're the parents! You have a problem with it, it's up to you to stop your kids having access to it, not the government.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    You expect parents to monitor their children? *Scoff* Yeah, that'll happen.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Come on. What's wrong with internet porn anyways?


    I agree that it's parents' responsibility, but I wouldn't forbid my child to watch porn.


    This was posted from The Student Room's Android App on my GT-I9000
    • 11 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord-Voldemort)
    If a parent really wanted to prevent their child from viewing inappropriate material online then they could do so, either via software of physical acts (such as actually watching).

    To be honest, I think a lot of parents cannot be bothered, but then criticise website owners while their child is in the background accessing inappropriate content because they haven't bothered to install parental controls or monitor them.
    Indeed, it's pure lazieness or ignorance on the part of the parents in the majority of cases.
    • 54 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Indeed, why should I have to suffer from useless parents, and have no access to *insert porn/suspicious website*, because Mr A does not know the how to set up parental control on his son's/daughter's PC or *scoff* Mac.
    • 27 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord-Voldemort)
    I am mainly referring to the recent campaign to ban online pornography and introduce an opt-in system in order to 'protect' children, and now the revelations regarding Habbo Hotel and how a few journalists encountered sexual discussions.

    Granted, website owners should have a duty to place reasonable and sufficient safeguards to protect children from accessing inappropriate content; however, why does it seem that the role of the parents has been pushed to the side and forgotten and the companies who run these websites have received the scorn?

    Surely the best defence against inappropriate material online lies in the hands of the parents. Parents should have the primary responsibility to monitor what their children view online and install any appropriate parental controls, with safeguards maintained by website owners complimenting this parental responsibility.
    The onus is on companies to work with parents or companies though. With the recent issues with Habbo Hotel, software designed for children, then no filter or automated system that the parent could install would have picked up on the issues (other than blocking the site completely, but the site is meant to be safe).

    Unless you are suggesting that parents watch/review every single thing their child does, then companies need to help as well.
    • 5 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I agree. The porn industry, whatever we think of it in terms of morality is nevertheless an INDUSTRY that needs to make money in order to survive and an opt-in system would create far more embarassment surrounding the viewing of porn. When there is the option for having parental controls on the internet it's down to the parents to either bring them up to be responsible and not go looking for things that will damage them or just use the parental control feature. Why not have an opt-out system? That way it won't have such a detrimental effect on the industry because people won't need to admit to watching it.

    I used to go on Habbo Hotel when I was younger and personally found the cyber sex scene hilarious. Kids will talk about sex whether it's in the school playground or on the internet. There really isn't THAT much of a difference. As long as they aren't giving out their personal contact details (which habbo actually restricts through filters) then I don't really see the problem.
    • 27 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by littleone271)
    I agree. The porn industry, whatever we think of it in terms of morality is nevertheless an INDUSTRY that needs to make money in order to survive and an opt-in system would create far more embarassment surrounding the viewing of porn. When there is the option for having parental controls on the internet it's down to the parents to either bring them up to be responsible and not go looking for things that will damage them or just use the parental control feature. Why not have an opt-out system? That way it won't have such a detrimental effect on the industry because people won't need to admit to watching it.

    I used to go on Habbo Hotel when I was younger and personally found the cyber sex scene hilarious. Kids will talk about sex whether it's in the school playground or on the internet. There really isn't THAT much of a difference. As long as they aren't giving out their personal contact details (which habbo actually restricts through filters) then I don't really see the problem.
    Posing as a young girl, a Channel 4 News producer said she had witnessed "very sexual, perverse, violent, pornographic" chats.

    Rachel Seifert spent two months on Habbo and said after she took part in online chats, she had quickly found herself in the middle of conversations of extremely explicit sexual nature.

    "Within two minutes I was being asked individually 'do you have a webcam?', 'can we chat on [instant messenger service] MSN, on Skype?'" she said.

    "I was also within a couple of minutes asked to strip, fully naked, and asked what would I do on a webcam."

    Ms Seifert said she had played the game 50 times, and every time had had similar experiences.
    Source.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by littleone271)
    I agree. The porn industry, whatever we think of it in terms of morality is nevertheless an INDUSTRY that needs to make money in order to survive and an opt-in system would create far more embarassment surrounding the viewing of porn. When there is the option for having parental controls on the internet it's down to the parents to either bring them up to be responsible and not go looking for things that will damage them or just use the parental control feature. Why not have an opt-out system? That way it won't have such a detrimental effect on the industry because people won't need to admit to watching it.

    I used to go on Habbo Hotel when I was younger and personally found the cyber sex scene hilarious. Kids will talk about sex whether it's in the school playground or on the internet. There really isn't THAT much of a difference. As long as they aren't giving out their personal contact details (which habbo actually restricts through filters) then I don't really see the problem.
    I think the problem is that the instigators might not actually be children.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Why don't the ISPs make it an option when parents sign up to have adult sites blocked, it's not like they don't have the technology? Presumably the reverse is what is currently being proposed. That would seem the cheapest and most sensible way of doing it, rather than every parent needing to install their own software and learn how to use it properly, then the onus is on them to opt in rather than the rest of us having to opt out, but at least they couldn't use the excuse of cost or lack of technical knowledge any more.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Er because CHILDREN CAN BE GROOMED.
    • 54 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by James82)
    Why don't the ISPs make it an option when parents sign up to have adult sites blocked, it's not like they don't have the technology? Presumably the reverse is what is currently being proposed. That would seem the cheapest and most sensible way of doing it, rather than every parent needing to install their own software and learn how to use it properly, then the onus is on them to opt in rather than the rest of us having to opt out, but at least they couldn't use the excuse of cost or lack of technical knowledge any more.
    What site though will be deemed insecure for kids and what wouldn't? Who decides? Talk Talk has something like this and, on many occasions they've blocked perfectly innocent websites, by error they say.
    • 5 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rmhumphries)
    Source.
    What's your point? The children aren't being forced to do it and who is to say they aren't being asked to do it by other children? Adults aren't the only ones who pester each other or children for online sex talks and 'cam fun'. Kids do it too. If the site fails to stop sexual content to that extent then it's the fault of that site and as it's designed for children and theres material on there that's upsetting some children or exposing them to things that their parents don't approve of then the site should be shut down. Shutting down the sites that are for children and failing to protect them is one thing. The opt-in system is completely unnecessary.
    • 5 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Formerly Helpful_C)
    I think the problem is that the instigators might not actually be children.
    And that is an obvious concern but habbo hotel is basically full of little boys wanting to play a game where they have 'cyber sex' and feel all grown up. Habbo hotel has no pictures on there and it filters it out if people try to share contact details although obviously there are ways of getting around that. If that one site is such a problem and the moderators are completely failing to moderate the conversations then I think it should be closed but I don't think the failings of one site can be used in an argument for the ambush of the porn industry.
    • 5 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by suffocation1992)
    Er because CHILDREN CAN BE GROOMED.
    Only if their parents let it happen by not setting parental controls. It's the parents responsibility to be in charge of what their child can and cannot do on the internet. It's not for porn companies to suffer due to their lack of parenting ability.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by suffocation1992)
    Er because CHILDREN CAN BE GROOMED.
    OMG ALL CAPS. WOOPS, GUESS YOU WIN.

    On a serious note, I agree with the OP, the Habbo Hotel thing is pretty serious yes, but kids going through their teens think and talk about sex, as a part of life. This doesn't mean it's appropriate for them to watch rampant hardcore porn the whole time, or discuss sex with random adult strangers online, but I think a lot of this argument seems to revolve around the "omg my 14 year old doesn't know about sex, I don't want the interwebz corrupting them!" argument, which is completely false.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by James82)
    Why don't the ISPs make it an option when parents sign up to have adult sites blocked, it's not like they don't have the technology? Presumably the reverse is what is currently being proposed. That would seem the cheapest and most sensible way of doing it, rather than every parent needing to install their own software and learn how to use it properly, then the onus is on them to opt in rather than the rest of us having to opt out, but at least they couldn't use the excuse of cost or lack of technical knowledge any more.
    They don't have the technology, that's the problem. Looky at this post:

    (Original post by ipoop)
    What site though will be deemed insecure for kids and what wouldn't? Who decides? Talk Talk has something like this and, on many occasions they've blocked perfectly innocent websites, by error they say.
    Yes, TalkTalk had a system already in place that was opt in. It sounded really good, until you realised it didn't block pornhub.

    The problem with a filter is that it will never be perfect and when little Jimmy is traumatised by stumbling onto some innappropriate content, who do mummy and daddy complain to? If the government have rolled out this plan then mummy and daddy will want to know why little Jimmy was scarred for life on a government secured connection.

    And that's only for false negatives, have you ever seen a filter you can't get around in 10-20 minutes if you really try? Go see how a filter turned out for virgin media with regards to thepiratebay.

    As for habbo hotel, I'm not up to date on the situation but I'm going to be a bit sceptical until I've looked into it. No doubt a problem exists, but to extrapolate this to half the internet (which these documentaries tend to do) is stupid.

    At the end of the day, parents need to realise that letting kids loose on the internet is like letting them loose in a vast library containing all "appropriateness" levels of material and hoping they don't stumble into the wrong section.

    Also, I instantly am put off by anyone who uses "Think of the children" as their argument. Gotta love this page (warning, tvtropes just ate 3 hours and I didnt realise, look at your own risk).
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ipoop)
    What site though will be deemed insecure for kids and what wouldn't? Who decides? Talk Talk has something like this and, on many occasions they've blocked perfectly innocent websites, by error they say.
    But that's exactly the same way software like Net Nanny works, most parents would install it and just let the software decide which sites to block. You could also overcome this by having an independent body decide which sites to block rather than leaving it up to the individual ISPs. Whichever way you chose to block sites, there will always be mistakes, there are millions of websites, nobody is going to be able to keep up with every site update, when new sites are launched, when a domain is sold and when sites switch IP adresses.

    The way I suggested would just be a reverse of the current proposal of an opt out scheme and make it an opt in scheme.
    • 27 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by littleone271)
    What's your point? The children aren't being forced to do it and who is to say they aren't being asked to do it by other children? Adults aren't the only ones who pester each other or children for online sex talks and 'cam fun'. Kids do it too. If the site fails to stop sexual content to that extent then it's the fault of that site and as it's designed for children and theres material on there that's upsetting some children or exposing them to things that their parents don't approve of then the site should be shut down. Shutting down the sites that are for children and failing to protect them is one thing. The opt-in system is completely unnecessary.
    My point there was that your point "Habbo restricts those [giving out personal details] through filters" either is incorrect, or doesn't appear to be working. Where you were agreeing with the OPs post, which said that the parents should be primarily responsible for watching their children, and I think that websites - especially children's websites have a big role to play.

    Photography or videos of under 18s being created or viewed is still illegal, if it is a child or adult asking. Not to mention that it does not become 'right' if it is a child asking for that kind of things. We have age of consent laws for a reason, and while I would turn a blind eye to a couple, in a committed relationship doing things under age, I truly do not believe that people often understand the consequences of doing things like that online, let alone children.

    (Original post by littleone271)
    Only if their parents let it happen by not setting parental controls. It's the parents responsibility to be in charge of what their child can and cannot do on the internet. It's not for porn companies to suffer due to their lack of parenting ability.
    No parental control, other than parents watching all the time is 100% fail-safe. No automated control can tell the difference between a real friend and a 'groomer' on facebook / other social networking websites and so on.

    *****

    I don't think the opt-in system is right, mainly because I don't think it will work. Kids are generally technological literate, and any filter can be worked around. In regards to my points about private sites, I feel the website itself needs to ensure there is a safe place for children, in the wider internet, I think there needs to be more free filters instead locally, which then restrict to a white-list as opposed to a black-list. Then, at times when the 'whole' internet is needed for work or whatever, then the parent can watch what the child does, at other times they can use 'safe' websites, where the website owners ensure it is as safe as possible.

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: June 16, 2012
New on TSR

So how did you do?

Come into the GCSE forum to share your grades

Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.