Fear of technology masks real threat

I have followed the story of the "Suburban Bliss Clause" and thought it ridiculous from the start. When going to post my own daughter's first day at preschool, I gave a pause to posting photos including the teachers and other students. Then I decided I wouldn't be a part of the problem and did it anyway. If they want to talk after the fact, then so be it.
Millions of photos end up in papers, internet, and television. Who is to say that you won't be in the background?
Are people that scared that they still won't use ATMs, open emails from any one but their closest friends and use a credit card online.
My lord people, WAKE UP. It is time you looked into what is so scary about your world.

Reply

I have photos of my son online but I understand the fear that other parents have. I have read about pedophiles seeing photos of children in the newspaper, learning their names, recognizing the playground they were at and eventually offending against the children. The same thing could happen online. The risk is incredibly small but I would be pissed too if my child's picture ended up in the newspaper or online without my permission.

Then again I work with abused children and know what kind of predators are out there.

Reply

Omg, Melissa, I had NO IDEA. My ex-in-laws felt the same way about my site. Thought I was putting the family in danger and inviting stalkers. Finally I said, okay, let's google me and look for a photo. The first one that popped up was a photo my mother-in-law had taken of my infant son and I with a friend and her infant son. She'd emailed the photo to the friend and the friend posted it. HELLO!

People used to want legislation to keep telephones out of homes--hopefully this will turn out the same way. Soon.

Reply

I am one of "those" people who does think that the internet can be "a scary place".

I would be upset if someone published pictures of my kids to a website without our knowledge or permission.

Hopefully if it happened, I would simply approach whoever did it directly and deal with it as politely as possible.

I was victimized as a child, so in a way the world will always seem like a bit of a scary place to me.

I don't think that ridiculing people for their fears or being angry with them because of it, is going to go very far in convincing them that they are wrong.

Reply

I was also victimized as a child. Of course, it wasn't a stranger and most cases of victimization are not at the hands of a stranger.

They may not be wrong but I do wonder how people who don't like their child to be in pictures on the internet justify taking their child out in public. Anyone could look on them. It's a question I have yet to have an answer on.

Finally it might be good to read the article, he has some very relevant points which may or may not give one something to think about.

Reply

MelissaS wrote " I do wonder how people who don't like their child to be in pictures on the internet justify taking their child out in public. Anyone could look on them. It's a question I have yet to have an answer on."

Here is my answer: Refusing to take your child out in public negatively impacts their quality of life. Refusing to put their pictures on the internet does not.

Reply

I just googled my daughter's name (she not only has her own web site, the URL is http://www.dorothynugent.com), and came up with one link pertaining to her - one of my ultrasounds, on my mother's web site. Somehow, I don't think she'll be victimized based on that.

Springtime, can you remember WHERE you read about pedophiles tracking down children from newspaper photos? Was it an actual report in a reputable news source, or a circulating email warning, or what?

Reply

Maybe I'm living in a happy, little, crime-free bubble, but can someone explain exactly what harm has come to children whose photos are in public places? As a teacher, I always get signed permission from parents before putting their kids on the web or in an iMovie of the class or even on the front page of the Boston Globe (for real--that was so cool!), but I've never really understood why, especially when the kids' names are not attached to the picture.

Reply

I guess I wouldn`t mind if someone posted my kids` picture on the Internet. When we were living in Tokyo, my then fist-grade son appeared on an NHK children`s show (describing his favorite toy) and no one told me until the day it was broadcast. I`m more afraid of the devils I know than the unknown devils.

(I just googled my kids` names, and found that my younger son has a same-name alter ego in Provo, Utah.)

Reply

I have no trouble with people who want to post pictures of their kids to the web. I really don't. I have no interest in convincing them they shouldn't or in telling them they are irrational for doing it.
I know why I don't feel comfortable with photos of my kids being posted, by me or anyone else. It is personal and has a lot to do with my own experiences and fears.
Has anyone tracked a child down and abused them because of this practice? I don't think so and I don't know. I do know that it is a possibility, even if it is a slim one and it is something I feel I have some control over. That alone makes it worthwhile for me.

Does that mean that I'm not going to allow my children to grow up and experience the world without me hovering over them? No.

Do I think the fear justifies rude or overtop behaviour on the part of the parents like that cited in both of the articles, yours and his?
No.

I'm not angry or fear filled or stupid or even a luddite. I did read the article. I have no interest in preventing people from casting their eyes upon my children at all - just in some situations for reasons that feel right to me.

Actually because of their ages that will soon and rightly be slipping completely out of my control.

Reply

I don't like having my daughter's picture on the internet under uncontrolled circumstances (meaning I use locked photo albums, or ones to which the url is only given to select people.) I look at it like posting one's phone number or address or place of employment, or anything one would prefer that the general public did not know. Sure, you can hand out a business card to a stranger, but you certainly wouldn't hand them out to everyone you came across. Anyone can see my daughter when we go out in public, but I'm not going to give them a snapshot of her.
Then again, I'm one of those crazies who asks permission from anyone before I post pictures of them, no matter their age.

Reply

I do ask permission now, but I still believe the fear is founded in nothing but blind (and I admit it, I think it's silly) belief it's 'dangerous'.

Reply

Melissa, it may very well be silly and unfounded and I freely admit that. I have no issue whatsoever with other folks posting pictures of their kids. I was raised by a former FBI higher-up, and thus was subjected to a zillion stories of all the bad people in the world and this has definitely colored my view on the subject. I have come to find out that people threatened to kidnap me to get back at my mother, and possibly also to get back at my grandfather. There are simply crazy people out there, and the internet *can* make it easier for them to target people. This is not to say that every child whose picture is posted on the internet is at risk, but it is to say that every parent has the absolute right to want a say in how exposed their child is, and that perhaps there are some people out there who have a reason for wanting this, no matter how apart from the norm it may be.
That said, I can't imagine parents calling for a child to be expelled from a preschool over something as inocuous as their parent posting pictures on the internet. That seems, to me, to be a case of people not understanding the internet and assuming that nobody else does.

Reply

It is far easier to bring harm onto a minor by simply walking a couple of blocks to the nearest school and checking otu which kids might be in a position to be easy picks. I'm not saying it never happens that a person uses a random image of a child to nefarious ends, but I will say that the chances of that happening is infantessimal. You are far, far, far more likely to have your children interfered with by people on foot, people in your neighbourhood and people in your family circle.

I absolutely agree with Melissa that it is a fear of technology, a fear of what cannot be directly controlled by one person, that feuls the irrational impulse to prevent all images of your child from appearing in public places.

Reply

I know a prosecutor who focuses on kiddie porn, and she makes everyone she knows promise that they will not publicly post pictures of their kids on the internet. Apparently, it is common practice for pornographers to download photos of random kids and then photoshop the heck out of them with unimaginably horrific results. Even though the article was not addressing this issue, this is the reason why I will never, ever post photos of my children on the internet.

Reply

"Springtime, can you remember WHERE you read about pedophiles tracking down children from newspaper photos? Was it an actual report in a reputable news source, or a circulating email warning, or what?"

It wasn't an urban legend. I read it in a newspaper or magazine (no, not a tabloid). They gave an example of a man who saw a picture of boy on the front page of the paper and his name was printed in the paper as well and yes, the man found the boy. He thought he was in love with the boy. Yeah, it happens very rarely but would you be the one to tell that mother that not putting her son's photo in the paper again would be 'silly'?

"I know a prosecutor who focuses on kiddie porn, and she makes everyone she knows promise that they will not publicly post pictures of their kids on the internet. Apparently, it is common practice for pornographers to download photos of random kids and then photoshop the heck out of them with unimaginably horrific results. Even though the article was not addressing this issue, this is the reason why I will never, ever post photos of my children on the internet."

Yeah the internet child exploitation team here in my city is about 2 years behind on caseloads too if that makes anyone feel better. I also know someone who was warned by the police that someone was in the park taking pictures of kids to photoshop into child porn. Same dude was also taking photos of kids on the internet to do his creative work. Now before someone says 'see, they are at just as much risk on the playground' I will reiterate that refusing to take your child out in public has a very negative influence on their quality of life, whereas refusing to put their photos online has none.

Reply

Child porn is obviously disgusting, and I don't want my child victimized. But even then, I don't understand exactly what harm it does her if some freak Photoshops one of her pictures, and we never see or know about it. Frankly, I'd rather they get their jollies via Photoshop than via posing live kids.

Reply

Holly Jones. She was murdered in Toronto at 10 years old. A pedophile was looking at child porn, got turned on and decided to act out on his fantasies.

It isn't ALL photoshopped. Real children are abused and penetrated and then for variety, other children's faces are photoshopped on.

Reply

Fine but the actual head of a child who's image was photoshopped isn't a victim of child porn. The children who were posed and abused are clearly victims of child porn.

They did not become victims of child porn because their parents posted pictures of them on the internet.

Holly Jones was a victim of a child molester and not because her image was on the internet either.

Reply

Here's a news story about Holly Jones:

http://www.canadiancontent.net/commtr/article_690.html

She was abducted while playing outside. I don't see any internet or newspaper connection whatsoever in this story. Could you explain more, Springtime? Is there another article somewhere with more detail?

Horrific as this story is, I don't see what it has to do with putting your child's picture on the internet.

Reply