Google's Street View puts children in danger?
Categories: Toddlers, Preschoolers, Kids 5-7, Kids 8-11, Teens & tweens, Health & safety, In the news
Thanks to Google's Street View, anyone with an Internet connection can virtually tour the streets of cities across the United States. The tool allows you to see 360° images of neighborhoods just as if you were driving down that very street. It's a unique way to get an up-close and personal look at places like Times Square in New York and the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco. But Street View also lets users get up-close and personal looks at homes, schools and playgrounds. And those views, says a children's advocacy group, put kids at risk.
Stop Internet Predators has asked Google to remove the city of Pittsburgh from Street View because they say that images showing kids, toys and family cars make it easier for pedophiles to find potential victims. A spokesperson for Google says they have a process in which users may request certain images be blurred or removed from Street View, but Stop Internet Predators executive Director Stacie Rumenap says that isn't good enough.
"We want parents to have the opportunity to safeguard their children and for them to have the level of privacy and security they deserve," she said. "Our children's safety should always be the No. 1 concern when allowing a new technology to come into our neighborhoods, and putting the burden on parents to opt out of the system seems unacceptable."
Although Rumenap acknowledges that there have been no crimes against children attributed to Street View, she still thinks it should go offline until all images that might identify where children live, study or play are removed. I am not sure how this could realistically be accomplished, but Rumenap's group is actively pursuing that goal in several other cities as well. I've never used Street View for anything other than wasting time online and wouldn't care one way or the other if it went away. But does showing actual images of schools, playgrounds and homes really put children at higher risk of being victimized? Or is this just pedophile paranoia?
Stop Internet Predators has asked Google to remove the city of Pittsburgh from Street View because they say that images showing kids, toys and family cars make it easier for pedophiles to find potential victims. A spokesperson for Google says they have a process in which users may request certain images be blurred or removed from Street View, but Stop Internet Predators executive Director Stacie Rumenap says that isn't good enough.
"We want parents to have the opportunity to safeguard their children and for them to have the level of privacy and security they deserve," she said. "Our children's safety should always be the No. 1 concern when allowing a new technology to come into our neighborhoods, and putting the burden on parents to opt out of the system seems unacceptable."
Although Rumenap acknowledges that there have been no crimes against children attributed to Street View, she still thinks it should go offline until all images that might identify where children live, study or play are removed. I am not sure how this could realistically be accomplished, but Rumenap's group is actively pursuing that goal in several other cities as well. I've never used Street View for anything other than wasting time online and wouldn't care one way or the other if it went away. But does showing actual images of schools, playgrounds and homes really put children at higher risk of being victimized? Or is this just pedophile paranoia?
Recent Posts
- Weekend Fun and Games (7/03/2009)
- Kids and Extracurriculars - When Do You Let Them Quit? (7/03/2009)
- Twitter Follow Friday on ParentDish! (7/03/2009)
- Lush Lashes (7/03/2009)
- Abigail Breslin Makes $13 a Week (7/03/2009)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Kathy 10-12-2008 @ 12:45PM
I think it's pedophile paranoia. Not only aren't these real-time pictures, but in some cases they're several years old.
Reply
Uly 10-12-2008 @ 12:46PM
Paranoia.
Without google streetview, random pedophiles still would find it easy to find children just by taking a stroll around the neighborhood and looking for houses with toys or children outside. Take a dog, and they're just walking their dog.
Besides which, as I keep saying, the odds of your child being harmed by a stranger are very slim. The vast majority of child molesters go after children known to them - so children are abused much more by their fathers, uncles, grandfathers, and brothers; by their teachers or religious figures; by their babysitters, neighbors, and close family friends. Strangers? It happens occasionally, but it's very rare.
And while I know there are people for whom statistics "don't matter", I don't see how that's a good way to live your life. Some people get hit by a bus crossing the street, but that doesn't mean you never walk anywhere. Some people get struck by lightning out of the clear blue sky, but you still leave your house, yes? Can't live your life scared of tiny risks.
Reply
hurstlane 10-12-2008 @ 1:06PM
These views are so outdated. The view of my grandmother's house shows a note on the door. It was the note stating "Oxygen in Use" form my grandfather. He's been dead 6 months.
Pedophiles are out there and taking this away won't stop them. They'll still keep on keeping on.
Reply
Trisha 10-12-2008 @ 1:14PM
Wow- paranoia for sure. I've used Street View to get looks at houses that are for sale in the area we are moving to in a few months, it's been great to see the house and street as a potential buyer.
Reply
LS 10-12-2008 @ 1:39PM
I see this two different ways.
On one hand, paranoia for sure, because I think that, while deadly serious, the whole pedophile "thing" has been sensationalized by the press. Yes, it is an extremely serious problem, but I also think that, in general, we're a pretty safe society.
On the other hand, am I the only person who is not only creeped out, but a little sick and tired of all these cameras *everywhere*? I'm getting durned tired of hearing the "if you don't like it, opt out/go somewhere else" excuse.
Technology is a wonderful thing. It allows us to be and do so much more than we have in the past. But there are times, like this, that it can get out of hand. I would venture a guess that, if Google made the entire system "opt IN" rather than "opt OUT', they wouldn't have a product. People like, and deserve, their privacy.
Reply
ricky 10-12-2008 @ 2:52PM
wow this article is great i like it very much
smarteepantz 10-12-2008 @ 9:14PM
More dangerous is a service that many cities are offering called GIS (geographic information system). While many of the features are "locked" to the general public (hi, hackers!), they consolidate multi-agency real-time info about the individual properties and utilities in those jurisdictions, such as gas/water lines, census information, zoning, deed information and full street-view and aerial images of the houses. Oh, and they update every couple of years, at least!
Reply
ninainindia 10-12-2008 @ 9:22PM
Definately paranoia. As Uly says the chance of your child being hurt by a stranger is very slim.
The photos are old and just show a regular street like you probably see anywhwere else in the US. I doubt a pedophile is going to drive to a specific street when he can just go to the street around the corner.
Reply
Josh 10-12-2008 @ 9:34PM
Run out of news ideas?
Reply
Justin Burns 10-13-2008 @ 2:51AM
There's so much information already in the public domain already that I don't think the introduction of Google streetview will make any difference. The article below gives an example of how public information could be used for evil (in the UK).
http://www.mypropertyguide.co.uk/articles/display/10098/using-property-websites-to-plan-the-perfect-burglary.htm
Reply
Mallory 10-13-2008 @ 9:47AM
I don't know. I just went and looked at this Street View option and I'm not even sure you could get much information from these cameras. It's definitely a really neat feature because you can see exactly what the place looks like - it's almost like you're there. However, when you zoom in or something like that, it is blurry so if you wanted to get any specific information, I don't think that is even possible.
http://sharefam.com
Reply
HA 10-15-2008 @ 10:31AM
Really the only threat would be if an attacker were to live in the area, correct? In which case, he could litterally walk down the street anyway. So what is the big deal? People need to not be so paranoid.
Reply