While I agree all parents should be aware of this story and the danger / potential for abuse which exists with webcams, I also think it is misleading to portray (as Oprah did on this program as well as the NYT writer who broke this story in his article and video interviews) that this can EASILY happen to ANYONE. When you listen to Justin tell his story (particularly in the NYT video interviews) it becomes clear he was “at risk” before any technology entered the picture. Here are some red flags:

1. He didn’t have any friends at school.
2. He was hospitalized after he was allegedly beaten by his father, and received seven stitches in his head.
3. His own father hired prostitutes for Justin so he could expand his activities on his website.
4. His mother claimed she had no idea anything was wrong.
5. Another student at Justin’s school found his website and circulated the videos around his school, embarrassing Justin and causing him to want to leave school. Yet no one apparently talked to Justin’s mother about this.

As I’ve shared in presentations and blog posts previously, it is my contention that “kids most at risk online” are also “at risk in the face to face world sans technology.” It is true that technology and Internet connections now provide direct access to children (as well as older folks) for people with harmful intentions (like pedophiles) and those types of DIRECT, personal and potentially private connections were not possible in earlier eras.

One of the most important things for people of all ages to realize is that the #1 behavior which puts them at risk online is TALKING ABOUT SEX. In Justin’s case, he registered himself on a webcam site with his picture and age, and immediately got contacted by strangers who eventually groomed him to talk about sex and do sexually related things. Talking about sex with strangers was the #1 tipping point here. Was his mom talking to him about sex? Was his mom talking to him at all? How could she let him go to Las Vegas to meet people she didn’t know, where he was molested and abused? This is a tragic story, and certainly the sexual predators who victimized Justin bear a huge amount of blame that should have severe consequences, but Justin’s parents also shoulder a great deal of this responsibility as does Justin at some point. Oprah and Kurt Eichenwald both shied away from this issue of “free will” and choices in their discussion of Justin’s case, but I don’t think we should ignore it. Yes I agree Justin was a victim, but he was also making choices and was not entirely a pawn at the complete mercy of his environment. Thank GOODNESS at last an adult (Kurt Eichenwald) helped him climb out of his pit of self-destructive behaviors. One lesson from that side of this story is that as individuals, OUR WORDS AND ACTIONS MATTER. Whether we are the biological parent of a young person or not, what we say and do can have an important impact on others.

Given those perspectives, perhaps you can better understand why I strongly take issue with the sentiment “Who cares?” We should care and must care. Yes, this is a sensationalized case, but as Steve points out in his comment these issues are “in our face” more and more in our digitally connected landscape, and we’ve got to do a better job being proactive about addressing them. Simply banning tools and technologies is not a viable answer, and neither is wishfully hoping that kids will be responsible and we just need to encourage parents to be more trusting. As I said before, what we all need are relationships of accountability and frequent opportunities for dialog with others.

Steve, I WILL write more about this down the road… I agree these ideas need to be further elaborated.

Perhaps this is just ONE case and Saint Oprah is exploiting adult fears for ratings and personal gain?

The fact that Oprah ran the program again during the summer is testament to its ratings.

I’m beginning to think that the #1 21st Century Skill is reason. #2 is rationality.

I hesitate to generalize from my personal experience, but we had HBO in my home when I was in the 5th grade. Both of my parents worked and we almost always came home to an empty house (I can hear the shocked gasps and pity echoing through cyberspace). My parents told us not to watch certain things and by and large we did as we were told. Of course we snuck a peek at TV shows and even rode my bike to the next town to buy Playboy, but I knew what my parents (who paid for my music lessons, participated in scouts and pitched-in at school) would expect of me.

We weren’t supposed to drink, smoke or take drugs either. My sister did the first two. I did not. C’est la vie! My three kids had their own laptops or desktops with Internet access in their bedrooms since the first Clinton administration. At 20, 22 and 24 none of them has wound up on Oprah. We trusted and respected the kids and hope they felt the same about us.

I’m concerned about kids raised in overprotective homes as well as kids whose parents say, “Well, as long as they drink at home.” I suspect that as we raise the level of what is taboo, we elevate the risks kids take to push boundaries and challenge the rules.

Kids also need their own space. Raising them like veal is unlikely to turn out like you had hoped.

Sorry about the comment issue. I’ll look into it (recent Wordpress upgrade).

I agree about pornography being a big issue for 1-1 schools. Most administrators of 1-1s compare it to bringing a Playboy mag to school, but 21st Century pornography is far easier to get and too interactive for kids just discovering the power of hormones to resist. When I became involved in my first 1-1 computing program, I had no idea what was out there, but I soon learned that dealing with kids on the topic meant we had to be non-judgmental. The “best” our generation would have gotten would have been a talk with the principal, a guilt trip, and a call home. Kids need to have an open door for discussion with multiple adults - at home, at school, places of faith - combined with people who care enough to start the discussion about “sensitive” issues (pornography, dealing with loneliness, online vs. real-life friends) before they get out of hand (and ideally before they’re encountered). My biggest regret is that these conversations aren’t started in early elementary school. It amazes me that parents don’t realize how much risk they’re kids are at until they have a school laptop. As a parent, I see plenty of 3rd graders with PSPs and cell phones; I hear from lots of parents who have allowed independent surfing at home because they filter or never saw anything “bad” in the IE history and they have a the computer in a family room.
I appreciate the shock value of shows like Oprah’s as something of which we should be aware, but easy solutions (taking away the technology) don’t provide long-term effectiveness. Demonstrating appropriate use, providing a positive context for engagement, and making the difficult conversations as safe as possible are what our kids really need.
Maybe we can create a virtual presenter? Take all of the ideas people have mentioned above and put them into a killer 3D Voki?
Just a thought

I think problems with student access to pornography in 1:1 projects is a bigger problem than we often hear about. One reason for this is that it seems under-reported. Certainly school officials don’t want to widely announce that these problems are taking place, because of the negative impact they could have on the 1:1 initiative overall. Yet these issues can affect anyone. I think you are wise to raise these issues. I am going to write more about this topic, as I took time to watch the 7 part video series on the NYT website about this 2006 case this evening– and it’s clear there were MANY things going on in the lives of the “kid” involved than just having a webcam. So much of this comes down to good parent/child communication. Too many parents today see the computer as “just another screen” like the television, I think, and that is a dangerous perception. I think it is a delicate balance to help parents change that perception, but in the process not convince them that the Internet and computers overall are evil and should be rejected. I haven’t heard or seen many speakers on the issue of Internet safety who can navigate this balance well.

I was relieved to see I wasn’t the only person questioning the attitude of making the technology go away as the only solution to this situation!

This fall, my middle school will be distributing tablet pcs with webcams to students. At first I was hesitant about providing kids with the technology, but then I saw the potential for classroom use. When I spoke with teachers about the potential for misuse, we used the analogy of providing 1-1 laptops. Yes, the possibility of misuse exists, but the potential for providing opportunities for poverty learning outweighs this possibility. If we are serious about preparing kids with 21st Century Skills, we Can’t avoid collaborative technologies. We need to embrace them and discuss them openly with kids so they’re able to use them responsibly when time comes.

That said, our implementation coincides with a new required class - Wellnology (Wellness + Technology) - a combination of digital ethics, Internet Safety, and healthy use of technology. I’ll be teaming with our school counselor (rotating with her Wellness class) as appropriate and prepping with content-area teachers to continue the discussion beyond my classroom. We’ll also be stepping up our existing parent chats to reflect discussions with students. Hopefully, combining the efforts of so many people who care about our students will provide the support necessary when temptations to abuse arise.

“In addition to dialog, we also ALL need to have ongoing, supportive relationships of accountability with others. Without dialog and real accountability, everyone can fall into trouble of some kind. BEING ALONE is the worst condition under which anyone can face serious challenges in life. When we try to stand alone, sadly we often fall alone.”

Even in most digital citizenship/safety workshops, this is not really emphasized (except for not putting the computer in an isolated area free from supervision). But it is more than that - it is the concept of relationship, accountability, and open dialog. Just putting the computer in the kitchen is not enough in most cases. You have to “be there” in mind and spirit, not only body.

I would also refer folks to Kim McManus’s recent message for Mosaic church (in LA) simply titled “pornography.” The previous link is to the direct mp3 audio file, this link is available from the Mosaic podcast channel. As the former church youth leader and his wife attest who speak in this episode, the lure of pornography can affect anyone. It is essential we speak about these issues and take steps to address them. My wife heard a youth pastor several months ago lament how tired he was in counseling male teens who are addicted to Internet porn. There is not one simple, easy “fix” to these problems and these issues are simply NOT going to go away.

I agree, of course, with your analogy of driving and “driver’s education.” This summer I’ve also grown fond of using an analogy of swimming, since my two youngest kids have come a LONG way in their swimming skills thanks to almost daily practice and a two week swim class with a great instructor. Swimming can be dangerous, but it’s a vital skill. We have to get wet to learn how to swim. Similarly we need to use social networking tools and technologies to understand them, and we have to use them together with our kids.

Certainly there are some people who are physically able to swim but refuse to ever learn how. I would contend it is in everyone’s best interest that they know how to swim, for multiple reasons, safety being number one. Digital citizenship should similarly be viewed as a skill set and area of “dispositions” (I think that’s the word NCATE uses) which all students need to develop and cultivate.

And while parents worry about that webcam, they should also be aware that video sites like YouTube and Hulu ( http://www.alleyinsider.com/2008/7/why-dudes-love-hulu-free-porn )contain pornographic video and other content that may not be appropriate for their kids to watch.

When I point this out at presentations on digital literacy and social networks and parents are always shocked to learn that YouTube isn’t all kittens and skateboarding bull dogs.

For many school administrators and parents blocking content seems like the easiest way to address the issue. But doing so creates a “Lord of the Flies” environment where our kids are left to navigate the world of social networks and content without any direction. Just like we have “drivers ed” to help them learn the rules of the road, we need to arm them with the digital skills necessary to navigate safely in the digital world.