Group items tagged

Scroll down and read the discussion forum paper, "Child Protection and Freedom of Expression Online". The report aims to open discussion and reframe the debate surrounding child protection by bringing together, rather than isolating, advocates of online child protection and those of freedom of expression. It rejects the current moral panics that dominate the debate, particularly in the media, which over-represents the likelihood of harm to children online. It highlights the unproductive nature of framing online protection as a moral panic because it obscures and undermines the work of both freedom of expression and child protection advocates. Rather than keeping these two parties as diametrically opposed the discussion laid the first steps in finding common ground between the two. From here they can work together to advance both of their agendas and therefore achieving a more desirable balance between defending the rights of children and maintaining freedom of expression.

The US Federal Trade Commission has release a request for public comment on the  expansion of the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA)  The initial review was scheduled for 2015 but is being brought forward.  COOPA's goal is to protect the online safety and privacy of children under the age of 13.  They are considering extending this to children under the age of 17. 

A university in the U.S. has provided an online reputation management program for all its graduating seniors. Since majority of companies are performing background checks on job applicants, this will allow students to clean up their Facebook and Twitter profiles. This step made by the university seems very beneficial, since for majority of the younger generation who don't know how it is not to have the Internet, the separation between online and real-life identities is a fine line. 

Rudd will consider Xenaphon's idea of an online ombudsman to help in some unknown way people affected by social media issues such as cyberbullying. 

OIX is a new organization that will try to provide identity credentials that can be accepted by both the private and public sectors. But, like some of this initiatives, government-wise it will only work, initially, in the U.S. Questions on privacy can also be raised? Wouldn't OIX allow for easier access to the whereabouts of an individual's online persona? 

Much has been said and written about Obama's online success during the 2008 US presidential election. But what are the numbers? This is an interesting report that sets the stage for the 2012 elections, which are not that far away. Interesting findings not only concerning the candidates, but also in the role played by the Internet in the voting experience itself. 

Government instructs web users to 'not feed the trolls', following scandals involving the defacement of Facebook pages. An 'Online Ombudsman' is proposed. This raises the question of whether and how Government is able to intervene in online forums. In these cases, no law has been broken, just moral codes.

This article discusses how online review sites can be manipulated, and the importance that companies place on 'word of mouth' for reputation. It raises this important issue: online reviews and comments are crucial for the reputation of 'real world' sites, so how can these sites be 'governed'? Or should they be?

According to a survey by Newsweek, although young people know the risks online, they choose not to protect themselves. In cases such as this, is it the Government's role to step in and protect people? Or is it the user's own fault for not taking precautions when they know the risks?

When it comes to keeping kids and teens safe online is it up to parents and schools to educate them about online safety or is censorship the answer?

Lessig talk about the internet being a innovative commons where allow creation to be made. There might be a new business model that online file sharing will eventually benefit than causing profit loss.

This discusses companies such as 'Reputation Hawk' which focus on improving your online reputation - particularly pertaining to your personal identity. It highlights how important your reputation is online - in many ways it is the only social currency that you have.

Banks were the target of the clampi cyber virus which basically stole the online banking details of those using infected computers

EMI can't sell Pink Floyd singles online. Could be a precedent for other copyright/authorship cases. 

We all know video content is one of the most popular types of content on the web, driving some of the most innovative and popular web based applications (for example Skype, ChatRoulette, YouTube). However, new video-centric applications, which combine real-time, social networking and broadcasting are putting an even more intense spotlight on questions of privacy than ever before. This particular article profiles examples that are surely just web minutes away from the tipping point, giving users the chance to broadcast their lives in ways Twitter can only dream of. Surprisingly, the article only touches on privacy issues, suggesting that we are too willing to post personal information about ourselves. Reader comments rightly point out we are moving into very murky territory where the attitude seems to be that anything posted on the web is fair game and can be used against the person who posted it.

What does it mean for both your privacy and personal reputation if you are putting everything online? If governments/corporations/employers etc can access so much personal information about you, how will this affect your life and the 'control' that such organisations have?

A Crikey article on DBCDE's proposal of mandatory filtering and the "Submissions on measures to increase accountability and transparency for Refused Classification material". The Government's courting of mandatory filtering has drawn widespread criticism from such stakeholders as Google, the Internet Industry Association and highly regarded academics such as Professors Catherine Lumby, Lelia Greean and John Hartley. One of the main concerns is that the scope of the filtering is too wide and will have major implications on what content is available online. This article also helpfully provides links to some of the submissions.

Blog Post 1 - Online Safety

A comprehensive study conducted by the Pew Center for Research in the States looks at one of the demographics that experience the 'digital divide' - people with a chronic illness. The results indicate that although people with chronic diseases are less likely to have access to the internet, those that do use it productively to contribute to the online bank of knowledge about health-realated topics, as well as forming supportive online communities.

thanks Tiana, I'm actually covering a related topic in my DRP journal article. This is really helpful.

As per DeNardis, the first question is who is the board, then what are their interests, how are they funded, who do they represent, by what process are decisions made and implemented, are objections public etc. If, as the press release suggests, this is the first of many more simple and stringent security and safety features, then what are they and who decides? "The Facebook Safety Advisory Board comprises five leading Internet safety organizations from North America and Europe that serve in a consultative capacity to the company on issues related to online safety. The organizations on the board are Common Sense Media, ConnectSafely, WiredSafety, Childnet International and The Family Online Safety Institute (FOSI). "