backtop


Print 92 comment(s) - last by cheyenne1.. on Dec 18 at 1:44 AM

Teen sexually assaulted by man she met on MySpace Kills herself, family sues

While the Internet has a wealth of good things going for it, there are some bad points as well. Social networking sites like MySpace and Facebook illustrate these points well.

Most users of MySpace and Facebook use the sites as they were intended -- a place to meet friends and find like-minded people to chat with and make new friends. However, both Facebook and MySpace have had problems with sexual predators preying on unsuspecting children using the sites.

DailyTech reported earlier this month that Megan Meier, a 13-year-old girl, had committed suicide after a cyber-bully tormented her on her MySpace page. In the case of Meier, the local district attorney said charges were unlikely to be filed.

The Dallas Morning News reports that another young girl, a 14-year-old identified only as Julie Doe from California killed herself in July of 2006 after being sexually assaulted by a 30-year-old man that she had met on MySpace named Kiley Ryan Bowers.

The family of the 14-year-old girl has filed suit against MySpace alleging that it knew about prior sexual assaults by predators using the site and failed to implement security measures to prevent assaults from happening again.

According to documents from the case, the girl’s suicide note said that the failed relationship with Bowers was part of her reasoning for killing herself. Jason Itkin, the attorney for the family of the girl says, “The main goal of these lawsuits is to get MySpace to stand up and put in meaningful protections that will make it more difficult to search out and find young girls.” Itkin and his firm are also representing six other families who have sued MySpace over similar allegations.

DailyTech has previously reported on subpoenas that were issued against MySpace rival Facebook over allegations of soliciting of minors using Facebook’s website. A Wired Magazine editor found 497 convicted sexual predators on MySpace in October of 2006.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Parents
By cobaltb on 12/13/2007 4:40:41 PM , Rating: 5
At the end of the day, the parents are responsible. Let them play in the sun to long and guess what, they get burned. Too bad few parents see the social danger online communities offer and limit their children's access. Many of these online participants, kids in many cases, build their self esteem from social networks. When the network collapses, so do the person.




RE: Parents
By FITCamaro on 12/13/2007 4:51:45 PM , Rating: 5
Yup. Just another pair of sh*tty parents who are blaming their own failings on someone else. If you haven't taught your daughter to not meet people they met online in real life by the time she's 14, then you've failed as a parent and are responsible for whatever happens.

As much as I hate Myspace, they have implemented security measures to prevent this kind of thing. Whether someone implements them is another matter.

As a side note, considering this did happen, I wish it had been in Texas so the guy would likely be executed or jailed for life.


RE: Parents
By marsbound2024 on 12/13/2007 4:53:37 PM , Rating: 2
Um, I think it is obvious that kids don't always listen to what their parents say.


RE: Parents
By FITCamaro on 12/13/2007 5:04:35 PM , Rating: 5
My parents did a just fine job of making sure I listened. How? By punishing me. And more than just "go to your room". The problem is too many parents a) don't care or b) try to be their kids friend instead of a parent.

My parents made it quite clear when I was growing up that they were not my friends. I got spanked and grounded growing up. Sure I hated them sometimes growing up, but now I appreciate what they did because it taught me respect, discipline, and responsibility.

If your kid doesn't listen to you, then you raised them wrong.


RE: Parents
By marsbound2024 on 12/13/2007 5:13:06 PM , Rating: 5
Well we could get on some sort of philosophical debate. But to be honest, I would believe that over 85% of the population must have been raised wrong by your standards. Because far too many kids get involved with alcohol, cigarettes, and even drugs. Kids also date even if their parents don't want them to. They might decide NOT to go to college or maybe they decide TO go to college.

In my opinion, I do believe that the parents should have had a more firm hand when it comes to meeting people online, especially on crap websites such as Myspace which have little or no security measures in place. However at the same time, in other cases, I think it isn't right for the parents to be dictators. They should allow their kids to learn from their own mistakes in some cases. Obviously not in a case like this, though.

Nonetheless, I would think it would be hard to keep watch over your kids 24/7 especially when parents work. Not all parents are perfect. It doesn't make them sh**ty. Bad things happen to good people. Bad things happen to kids who disobey their parents.

The kid could have gotten on Myspace anywhere, not just at home. How can you prevent that? Ban Myspace I suppose... or force Myspace to have much better security policies.

All I know is that I've disobeyed my parents and either found out that it was ok or that I had made a mistake. Humans cannot always be ruled with a steel fist and especially during teenage years a lot of us will rebel in some fashion or another. We learn for ourselves and I think that is a fact. Though appropriate guidance from our parents is needed, a lot of people have different philosophies about how to raise children. Some our flat out wrong and others are just... different. Just because your parenting worked for you, doesn't mean it will for everyone.


RE: Parents
By TomZ on 12/13/2007 5:16:48 PM , Rating: 2
Excellent post, sorry for my somewhat redundant post below, I didn't have the opportunity to read yours prior to submitting mine.


RE: Parents
By clovell on 12/13/2007 5:17:45 PM , Rating: 2
Being a good parent is a tough job, and takes lots of work. Investing the effort into parenting early on pays dividends later in your child's life.


RE: Parents
By Christopher1 on 12/14/2007 3:23:24 AM , Rating: 1
Actually, being a good parent is not tough. The problem today is that we are making things verboten for children, and thereby making them more attractive to them because the children feel that they are 'grown up' for doing them (i.e. alcohol, sex, drugs).

Really, in this case.... all the blame lies on the parents of this girl, with a very little going to the people who harassed her online, though I would like to see those harassers in prison.

I have had people harass me online, and what do I do? Simply ignore them in most cases, and shoot down their arguments one by one. Then, they get banned when they start 'trolling' as they call it.

What kind of life was this girl living where being rejected by someone ONLINE could make her want to commit suicide? I really think I know, having met people who were raised in conservative families (who have a higher rate of kids suiciding): not being allowed to go out and date and get to know boys in real life, not being allowed to go out with friends and relatives, and a few other things.

Basically, her WHOLE LIFE might have been 'online only' so when she was rejected by an imaginary (she didn't know that) boy online..... it devastated her.

This is the reason why my children.... I let them go out and play with anyone who they wish to play with, and get to know people who I don't like in all honesty, just so that they can have their own lives and make their own mistakes and choices and learn to live with life's disappointments.

To round up, there is VERY LITTLE that MySpace could have done in all honesty here: they cannot monitor every single conversation online, every e-mail, etc........ they did what they could when they were informed about a problem, which unfortunately wasn't until after this girl was dead.


RE: Parents
By clovell on 12/14/2007 11:18:08 AM , Rating: 2
I disagree completely. Being strict does not cause kids to do dumb things. Being uninvolved causes kids to do dumb things. Big difference there.

And, if it were easy, everyone would do it.


RE: Parents
By Ryanman on 12/14/2007 3:35:35 PM , Rating: 1
The fact that you're a pedophile Makes pretty much all statements you post on articles like these moot. Quit trolling with your twisted agenda and go hang out at 12chan.

In any case, There's nothing quite like getting money from your kid dying - It's pretty obvious these parents don't care that she died because they couldn't tell she was developing a sexual relationship with a 30 year old man. Myspace COULD make itself unusable by instigating greater security but it just won't work. Get a life you lawyer hugging psychos.


RE: Parents
By Oregonian2 on 12/13/2007 9:06:38 PM , Rating: 2
Those things aren't the issue I think. Their kids ARE their responsibility, even if they don't have time for them (if they didn't have the time, they should have used a condom). Every action isn't under their control, and shouldn't be, but the kid's fundamental values and outlook are, along with the children's health. It isn't Myspace's responsibility. That's like suing a knife-maker for a murder that was used with their knife. There may be a guilty killer around that should be strung up, but it's not the knife. That said, it's good to have a safe holder for the knife to keep the edge from cutting inadvertently -- but it still can kill.


RE: Parents
By Christopher1 on 12/14/2007 3:31:12 AM , Rating: 3
The problem is that some of the 'values' that are being pushed on children today are bankrupt: the idea of someone have a 'one and only' person who is right for them, the idea that sex is a bad thing for them, etc.

As to the children's health..... really, a child's mental health is outside the purview of the parents, just as an adult's is outside the purview of that adult's parents.

There is VERY LITTLE that parents can do for their children's emotional health, and the biggest thing that leads to fragile children like this: not letting the children make their own choice and mistakes, not allowing them to make their own decisions and own morality outside of the 'big three' that I adhere to, not letting them make friends their own age and older, giving them an out when they have been 'sexually abused' and report it MONTHS or YEARS later, and a few other things that I could think of were I to have enough time.

We are protecting our children too much today and are not allowing them to make those 'mental shields' that protect them when someone is 'mean' or 'unfair' to them..... and it's coming back to haunt us with dividends.

Most of this problem is coming from feminism and the feminization of society.... making everything 'touchy-feely' and 'child-safe' when they don't need to be child-safe, and keeping information from children that is the truth, like children have to protect themselves because Mommy, Daddy and society will not always be around to do it.

That is what my friends and lovers when I was a child told me, and it was the truth and made me into what I am today: someone who is VERY self-powerful and doesn't take 'societies' values as being the rote truth.


RE: Parents
By TomZ on 12/14/2007 8:07:01 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The problem is that some of the 'values' that are being pushed on children today are bankrupt: the idea of someone have a 'one and only' person who is right for them, the idea that sex is a bad thing for them, etc.

Sex is a bad idea for children. You can write 1 million posts saying otherwise, but it doesn't change the facts, or the law. You need professional help, for the sake of yourself and for the safety of all children anywhere near you.


RE: Parents
By jtemplin on 12/14/2007 9:47:11 AM , Rating: 2
lol...


RE: Parents
By Ryanman on 12/14/2007 3:38:58 PM , Rating: 1
yeah lol. Cause he's actually a pedophile and it's not a damn joke.


RE: Parents
By clovell on 12/14/2007 11:30:01 AM , Rating: 2
> There is VERY LITTLE that parents can do for their children's emotional health, and the biggest thing that leads to fragile children like this: not letting the children make their own choice and mistakes, not allowing them to make their own decisions and own morality outside of the 'big three' that I adhere to, not letting them make friends their own age and older, giving them an out when they have been 'sexually abused' and report it MONTHS or YEARS later, and a few other things that I could think of were I to have enough time.

You're full of crap. You seriously think there's almost nothing a parent can do about their child's emotional health? Everyday when I get home from work, my kids drop everything they're doing to come and hug me. If I don't spend time with them, their mood and attitudes suffer. It is well-documented that parents and family play the largest role in a child's emotional health.

Which brings me to my next point. I kept thinking for the longest time that a few of the members here just had some vendetta out for you - that you were being given a hard time without just cause. Now, I realize that you are one sick dude.

> We are protecting our children too much today and are not allowing them to make those 'mental shields' that protect them when someone is 'mean' or 'unfair' to them..... and it's coming back to haunt us with dividends.

No, that's not it. We're not spending enough time and investing enough of ourselves in our children. It has nothing to do with being protectionist. Having involved parents and a stable family are the largest predictors of adolescent behavior. This is proven fact, not your pop-psychology perv propaganda.

> Most of this problem is coming from feminism and the feminization of society.... making everything 'touchy-feely' and 'child-safe' when they don't need to be child-safe, and keeping information from children that is the truth, like children have to protect themselves because Mommy, Daddy and society will not always be around to do it.

See above. It's not protectionism, it's involvement that matters. It's realy a wonder that DT hasn't dropped the hammer on your second account.


RE: Parents
By TomZ on 12/13/2007 5:13:45 PM , Rating: 2
Those are some pretty broad generalizations. Parenting is harder than you think. Even if you do everything to the best of your ability, there is no guarantee that there will be a good outcome, that your kids will apply the lessons you taught them, they will always make good decisions, etc.

In addition, remember that many things we learn are from actual experience, and so you cannot prevent your kids from making all forms of mistakes simply by conveying your wisdom and experience to them. That's kind of the paradox of parenting, in my view - you have all the knowledge and experience to help them avoid mistakes, but kids need to make their own mistakes in order to learn many things.

If you become a parent, you'll probably learn firsthand what I mean.


RE: Parents
By clovell on 12/13/2007 5:21:15 PM , Rating: 2
Right, but being so disconnected from your child as to not notice an improper relationship taking place mostly in your own home is rather inexcusable.

You can't stop kids from screwing up and rebelling, but if you're vigilant, you can catch them before it gets out of hand.

Parenting is a cumulative job.


RE: Parents
By timmiser on 12/13/2007 8:01:46 PM , Rating: 2
You would think, but the other side of the coin is that they are very much aware of the reasoning why they shouldn't be in such a relationship, and because they know better, they will go to the extreme of hiding it. Not every kid will, but some do. I had two teenage daughters but their personalities were totally opposites. I would never have to worry about the older one doing something as described above, but the younger one would. They were just different and that is the reality of it.

I actually went so far as to purchase an evesdropping program that would record her chat sessions. I was actually more worried about her getting into trouble with drugs or alcohol then a relationship but it actually enabled us to intercede at a point where she had experimented with marijuana. She still doesn't know how we knew but it was a crucial point in her life where she could have gotten in with the wrong crowd that we were able to correct.


RE: Parents
By Christopher1 on 12/14/2007 3:36:33 AM , Rating: 1
That wasn't 'getting in with the wrong crowd'. I hate to inform you of this, but the big problem is that we have not legalized drug use yet.

I have met many drug users in my life, and 90% of them are not the picture of the 'addict' that the government puts out there. Most of them have better jobs than I have, better lives than I have, etc.

We need to stop trying to protect children from their own choices, allow them to be sexually active and experiment with drugs and alcohol (I allowed my cousins to drink a sip here and there when I was home of alcohol), and simply allow them to grow up and stop acting like just because they are not doing what we want them to do, that it is the 'wrong' choice or 'wrong' crowd they are hanging out with.

I'll put it simply: There have been 10 murderers and 20 drug dealers in my graduating class from high school: you know who they were? Not the druggies or 'bad' kids, but the jocks and so-called 'good' kids who got the good grades.


RE: Parents
By TomZ on 12/14/2007 8:15:45 AM , Rating: 3
I think that children should not be allowed to experiment with drugs, alcohol, and drugs. Children lack the developmental maturity to make these types of decisions because they cannot truly understand the consequences. That is why children have parents, to help them make the right choices (you being an exception of course).

And I also don't think that drugs should all be legal. I don't see what positive thing that would accomplish for society, and clearly it would ruin far more lives than addictions do today already.

In addition, we already have a severe problem with impared driving due to alcohol, and I would expect that if drugs were legalized, we would see this problem increase as well. Again, another step in the wrong direction.

You're groovy "sex, drugs, and rock-n-roll" thing may have sounded cool in the 1960's and 1970's, but really we've gotten past that now. It didn't improve the world then, just as it doesn't improve the world now.


RE: Parents
By clovell on 12/14/2007 11:37:05 AM , Rating: 2
> That wasn't 'getting in with the wrong crowd'. I hate to inform you of this, but the big problem is that we have not legalized drug use yet.

Wrong. Drugs are illegal. Getting busted or caught up in a driveby ruin lives. You can work as hard as you want on legalizing drugs, but this guy made the right decision.

> I have met many drug users in my life, and 90% of them are not the picture of the 'addict' that the government puts out there. Most of them have better jobs than I have, better lives than I have, etc.

I've met a lot, too. They're not as happy, intelligent, har-working, or as successful as myself. Most of them were working on undergraduate degrees that are a dime a dozen and don't bother writing a resume until two months after they've graduated.

> We need to stop trying to protect children from their own choices, allow them to be sexually active and experiment with drugs and alcohol (I allowed my cousins to drink a sip here and there when I was home of alcohol), and simply allow them to grow up and stop acting like just because they are not doing what we want them to do, that it is the 'wrong' choice or 'wrong' crowd they are hanging out with.

No, we need to intervene when they start messing up so bad that they risk ruining their lives through addiction, emotional distress, and trouble with the law.

> I'll put it simply: There have been 10 murderers and 20 drug dealers in my graduating class from high school: you know who they were? Not the druggies or 'bad' kids, but the jocks and so-called 'good' kids who got the good grades.

How convenient for your position - nice round numbers. Not only a perv, but a pathological liar, too.


RE: Parents
By cheyenne1 on 12/18/2007 1:44:39 AM , Rating: 2
That guy's a lot worse than just a perv. http://wikisposure.com/Christopher_Kidwell

Back on topic....

The main cause behind problems like this for kids? Parents who try to act like teenagers themselves and be their kid's peer and friend, instead of the parent.


RE: Parents
By Mitch101 on 12/13/2007 6:04:47 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The problem is too many parents a) don't care or b) try to be their kids friend instead of a parent.


So true. If I didn't post already I would rate you up.


RE: Parents
By timmiser on 12/13/2007 7:51:51 PM , Rating: 2
I laugh because in debates like this, it becomes so crystal clear of excactly who has teenagers at home and who doesn't!

I was the same way <before> teenagers. It is so simple then.

"My kids won't be doing that because I will maintain control and discipline!"

"I will spend time with them and teach them well and they will know better."

Raising teenagers is the wildest and crazyest emotional roller coaster I have ever experienced. No, that doesn't explain it well. I don't have words to explain it. I apologize!

Now that I am <after> teenagers, I feel for the parents and support their legal action against Myspace. If you are a corporation that deals with children, you better be damn sure you are always doing everything you can to protect them. It doesn't matter if you are making small toys that could be swallowed, or hosting online webpages for them, the message must be clear; they MUST be responsible for what they provide to your children.


RE: Parents
By HimuraX03 on 12/13/2007 8:23:44 PM , Rating: 3
Growing up as a teenager who did much wrong. I can side with not knowing what you kids did/do when they're older. I remember dating when I wasn't allowed.

But to raise another topic that is gray and will lead to debates. I wonder how many of these kids had access to a PC in private (be it school, home, etc.). I think that in most cases these kids have PCs or laptops of their own. Being a parent now, the smartest think my wife and I have decided is that no form of TV will be allowed in our kids rooms.

Even if we are cooking/cleaning/etc. while they are watching TV, we can at the least hear what is going on. All PC access will be in the Kitchen where we can keep an eye on what they do. Many monitoring programs, routers, etc. are simpler these days (no excuses people..my mom who is in her late 50's learned how to do it to protect our kids) and can be configured to block access to sites, time of day, etc.

I'm not knocking how some parents are parenting...but if we can attack myspace we might as well attack google, HBO, etc.


RE: Parents
By RedAlice on 12/14/2007 10:54:20 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Now that I am <after> teenagers, I feel for the parents and support their legal action against Myspace. If you are a corporation that deals with children, you better be damn sure you are always doing everything you can to protect them. It doesn't matter if you are making small toys that could be swallowed, or hosting online webpages for them, the message must be clear; they MUST be responsible for what they provide to your children.


Just because it's AVAILABLE doesn't mean that parents should let their children use it. There are lots of things available to children that parents have to decide what is and isn't allowed. If in the parents mind they feel it is unsafe for their children to use, they shouldn't allow them to use it! When I was a teenager, my parents monitored my computer use. They approved the games I played, they took the time to look into a game, even if it had a "mature" they would allow me to purchase it and play it if they didn't see anything wrong with it. I could even buy CD's with Explicit Content warnings on them! So it's not like my parents were strict or conservative. Just cautious. They knew my email password and made sure I didn't go on certain sites.
It's not EVERYBODY elses job to keep your kids "safe". If you know it's dangerous to let your kid go play in traffic, don't let them do it. Kids toys, manufactured and marketed specifically for kids should be safe, because it's for them. But MySpace isn't some "product". It's a social networking site, that *gasp* involves people! Not all people are good, parents should realize this, with all the media focus on the subject. They should MONITOR their children who use these sites. Not have the site monitor them.
I absolutely HATE when people always have to find someone to blame, and I'm tired of idiotic lawsuits ruining things for everyone else.
I think it was cruel what was done to these girls, but I do not believe it is MySpace's fault. In my opinion, it's the fault of the people who acted upon these girls.


RE: Parents
By clovell on 12/14/2007 11:41:50 AM , Rating: 2
"My kids won't be doing that because I will maintain control and discipline!"

"I will spend time with them and teach them well and they will know better."


Never said it'd be easy when kids get into their teens, but it'd sure be a lot tougher than if you hadn't done either of those.

It sure beats having your kid die and filing a lawsuit.


RE: Parents
By Macungah on 12/14/2007 4:02:59 AM , Rating: 2
I'm sure you didn't look at porn then.


RE: Parents
By TomZ on 12/13/2007 5:02:06 PM , Rating: 2
MySpace has no security, because there is no actual age system in place - it's completely the honor system. By their own admission, they have no system in place:
quote:
MySpace security spokesman Hemanshu Nigam told the Wall Street Journal the firm had failed to find an effective age verification solution. He said: "We've spoken to a number of companies and we have not yet found a firm or technology that can reliably verify the age of our members under 18."
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/01/17/myspace_ze...
And just because they haven't yet "found a technology" that works doesn't absolve them of their responsibility. The real problem is that MySpace realizes that if they make it harder for its users to lie about their age, then they will lose traffic to other sites that require no such verification. So they tradeoff they make is to knowingly put children at risk in order to have high traffic. Why doesn't anybody want hold them responsible for that repugnant decision?


RE: Parents
By FITCamaro on 12/13/2007 5:11:43 PM , Rating: 3
Their security is that if you're underage, they have account controls that limit who can contact you. If you choose not to use it, that's your fault. And if you're a parent whose kid has a Myspace account, if you haven't turned these controls on yourself, then thats your fault as well. You should have the username and password of your kids account so you can check up on these things. If your kid changes the password, contact Myspace and tell them to delete the account.

Me personally. When I have kids, if Myspace is still around, I plan to block it completely.


RE: Parents
By TomZ on 12/13/2007 5:22:01 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Their security is that if you're underage, they have account controls that limit who can contact you. If you choose not to use it, that's your fault.

I disagree, the point being that a 13-year old probably wouldn't understand the potential risks in lying about her age on MySpace. You have this view that children understand all the crime risks and have a clear picture of MySpace's security model. I think that kind of insight exists in maybe 1% of 13-year-olds, if that many.

No, more likely situation is that a child decides to create an account, quickly came across the age restriction, and just simply changed the age field so that the account would be created. Since there's no actual age verification, they get away with it, and by doing so, put them at some risk unknown to them.


RE: Parents
By retrospooty on 12/13/2007 5:25:27 PM , Rating: 2
"I disagree, the point being that a 13-year old probably wouldn't understand the potential risks in lying about her age on MySpace"

Exactly why it is on the parents to explain to their child, that the world is not all fluffy bunnies and candy canes. There are predators out there, and you need to be made aware. It is not a websites job, it is the parents job. Its rediculous to sue a website because you (the parent) failed to protect and educate your own child.


RE: Parents
By clovell on 12/13/2007 5:29:11 PM , Rating: 2
I tend to agree. The internet is full of junk that kids don't need to be looking at. If parents are going to let their kids use it, they need to be monitoring what's going on.


RE: Parents
By TomZ on 12/13/2007 6:28:35 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Exactly why it is on the parents to explain to their child

Explaining it to a child doesn't mean they understand the risks enough to make an informed decision . That's my point. And no child will understand how truly evil some people are, unless they have had prior experience (e.g., abuse).

I'm not defending bad parenting - I'm just saying that teaching your children well doesn't prevent them from sometimes making bad choices anyway.


RE: Parents
By timmiser on 12/13/2007 8:14:10 PM , Rating: 2
So did you ever do anything as a teenager that your parents told you not to do but you did it anyway?

This is what kids do: "Dad is gonna tell us the risks of the Internet again... <sigh>" "Now we have to hear his shpeal on drugs and alcohol... <heavy sigh>" "Oh now it's the sex talk...Jeez Dad! Can we go now??"

The thing is, you can tell them all of this stuff but they don't have the ability to really comprehend it at that age. When they open an internet browser, they are no more intimidated about what they will find out there than you are. Are you worried about what you might be exposed to on the Internet? Well, despite your best advice, neither are they.


RE: Parents
By retrospooty on 12/13/2007 9:58:44 PM , Rating: 2
Of course I did. I smoked, did drugs, cut school occasionally like most kids. I did NOT hitchhike, or stay out all night in bad parts of town, nor did I allow myself to be predator bait. That takes a special kind of carelessness. I am not saying I like what happened, but partents HAVE to stress how important it is to not be a victim and to NOT meet strangers on the internet. Failure to do so can result in aweful consequences like kidnap, rape, death etc. There are few more important lessons that can be taught to your children.

Anyhow, what is your point in relation to suing myspace for these standard teenage antics? How is Myspace legally responsible? How can they possibly stop something like this? You cant know someone is a psycho until they do a psychotic act.


RE: Parents
By timmiser on 12/13/2007 11:59:43 PM , Rating: 2
Things myspace can do:

Require parental control for children under 18. How? Well, a start would be to require a credit card as proof of being over 18. A followup phone call to the parents to open an account. Issuing "administrator account" password status to the parents where the parents could control things such as time online; friends lists; be notified of a new "friend", etc.

This is a start and only things that come to mind immediately. The parent can decide what elements of the myspace experience that could remain private between their kids and others, etc.

Instead of shooting down all of my ideas with negatively, how about instead, you guys provide some suggestions based on your own computer background and expertise? Tell me what won't work and why, but offer an alternative idea.


RE: Parents
By retrospooty on 12/14/2007 8:49:00 AM , Rating: 2
Thats alot of control for an open/free website. Who pays for all that effort?

What about netnanny, or any of the many other parental content blocking programs. Again, that would be on the parents to decide and install.


RE: Parents
By timmiser on 12/14/2007 12:19:51 PM , Rating: 2
Myspace pays for it. That is the point of high value lawsuits and their financial motiviation.


RE: Parents
By TomZ on 12/14/2007 1:19:32 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Thats alot of control for an open/free website. Who pays for all that effort?

You make it sound like a non-profit that runs on a shoestring.

No, MySpace is a commercial web site, run by and for ad revenue, and owned by News Corp. It is the epitome of "big corporate" and along with that comes big responsibility and at times big lawsuits if they screw up.


RE: Parents
By FITCamaro on 12/13/2007 7:09:39 PM , Rating: 2
I'm sorry but 13 year olds are not stupid. They know full well of the dangers of the world at that age. If a 13 year old girl doesn't have the common sense to know meeting a 30 year old guy is a bad idea, thats a sign of bad parenting or mental impairment.


RE: Parents
By caqde on 12/13/2007 7:45:48 PM , Rating: 2
This is very subjective and is different for every person. What a person knows is up to them. But I will say it this way as a persons age goes up the chances of them understanding the implications of what they are doing increases, BUT even a person who thinks they know the implications of what they do may still not know fully what they are.

Although I must say on average you MIGHT be correct, but there are a lot of situations that can lead to a person not knowing what you expect them to know. Small towns, sheltering parents, sheltering personality(self), abusive students from school, etc..


RE: Parents
By retrospooty on 12/13/2007 11:32:34 PM , Rating: 2
Agreed some kids dont know better... How is that myspaces fault?


RE: Parents
By masher2 (blog) on 12/13/2007 7:20:28 PM , Rating: 2
> "And just because they haven't yet "found a technology" that works doesn't absolve them of their responsibility"

The responsibility here lies with the parents who allowed their child to not only access Myspace, but to go somewhere unattended with a 30 year old man.

Would you allow your 14 year old daughter to be alone with a strange man over twice her age?


RE: Parents
By TomZ on 12/13/07, Rating: 0
RE: Parents
By masher2 (blog) on 12/13/2007 7:48:02 PM , Rating: 3
> "I'm saying that MySpace could do more to protect children"

Certainly. And carmakers can always do more to make safer cars, home builders could make safer houses, and the government could build safer streets, hire more police officers and firemen, etc, etc. We can **always** do more.

The real question is, though, how much do you NEED to do? Is it Myspace's responsibility to prevent people from meeting in real life, and possibly being raped or assaulted as a result? Or is that the responsibility of parents, and the people themselves?


RE: Parents
By timmiser on 12/13/2007 8:25:00 PM , Rating: 2
Well, let's use your car maker analogy:

Do car makers make things safer for people? Seat belts, bumpers, impact zones, air bags, saftey seats... etc. In other words, hell yeah they are making things safer all of the time and continue to progress with new methods and inventions.

Now, does myspace make things safer for people?

<Sorry I don't have any examples to stick in here.>

So, unlike car makers, myspace has had a free ride of doing nothing responsible. Sure you can argue that it is the parents fault, it's the lack of common sense, it is out of myspace's control, etc.

But then again, the car makers could say they they were speeding, they were driving unsafe, intoxicated, etc. It is out of their control. You see how it is so easy to blame the victim?

But the car makers don't. They do something about it. It is time that myspace steps up to the plate.


RE: Parents
By masher2 (blog) on 12/13/2007 11:25:39 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
"then again, the car makers could say they they were speeding, they were driving unsafe, intoxicated, etc. It is out of their control. You see how it is so easy to blame the victim?
So, you think if someone is injured because they're speeding and driving unsafely while intoxicated, that we should blame the automaker instead?

quote:
It is time that myspace steps up to the plate.
Steps up and does what exactly?


RE: Parents
By timmiser on 12/13/2007 11:45:38 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
So, you think if someone is injured because they're speeding and driving unsafely while intoxicated, that we should blame the automaker instead?

Only if they expect that people won't ever get into accidents. With millions of vehicles on the road, the automakers have a responsibility to make their cars safe for the occupants because they know, that eventually, that safety will be needed. To ignore that, knowing that it would never be the automaker's fault, is negligence on their part.

quote:
Steps up and does what exactly?


Are you kidding? Do you really think there is nothing myspace can do? Do you really think they've created a website that they have no control over?


RE: Parents
By masher2 (blog) on 12/14/2007 12:54:18 AM , Rating: 2
> " Do you really think there is nothing myspace can do? "

So tell us exactly what they can do.


RE: Parents
By timmiser on 12/14/2007 5:20:21 AM , Rating: 2
I did in a different post in this thread but I will repeat for you:

Things myspace can do:

Require parental control for children under 18. How? Well, a start would be to require a credit card as proof of being over 18. A followup phone call to the parents to open an account. Issuing "administrator account" password status to the parents where the parents could control things such as time online; friends lists; be notified of a new "friend", etc.

This is a start and only things that come to mind immediately. The parent can decide what elements of the myspace experience that could remain private between their kids and others, etc.

Instead of shooting down all of my ideas with negatively, how about instead, you guys provide some suggestions based on your own computer background and expertise? Tell me what won't work and why, but offer an alternative idea.


RE: Parents
By SigmaHyperion on 12/14/2007 11:46:15 AM , Rating: 2
All your ideas presume that the child was honest and admitted to being a Minor -- Calling a Parent, setting up an Admin Account, etc -- that all requires that the kid says that they're 13 when they sign up. It also requires them to provide you with the real number to their parents and not some friend; there's no way that MySpace could verify that they were speaking to So-and-So's actual parent. It would require HONESTY on the part of the subscribing minor. MySpace already provides available protections to those who ADMIT TO being underage when they sign up. The issue is those that lie about it and claim to be over 18 when they're not.

And you can't verify a Credit Card to prove someone's over 18. For one, there's no requirement that you be 18 to own a credit card. Minors either have their own and/or have easy access to them. Requiring a credit card would also be a huge block for new legitimate over-age subscribers. Not only is there no requirement that all those over 18 have one (and in fact, one could argue that many of us SHOULDN'T) but even those that do don't necessarily like to freely give it to just any business, particularly one like MySpace. It would significantly detract from the number of subscribers they'd get.

And, no, I can't offer any good suggestions BECAUSE THERE ARE NONE. The best experts in the business have tried to find ways to verify the age of those on the Internet and they've yet to find anything that works even remotely well. If I could solve that problem I'd quit my job in a heartbeat and license the technology and make billions.


RE: Parents
By clovell on 12/14/2007 11:52:28 AM , Rating: 2
Just throwing this out there - Credit Card accounts usually have phone numbers on file. I'm also pretty sure that a primary cardholder must be 18.


RE: Parents
By timmiser on 12/14/2007 12:17:45 PM , Rating: 2
You must be over 18 to own a credit card and that is a valid, often used method for determining over 18 on the internet.


RE: Parents
By SigmaHyperion on 12/14/2007 2:20:15 PM , Rating: 2
You absolutely DO NOT need to be over 18 to own a credit card. And I'm not talking about one that your parent got you. You can be a Minor and have YOUR OWN credit card.

I personally got my own card many years ago at just 15. It is now common for credit card companies to solicit minors -- in fact, High School Juniors and Seniors are one of the fastest-growing segments in the credit industry. While legally a minor cannot enter into a contract with a parent to cosign, it absolutely does not prevent credit card companies from issuing cards to them.

Credit card companies are even allowed to solicit IN High Schools in some areas. And there's stories all the time of young children, even toddlers, having credit cards issued to them. ANYONE who can pick up a piece of junk mail and sign their name on it can be issued a credit card.


RE: Parents
By timmiser on 12/14/2007 4:48:13 PM , Rating: 2
Well come on, show me a link to a V/MC offer where a minor is eligable without a parent's consent? I've never seen one.

quote:
While legally a minor cannot enter into a contract with a parent to cosign, it absolutely does not prevent credit card companies from issuing cards to them.


How do you figure that? If a minor can't enter a contract, how would they get a card?


RE: Parents
By clovell on 12/14/2007 11:48:05 AM , Rating: 2
I'm okay with that.


RE: Parents
By RedAlice on 12/14/2007 11:25:36 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Now, does myspace make things safer for people?

<Sorry I don't have any examples to stick in here.>


I'm sorry......what?

Wasn't there just a big thing with MySpace not that long ago where they turned over lists of sex offenders who used MySpace and deleted profiles?
Aren't there security settings on profiles to make it viewable by only people who know you...?

Clearly, MySpace has done nothing to address any of these issues.
Anybody driving recklessly accepts the risk of an accident.
Even if MySpace DID have strict security measures to protect children from the big bad world, there are always ways around that. And that doesn't stop people from going to places who don't, Facebook, Hi5 and the hundreds of other social networking sites, messengers, email, forums...etc.

If you think MySpace is unsafe, DON'T USE IT!!! Don't let your kids use it!
If you feel a car is unsafe to drive, do you buy it anyway then sue the car manufacturer for it not having the safety features you want?
Maybe MySpace should not be available to children under the age of 18. *shrug* They could have a networking site just for kiddes sponsored by all the parental groups, with all of the security and safety they desire. Or maybe that's too much work for them and they'd rather just blame everyone else for not doing what they themselves are too lazy to do...
I fell off the jungle gym once in elementary school...maybe I should sue the school for not providing enough security and safety.....


RE: Parents
By timmiser on 12/14/2007 5:02:17 PM , Rating: 2
Thanks for the updates on filling me in on the things Myspace has done to make their online environment safer for kids. That is good to hear.

For the rest of your post I think you are misunderstanding the point of the article and the discussion. We are talking about negligence. What can the parents do better and what myspace should be doing better.


RE: Parents
By RedAlice on 12/14/2007 5:40:04 PM , Rating: 2
This is more about liability. Is MySpace liable for the actions individuals have taken using their "product"?


RE: Parents
By tmouse on 12/14/2007 11:57:32 AM , Rating: 2
Well this is a tough one, my first impulse was in general agreement with the bulk of the responders; namely it’s the parents fault. However the more I think about it, and read the responses the more I must admit that MySpace also shares fault. First there is no evidence (other than the event itself) that indicates that the parents are bad, abusive or ignoring their children in this case. I doubt seriously anyone responding to this thread that has teenagers can account for their children’s whereabouts every hour. You MAY think their going to school and attending all of their classes but you do not know. Most “good” parents would also have no problems with their kids going to the mall with friends, once they are there what are they doing? You cannot truthfully say. NO ONE can honestly say they know EVERYONE their kids are emailing or talking to. There is simply too much access to mass methods of communication. Its not even possible to monitor all of a persons phone calls with the amount of free contact plans. Schools, libraries and shopping malls have wifi access and free public computers, so even if you are responsible with the family computer (ie parental controls; location ect.) you cannot tell what your child is doing outside in places you “trust”.
Now lets get on to the well if they raise them right there will be no trouble argument. Simply put this is naïve at best; so you assume only “Bad” kids get in trouble? Please! I have several friends and family members in law enforcement and while abused, neglected ect. Kids do get into more trouble; over 35% of crimes committed by kids outside of high density urban centers are from ‘good’ households with strict parents. I have also seen as I assume many of the responders, houses with parents who want to be “friends” with their children instead of parents but I can tell you this really is NOT a major factor, as a matter of fact most runaways come from “strict" households. Its interesting to read how many of the responders have admitted to drinking, drug use and getting into trouble as adolescents but certainly do not indicate that they had “bad” parents. I would be willing to bet most responders to these threads are males, I am also willing to bet if any of them were asked for sex from an older woman when they were young they would have run away screaming my folks told me this is a bad thing. I seriously doubt these parents knew their daughter was having sex with a man twice her age but ignored it. I have already established how easy it is today for a teen to have access to such people regardless of how “good” her parents may be. Now lets get onto MySpace. Well the only argument I can see for them not having to do anything is the cost. Is that really a good enough reason? There is a problem with sexual predators online; this is a FACT. While “good” parenting can and does help it is simply not enough, kids will be kids no matter what you tell them this has NEVER changed and WILL never. NO ONE can “Control” their teen, they either cooperate or they do not. Since there are things MySpace can do (but they choose to do virtually nothing) they should be forced to either by legislation or through the economic pressure of lawsuits. I must agree something as simple as a credit card requirement to verify age would be a good start. It would make it much harder for the pedophiles to pretend, and it would also make it harder for kids to falsify their age. The card holder could be provided with a master password for monitoring the profiles and content anywhere. This would be a bit more of a deterrent and put the responsibility back on them , then we can all sit back and point fingers with a least some supporting evidence of “bad “ parenting. If it “hurts” MySpace’s bottom line so what? They make plenty of money from this and so they should bare some costs if it help even only a few.


RE: Parents
By diablofish on 12/14/2007 3:00:45 PM , Rating: 2
Trying to be constructive (and not mean) when I post this:

It's MUCH easier to read and comprehend a post that is adequately divided into proper paragraphs than

itistoreadonethat'sallscrunchedtogether.

Good thoughts, but the presentation could have been in an easier to read format.


RE: Parents
By Polynikes on 12/14/2007 12:38:37 PM , Rating: 2
Although these situations are tragic, you're right, it's the parents' responsibility to make sure their kids are safe.

This would be like suing a city because their police didn't manage to prevent their child from getting mugged or killed after sneaking out at night.


idiot parents
By Future145 on 12/13/07, Rating: 0
RE: idiot parents
By TomZ on 12/13/2007 4:51:35 PM , Rating: 2
I agree that parents bear some responsibility, but on the other hand, MySpace effectively provides a powerful tool for sexual predators to find, communicate with, and lure in their victims. They have been aware of this use for a long time and have failed to develop any reasonable form of security.

Ignoring the merits of this particular case for a moment, surely nobody believes that MySpace couldn't do more to protect its users, especially children. They have so far done basically nothing except stick their heads in the sand. Children will continue to get victimized and the lawsuits will continue until sites like MySpace realize that it costs them less to actually do something about the problem. Even some attempt at a less-than-perfect solution would be better than what exists now, which is effectively nothing.


RE: idiot parents
By FITCamaro on 12/13/2007 4:57:59 PM , Rating: 2
It doesn't matter how much security they put in place. These stupid young girls are often looking to meet older guys. They just lie about their age and then the child protections are worthless. Any teenage girl raised properly wouldn't need a website to protect them since they wouldn't be stupid enough to meet up with a 30 year old guy. It's not like he posed as a younger guy/girl.

Myspace has no method of verifying someone's age short of asking for a driver's license and verifying it. And who's going to give that out to a social networking site? The only way younger girls lying about their age are kicked off the site is if a family member or friend reports them. A lady at work was doing that to her niece since the girl was 16 and posting photos of herself in her bra and panties. The girl's mom didn't care enough to do it so she was.


RE: idiot parents
By ttnuagadam on 12/13/2007 5:00:20 PM , Rating: 3
the parents bare full responsibility. why would you let your 13 year old girl on myspace unsupervised?

every last child successfully preyed upon through myspace is the PARENTS fault for not monitoring or restricting their activities. Parents dont want responsibility, they want to blame everything and everyone else for anything their child does. internet, tv, video games. its the PARENTS responsibility. of you cant monitor your kid, dont have a kid, the world is not your baby sitter.


RE: idiot parents
By tdktank59 on 12/13/2007 5:00:59 PM , Rating: 1
Tell you the truth myspace has preventative measures such as profile viewability people can turn there profile off, have a user enter there full name or answer some sort of question to even send a friend invite. Only friends can send you messages and so on...

Really its the stupidity of the user (child in this case) and the parents failure to communicate with there child.

Stop letting the damn media shape your opinions people... They report a 13 year old girl commits suicide and myspace is to blame when really you need to look at her life. Are here parents abusive? Does she have school problems, metal illness and so on.

The only way to really "Protect" the youth on myspace and facebook would to have a user plug in a credit card number to verify there age and even that wont stop users from doing it... THey will steal there parents credit card or borrow a friends, or do some other drastic thing.

As a programmer ive thought about this a while since i want to protect my users information as well as there well being since they click my ads and bring me money.

There is no "Real" way to prevent the predators from reaching the young inexperienced children who dont know what they should not be doing.

If anyone wants to chat about this more in depth ill be around


RE: idiot parents
By FITCamaro on 12/13/2007 5:07:48 PM , Rating: 4
For the love of god.

"there" = a place
"their" = a person or group
"they're" = a person or group performing an act

Examples:
there - Have you been there?
their - Their mom is really strict.
they're - They're going to the mall.


RE: idiot parents
By soydeedo on 12/13/2007 5:55:38 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
"their" = a person or group

their - Their mom is really strict.


Actually "their" is used to show possession, so your example "their mom is really strict" could just as well have been "their toys are really old" or "their car is about to fall apart".

It's basically the plural form of "his/her" - notice you can put "his" or "her" in place of "their" in any one of the previous examples. You just use "their" to show that more than one person owns the mom, toys, or car in question.


RE: idiot parents
By Sylar on 12/13/2007 4:51:45 PM , Rating: 2
Bad analogy, myspace is specifically designed as a place for people to meet, the store isn't. Myspace is responsible at least to some degree to protect it's younger members however so are the parents. Either way, I don't know where I stand since I don't use myspace or presume to know how well their security is but I certainly think all the parties involved should share the blame. Myspace happens to have money so that's where the lawsuit is I guess.


RE: idiot parents
By masher2 (blog) on 12/13/2007 11:42:42 PM , Rating: 3
> "myspace is specifically designed as a place for people to meet"

Myspace isn't a place. It's a tool designed to allow people to communicate, just like public mail or the telephone system. If you meet someone over the phone, is the phone company liable? If you meet your penpal and they kill you, is the postal service liable?

Honestly, I don't see where people believe Myspace has even a shred of liability here. Young girls should not be left alone with strange men twice their age. It's the parent's fault for allowing that, plain and simple.


Websites Kill People?
By Mitch101 on 12/13/2007 4:52:23 PM , Rating: 2
I hate lawsuits like this.

While I feel for the family and their loss its people that kill other people not websites.

Put the blame on the person who killed her not the website because it could have been anywhere that people could have met it just happened to be a website. A bar, bookstore, gym etc. The meeting place is not important the killer who did this is.

What's next people need approval or a license before they can date one another? Where does it end?




RE: Websites Kill People?
By Mitch101 on 12/13/2007 4:58:17 PM , Rating: 4
For the record too the only cure for a child predator is death. If you watch "To Catch a Predator" one I saw got caught twice!!! Then they get a slap on the wrist and are back out doing the same thing all too soon. You cant cure the idea they are attracted to children. Kill em and if you are against their death then put a huge un-removable red collar/tattoo on them that says sex offender.

Criminals have way too many rights and they aren't deterred by the law so you have to make things much more drastic because obviously the crime is worth the punishment that these people are repeat offenders or are willing to take the chance.


RE: Websites Kill People?
By FITCamaro on 12/13/2007 5:18:22 PM , Rating: 3
At the same time though, there are far too many things that get you on the sex offender list. Having sex with your 16 year old girlfriend at 16 gets you on the list if you get caught. The optimal solution is don't have sex at 16, but thats not reality.

They need to revamp what qualifies as a sex crime first. Sleeping with your 16 year old girlfriend at 18 shouldn't count as long as its consensual. Sleeping with a 16 year old at age 21+, should in my mind.

Also you have the issue of males doing it vs. females doing it. If a 30 year old male sleeps with a 16 year old, they're in jail for a very long time. If a 30 year old woman sleeps with a 16 year old, her sentence varies based on how hot she is.

But yes, I'd love nothing more than for pedophiles to be executed.


RE: Websites Kill People?
By BMFPitt on 12/13/2007 5:01:46 PM , Rating: 2
If he would have sent her snail mail, should they have sued the post office or the paper company?


RE: Websites Kill People?
By kinnoch on 12/13/2007 5:39:02 PM , Rating: 2
or if they met in a park, would you sue the park?


RE: Websites Kill People?
By Burnc4 on 12/13/2007 6:44:36 PM , Rating: 3
I totally agree. When will people start holding others responsible for THEIR actions.

This reminds me a bit of John Hancooks Family Lawsuit. Hancock died after diving a rental SUV into the back of a tow truck.
His family then files a lawsuit suing the restaurant that Hancock was leaving, the towing company, the tow truck driver, and the motorist being assisted by the tow truck.

The interesting part is Hancock had a blood alcohol level of nearly twice the legal limit, was speeding, and was using his cell phone at the time of the crash.

Story here:
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=288160...

This girl consented to meeting a total stranger. What in the world did she think would happen? Granted this guy is wrong for what he did. I'm in no way defending him. He is responsible for his actions also. Hopefully he's gets punished to the full extent of the law.


RE: Websites Kill People?
By diablofish on 12/14/2007 3:02:45 PM , Rating: 2
I don't know what she was thinking.

At 13, I know I wasn't thinking I was going to be killed. I doubt many 13-year-olds are.


In the case of megan....
By Locutus465 on 12/13/2007 5:34:27 PM , Rating: 2
I really wish the parents that tormented the poor girl could be jailed... I saw a report about it on TV a little while ago, basically these dumbasses for some reason got the idea in their head that this girl was talking about their child behind their back... So they invent this boy, play the poor child so she starts having feelings for this josh boy, then when they decide they've learned all they want to they have this Josh character turn on her, start calling her names and such...

I'm sorry, but what the f#@* is that? Is this how adults are supposed to act? I would love to see them locked up for involantary man slaughter.

In the case of megan, her parants apparently were monitering internet usage... But what are you going to do if one of your childs new friens turn on them like this? The fact that the poor girl suffers from depression didn't help that situation.




RE: In the case of megan....
By clovell on 12/13/2007 5:42:51 PM , Rating: 2
Damn - I didn't know all that. I hope they lock those bastards up, too.


RE: In the case of megan....
By Locutus465 on 12/13/2007 5:47:21 PM , Rating: 2
Based on what I understand, they technically can't be... I think at best they violated a brand new (to that state) cyber harrasment law that I'm not sure carries any jail time at all...

Personally I consider this murder.


RE: In the case of megan....
By clovell on 12/13/2007 5:50:27 PM , Rating: 2
Damn, what about a civil suit? That's ridiculous that they're getting off like that.


RE: In the case of megan....
By Locutus465 on 12/13/2007 5:57:33 PM , Rating: 2
If this was my child, I would not allow these people a single day of rest for the rest of their lives... I would file as many suites as I humanly could, and frankely I would start champaigning that the suicide of a minor resulting from harrasment from an adult be considered involentary man slaughter, which I think is the most sevear charge you could reasnobly bring in such a case.


RE: In the case of megan....
By RedAlice on 12/14/2007 11:29:57 AM , Rating: 2
I think a civil suit would be a wonderful thing! Look at the OJ Simpson wrongful death suit? :o

Basically, the state cannot charge them with anything because the "crime" doesn't fit any of their laws.


RE: In the case of megan....
By clovell on 12/14/2007 11:55:17 AM , Rating: 2
It really takes a sick individual to do that sort of thing. I hope justice is somehow served.


RE: In the case of megan....
By Locutus465 on 12/14/2007 3:57:22 PM , Rating: 2
Pretty much, this is one of the big reasons why if this was my child I'd be champaging to change that situation... I would make new laws if nessesary to make sure no one else can ever get away with this...

It may be too late to bring any sort of criminal justice against these people, but we can at least make sure no one else gets it so easy!


Throw out the case
By BeanoJosh on 12/13/2007 7:11:24 PM , Rating: 2
It's not myspace that is at fault in this situation. It's the parents' fault for not monitoring the child and letting the child meet someone online. If a gun is what kills me, is it right to sue the gun industry for "knowing that guns have killed before and not taking measures to prevent killing"? It's dumb. If I were the judge, the case wouldn't even make it to court. Period.




RE: Throw out the case
By TomZ on 12/13/2007 7:20:33 PM , Rating: 2
I don't think you understand the nuances of this particular case. Re-read the last two paragraphs of the article.

What is going on is that MySpace has so far decided that web site traffic is more important to them than safety. In other words, they realize if they implement age verification, for example, fewer people will use the site. That's quite a tradeoff for a company to make - putting more people in harm's way in order to increase profit.

The point of these lawsuits is to create a financial incentive for MySpace to improve their protection of children from predators. Although this suicide is not exactly that type of situation, it is related to the more common cases of predators using MySpace to find, communicate with, and lure victims.

And by the way, judges are required to follow and apply the law. His/her personal opinion is not the primary consideration.


myspace
By knowom on 12/13/2007 4:48:40 PM , Rating: 2
kids that age shouldn't be on myspace anyway and pretty sure it violates the terms of agreement when signing up for a myspace page myspace is no more at fault than the parents the kids or any other social networking site forum chat room ect...it's tragedy, but it's certainly not the fault of myspace




Come on Guys...
By OPR8R on 12/13/2007 7:04:34 PM , Rating: 2
If this is really a problem, and not just something tech-sites write about to get people to post on the message boards, something needs to be done. Kids are offing themselves pretty frequently now.

While I agree that most of the responsibility should fall on parents, I think that school of thought is a bit old-fashioned and idealistic. And yeah, teen girls can be stupid, but they are kids; aren't they entitled to some ignorance and stupid decision making?

My point is, it's really easy to stick with the normal rhetoric, but is there really no other solution than to say, "Parents just need to monitor their children's activity"? If that's the only answer, this problem isn't going away.




"The Space Elevator will be built about 50 years after everyone stops laughing" -- Sir Arthur C. Clarke

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki