Print 48 comment(s) - last by Dreifort.. on Feb 6 at 2:19 PM

MySpace and Facebook have been forced to clean house

MySpace has banned 90,000 sexual predators from its social networking web site, and has turned the names over to two different attorneys general offices, company officials recently announced.

The total number of 90,000 is twice as many as MySpace officials believed it had removed in 2008, with North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper and Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal leading the charge.

"Almost 100,000 convicted sex offenders mixing with children on MySpace -- shown by our subpoena -- is absolutely appalling and totally unacceptable," Blumenthal said in a statement issued to the press.  "For every one of them, there may be hundreds of others using false names and ages."

MySpace competitor Facebook, which is the No. 1 social networking web site in the world, have a combined 280 million users -- and the U.S. government wants both sites to do a better job of protecting children and teenagers from sexual predators.

Last year, both companies agreed to work with lawmakers to create security standards to help protect young people from online predators, after parents and politicians said the sites weren't doing enough.

"We've been working productively with Attorney General Blumenthal's office for more than three years on these issues," Facebook chief privacy officer Chris Kelly said in a published statement.  "They recently let us know that they are planning to send an updated subpoena."

Now that MySpace is done kicking 90,000 sexual predators off the internet, Facebook is expected to announce how many people it has removed sometime in the near future.

After the KIDS Act of 2007 was signed into law in 2008, all registered sex offenders must now submit real e-mail and instant messaging account information to the national sex offender registry.  This is done so sites such as MySpace and Facebook are able to better track sexual offenders.

It's unknown how many registered sex offenders use social networking web sites with false identities, so this ultimately is just the tip of the iceberg.

Comments     Threshold

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

RE: Hm, not to fond of this...
By mdogs444 on 2/4/2009 2:16:49 PM , Rating: 2
Case studies have proven that sexual crimes against minors when performed by adults are indeed not truly sexual in nature.

Whether they are sexual in nature is besides the point. The bottom line is they violated a minor in a way that is not socially acceptable, and that person is no longer trustworth (as far as I am concerned) with being around any children, especially ones who cannot protect themselves against him/her.
An adult who commits a sexual act on a child probably has a subconscious mental issue.

Again, I dont care WHY it happened. I'm all for making laws and punishments to assure that it doesn't happen again.
An adult who commits a sexual act on another adult is usually very horny and cant control their inhibitions.

No, it means that the particular person has violated the liberties and freedoms of someone else against their will, plain and simple.
I am advocating recognition of severity for the people who don't deserve a lifelong penal system hazing by generic labeling.

I never said I was against different severity levels, as far as labeling is concerned. But forgive me if I choose to act like it didnt happen and accept them as my next door neighbor who I trust around my children.
I would bet my life savings you would get 2 starkly different results when giving those people a questioneer on their thoughts.

I'm sure you would. I won't argue that. But whether he was drunk or not is not a valid excuse for violating someone else. Granted a swift pat on the cheek is not the same as forcing himself upon her against her will, the fact is that he violated her in a way that he has no right doing, and if she feels threatened or insecure now because of him, I don't see anything wrong with making him live up to what he did.

In conclusion, I said I'm all for different severity levels, but I refuse to accept that removing the tag and acting like it didn't happen, and now making him socially acceptable because he's "sorry". Oops, should have thought of that before he did it.

"I want people to see my movies in the best formats possible. For [Paramount] to deny people who have Blu-ray sucks!" -- Movie Director Michael Bay

Most Popular Articles5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
Laptop or Tablet - Which Do You Prefer?
September 20, 2016, 6:32 AM
Update: Samsung Exchange Program Now in Progress
September 20, 2016, 5:30 AM
Smartphone Screen Protectors – What To Look For
September 21, 2016, 9:33 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki