Slashdot Mirror


Kid Clicks For Sale

evenprime writes "Zdnet is reporting that N2H2 is selling statistics from their BESS filtering software (a product designed for use in schools) to marketing companies who are interested in students' browsing habits." N2H2's stock price jumped dramatically last month when they put up a helpful website to explain how schools can comply with the new federal mandate which requires the installation of censorware. And just wait for the profit reports once Europe makes it mandatory too. Anyway, this selling-traffic-patterns story is interesting because it's the next logical step in the continuing trend to cash in on kids -- if anyone gets suspended for reading Coke.com on Pepsi Day, let us know, OK?

18 of 91 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Use the Freedom of Information Act by Masem · · Score: 3
    If I was faced with those two choices as a school board, I'd take option 3: pull the net plug. There is NO reason that a grade school needs to have net access. Computers, yes, but not full net access. Maybe set up one or two networked computers in the library where they will be under the watchful eyes of librarians, so the virtual filter works as opposed to any software (or lack thereof) solution. Buy plenty of copies of the electronic encyclopedias, and I bet you can find a way that would cache a site like CNN every 2 or 3 hours so that current events could be covered. If you still want the schoolkids to use email within the school, no problem there, just block any outgoing mail.

    The key point here is, without the current mandatory filters requirement, schools can balance the parents that want tight control and the free-speech advocates by limiting the number of computers that would present such a problem to a number that can be easily monitored by a staff member; you can still have effective computer learning and research, but having full internet access for a GRADE SCHOOL child while in school is not necessary for a good education.

    --
    "Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
    "I can see my house from here!" - ST:
  2. What about COPA? by AhNewBis · · Score: 3
    From what I recall, doesn't COPA (Child Online Protection Act) keep companies from collecting any data of anyone under the age of 13 years? Ironic, considering COPA is the reasoning, IIRC, for the installing the censorware to begin with.

    Bah. This is all another form of Child Exploitation, in a completely other form. There seems to be this image of children as the great innocents, and the quintessence of purity. Ask any kid that's in Kindergarten or First Grade what bad words he's learned. Trust me, he'll be able to spew a few off already. Children aren't any purer than the parents that raise them, and the lowest common denomiator is highly frightening.

    So up come these companies: NetNanny, N2H2, what have you, and prey on the very fears of all parents -- What is my little pure one learning that he shouldn't? -- and putting a price on it and turning a profit.

    Wasn't that the point of child labor laws? Exploitation of Children was defined as using them for cheap labor, another means for turning a profit. So now, let's exploit children again -- this time, exploit the supposed innocence and purity -- and turn a quick million or two.

    Instead of being afraid of children and wanting to protect them from the world -- up to and including age 18+ -- try to listen to them. Talk to them. Be open with them. Don't tell them that it's wrong to look at pictures of people having sex because you said so. Tell them that it's wrong because of the conditions that desperate women undergo to achieve the dream body or the dream relationship. Don't obscure, explain. Children may act childish, but reports show that children, as young as age seven, can come to rational conclusions and informed decisions about the world around them. All they need is guidance -- not censorship. Censorship is another form of obfuscation, and as we've learned from security, code, and other other geekly things around us, obfuscation just doesn't work in the real world.

    UNICEF has a portion of their site dedicated to children's rights. Included in those rights is a right to education is the right to expression and information. Article 17 states that "Children shall have access to information from national and international sources. These materials should be beneficial, and those that are harmful to children shall be discouraged." (emphesis added). Not censored, but discouraged.

    Teach your children the truth of what they see around them. The world is not a pretty place with dancing squirrels and singing birds, where rabbits and deer talk and frolick. No, the world is always in a state of chaos -- sometimes its simply less harmful at times. Wars occur, people get murdered, men and women get raped. Children take candy from strangers every day. Give them some ray of hope though, and let them think for themselves.

    Children aren't pets or toys, they're human beings. Listen to them. Even the student teaches the master something new now and again.

    -----

  3. What's really scary by ahertz · · Score: 3

    What's really scary is who's buying this information. Look at the end of the article. Their only two clients are listed: an educational website (makes perfect sense) and...

    The Department of Defense. Why on earth does the Department of Defense need to know where kids are going on the internet? I'm scared...

    --
    Information doesn't want to be anthropomorphized. -AC
  4. Re:Ethics Class by jgerman · · Score: 3

    I'm sorry, I hope that this is a joke. Any class that claims to teach ethics is a waste of time. Ethics aren't learned by saying "this is wrong, and that is right" who the hell is anyone to tell anyone else how to live. Ethics should be taught as open discussion. Ungraded classes, that may be required, but are more for enlightenment than anything else.

    --
    I'm the big fish in the big pond bitch.
  5. Re:Censorship Question by x-empt · · Score: 3

    It isn't about filtering porn. It is more about the ability to view other websites. Many MANY MANY websites are miscategorized and blocked. MANY.

    And MANY MANY MANY porn sites are not blocked, in fact its VERY easy to find porn sites that are not filtered if you know what you are doing.

    Plus now N2H2 is selling information about viewing habits of children at school, when they are forced to utilize the BESS proxy by the damn stupid government here in the United States. Sadly there is too much money being slipped under the table for votes on certain issues....

    N2H2's setup is more than just blocking porn, it often blocks my access to highly informational sites about C coding and even blocks stuff on gnu.org... which definately isnt porn or an online store.

    Sorry, but you need to wake up and realize that it isn't all about some horny kid wanting to view porn in public.

    Damn.

    --
    Ever need an online dictionary?
  6. Everyone has missed the really scary thing... by Glowing+Fish · · Score: 3

    People are going on and on about why this is scary because it is selling out our children to corporations. I think these people are missing the point.

    The real scary thing is at least some of these children are going to be reading Slashdot and clicking on links here...and when they do, and the marketting drones finally get this information, we are going to have...Goatsex Cola!

    --
    Hopefully I didn't put any [] around my words.
  7. Re:Coke on Pepsi by tagishsimon · · Score: 3
    Umm yes, I think this was what jamie might have been alluding to. The person suspended was Mike Cameron, the school was Greenbriar High School in Evans, Georgia.

    "I know it sounds bad - ' child suspended for wearing Pepsi Shirt on Coke Day' said principal Gloria Hamilton. "It really would have been acceptable...if it had just been in-house, but we had the regional president [of coke] here and people flew in from Atlanta to do us the honour of being resource speakers. These students knew we had guests." - quote from No Logo, Naomi Klien, page 95.

  8. Others also do this... by tagishsimon · · Score: 3
    According to Naomi Klien, in her most excellent tome "No Logo, (page 94) a company by the name of ZapMe! does much the same thing:

    "...the in-school computer network ZapMe! doesn't merely seel advertising space to its sponsors: it also monitors students' paths as they surf the Net and provides this valuable market research, broken down by the students' sex, age and zip code, to its advertisers."

  9. Re:Use the Freedom of Information Act by sulli · · Score: 3
    ... schools are operated by the Federal Govt.

    Ummm... last time I checked, virtually all publis schools are operated by local authorities, including the Las Vegas / Clark County School District. IANAL but the federal FOIA may not apply in this case - you may need to submit a request complying with Nevada law.

    --

    sulli
    RTFJ.
  10. Zapme == toast by sulli · · Score: 3

    Well, though they did provide nice fodder for press and authors looking for the thousands of ways America's youth are being raped by corporate America, ZapMe recently found itself fucked. Now it appears that they're "committed to creating advanced vertical networks for small to medium-sized businesses worldwide," whatever that is.

    --

    sulli
    RTFJ.
  11. What a load of crap! by atrowe · · Score: 3
    First of all, the title of this article is *extremely* misleading. This company is not selling "clicks" or any other type of advertising to children, nor are they providing confidential, or individually traceable information to advertisers. What they are doing, is selling statistical information about the surfing preferences of kids to potential advertisers. This article was written to intentionally put a shady, dishonest spin on N2H2's legitimate business practices and to try and spread Taco's own paranoid propaganda.

    What N2H2 is really doing here, is neither illegal, or immoral, but a perfectly reasonable business practice. Here's a fact: More children than ever are surfing the web these days. N2H2 is simply providing advertisers with a list of children's web-surfing habits and tendancies. They are in no way providing any information that could be used to trace individual surfers in any way. Television networks have been using this type of targeted advertising geared towards children for years. This is why commercials for cereal and action figures come on during Saturday morning cartoons. I am deeply offended that Taco would try to spread these slanderous lies!

    --

    -atrowe: Card-carrying Mensa member. I have no toleranse for stupidity.

    1. Re:What a load of crap! by BilldaCat · · Score: 5

      >> First of all, the title of this article is *extremely* misleading

      >> This article was written to intentionally put a shady, dishonest spin on N2H2's legitimate business practices and to try and spread Taco's own paranoid propaganda.

      >> I am deeply offended that Taco would try to spread these slanderous lies!

      You're new here, aren't you?

      --
      BilldaCat
  12. A wicked thought...Open Source Censorware by eris_crow · · Score: 3

    Why don't we start an open source project to build a free software censorware product? I know. It's kind of oxymoronic, or maybe just moronic ;-) -- but bare with me here.

    Think about it! Schools and libraries don't want censorware, and the American Library Association is challenging this law.

    We don't want censorware either: it doesn't work, and the companies that make it often push radical conservative political agendas, that target a lot of ideas near and dear to us.

    So let's make our own product. By controlling the development, we could make certain that the blocked sites list is as minimal as possible to satisfy the legal requirement. The ALA, schools, and libraries would like it for being

    a) FREE software (budgets are important, after all), and

    b) software that is made by people who are friendly to free speech.

    In the meantime, we all continue to support the legal challenges. But in the event that the ever more conservative Supreme Court upholds the law, we also have a weapon to use in holding censorship at least in check. If someone is going to do censorship, then let it be a civil libertarian.

    I'd be willing to work on such a project. I think I would enjoy sticking it to CyberSitter -- they once blocked the site of a friend of mine because he's pagan, and especially because he dared take a public stance against them.

    Eris

  13. Simpsons episode? by griffjon · · Score: 4

    I think N2H2 execs must not understand that The Simpons is a tragicomedy, and the episode on using kids' ideas and behaviour for marketing by subverting the school should *not* be the foundation for revenue streams.

    They claim no schools have cancelled their service due to this. Did any of the schools KNOW about this? Is this tied to that wave program that got exposed during the initial voices from the helmouth series?

    --
    Returned Peace Corps IT Volunteer
  14. Re:Use the Freedom of Information Act by cowboy+junkie · · Score: 4

    Unless you can organize a substantial base of parents and community members to support you, you are pissing in the wind.

    If you are a school district, what scares you more?

    1. The threat of ultra-conservative/liberal parents suing you for their kids accessing pornography, Neo-Nazi message boards, or a chat room that hooks them up with a potential child molester...

    OR

    2. The threat of free speech zealots suing you because kids can't access some legitimate sites.

    What most folks don't understand is that outside of the federal $$ issue that has recently appeared, most school districts have installed blocking software already to cover their asses in case of lawsuit (and districts are easy targets). Even if the stuff is flawed, at least a district can argue that they installed the best available safeguards.

    While there are certainly an incredible amount of great sites that are blocked by proxies like Bess, you have to understand that a district isn't going to get sued because a student *couldn't* access a site.

  15. Just proves the need for gov't regulation by Trevor+Goodchild · · Score: 4

    I am continually shocked at our consumerist society, especially when it targets our poor, impressionable children. The corporate dominance of US culture must end at once. If selling traffic analysis of children's web viewing habits while at school isn't the last straw we need to motivate us into action then I fear our society of individual freedoms may be lost.

    I know this is going to generate some flame, but the only way to stop these abuses of our fundamental rights to privacy is for the federal government to get involved. We need regulation of these cash-bloated demons who would sell their grandmother's dentures as long as there was a little gold in them. Freedom of speach does NOT mean freedom to market your damn products to my child while he or she is attending class!

    It is truly sad that we have reached a point in history where it is now unavoidably necessary for us to encourage further governmental control of some of our communications mediums. But, there is simply no other way for us to throw off the yoke of our profit-driven, capitalist opressors.

  16. Use the Freedom of Information Act by x-empt · · Score: 5

    You can gain access to this same information by utilizing the Freedom of Info act, since schools are operated by the Federal Govt.

    Below is a letter I recently sent to my school district in Las Vegas, NV:

    Freedom of Information Officer
    Network Services
    Clark County School District
    2832 E Flamingo Rd.
    Las Vegas, NV 89121

    Re: Freedom of Information Act Request

    Dear officer:

    Under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) I would like to request the following materials from the Clark County School District (CCSD):
    1) All documentation regarding the implementation of the Bess web proxy system provided to CCSD by N2H2. Including proxy configuration, network topology after installation, and the reasons for the Bess installation.
    2) All access logs that are recorded by the Bess proxy filter. These logs should be provided in digital form, compressed using either ZIP or gzip compression algorithms.
    3) Documentation regarding the effectiveness of Bess at blocking Internet sites deemed inappropriate for minors and sites that have been mis-categorized by Bess.

    I am aware that I am entitled to make this request under the Freedom of Information Act, and if your agency response is not satisfactory, I am prepared to make an administrative appeal. Please indicate to me the name of the official to whom such an appeal should be addressed.

    If my request is denied, I am entitled to know the reasons for denial.

    I am aware that while the law allows your agency to withhold specified categories of exempted information, you are required by law to release any segregable portions that are left after the exempted material has been deleted from the data I am seeking.

    I also request a waiver of all fees for this request. Disclosure of the requested information to me is in the public interest because it is likely to contribute significantly to public understanding of the operations or activities of the government, and is not in my commercial interest. I am classified as noncommercial news media under the Freedom of Information Act.

    Sincerely,

    xxx

    Anyways, they responded back by sending me marketting materials from N2H2. Well, its time to re-request the information and "be more specific."

    Anyways, this does work well for pissing them off and scaring them to death, plus you can see how ineffective the filters really are.

    x

    --
    Ever need an online dictionary?
  17. pretty scary by drDugan · · Score: 5
    I think this is pretty scary... just from the privacy implications alone.

    Lets summarize the situation:
    • The government requires kids to go to school.
    • Schools require kids to use the Internet.
    • Govenrment requires special software in schools to monitor the actions of people there while online.
    • Sellers of the software can do whatever they want with the data, without any oversight.
    • The people being monitored (the schoolkids) have no say or recourse to affect the situation.


    Doesn't sound so cool does it?
    Where does the line get drawn for what is OK to watch and monitor and what is private?