Slashdot Mirror


Summer Camps Join Fray Against MySpace

The New York Times reports that now even summer camps are raising concerns about social networking sites such as MySpace, Friendster, and Facebook. Camps are worried about the ramifications of certain activities being associated with their summer programs after revealing pictures or postings are made online. Some camps are banning digital cameras, while others are instructing campers and parents to remove references to the camps from blog postings. Of course, the camps take the stance that they are merely trying to protect the children:
"The information that kids share today often is personal and private information that allows predators to track them down. We're also concerned about cyber-bullying."

4 of 251 comments (clear)

  1. Banning progress does not work by the_furman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's perfectly understandable that summer camp administrators are concerned. There's cause for concern. I think, however, that trying to ban kids from socializing online and discussing their camp experiences is definitly not the way to go. Social networking sites like Myspace are a reality, and trying to ban reality never works. Teaching kids about safe behaviour on the 'net would be a much more viable option, IMHO.

  2. Re:Need to blame someone by TubeSteak · · Score: 5, Insightful
    "[Kids] were some things that we found that some of the kids posted that were really kind of nasty, saying bad things about counselors"
    It's called CYA (Cover Your Ass)

    All kinds of shit goes on at summer camps that would cause parents to freak.

    The administrators running these camps don't want those kinds of details to come out, since we know that people (regardless of age) are stupid when it comes to pictures on MySpace, FaceBook, Etc. It'd be a huge liability issue on their part. parents would be asking "how could you let [bad behavior caught on camera] happen?"

    "For the children" is just the easiest way to get everyone onboard.
    --
    [Fuck Beta]
    o0t!
  3. Treating symptoms? by greatcelerystalk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Camp directors are attempting to do two things, according to the article: treat the symptoms of a problem and censor negative opinions about their organizations.

    If photographs of a camp and its attendees have managed to wind their way onto an adult website, I have no qualms with the camp in questions taking action to have the material removed, however, it seems the camp might want to devote more resources to educating attendees about safety. I also don't see any issue with confiscating digital cameras, even though many children who've gone to camp in the past were able to take photographs.

    I certainly take issue with camps' attempts to censor negative opinion and activities which take place outside of the camp and are unrelated to the camp. The article makes it seem like these camps are asking both attendees and counselors to censor their outside activities so as not to make the camp "look bad."

  4. Re:Observation. by pla · · Score: 5, Insightful

    the simple solution to problems akin to MySpace is proper parenting.

    Not at all - The simple solution to 99% of MySpace problems rests in recognizing that the "problems" don't exist in the first place. With the exception of the twits threatening to extort MySpace and posting about it thereupon, every other "problem" involved some busybody 3rd party authority-figure overstepping their bounds and panicking over harmless boasting and dick-waving.

    So Little Jimmy posed with a bottle of Jack - Can you prove he drank it and that it contained actual whiskey, rather than drinking cherry kool-aid out of a previously empty bottle? Can you even prove the punk in the poor-quality overly-compressed picture, wearing the same style of clothes and hair as every other 14YO male in the country, as the same Jimmy?

    So Susie has a list of people she hates and wants dead. We all (at least mentally) kept lists of people we hated and wanted dead. We just didn't act on them. Nor would Susie - Her "enemies" stand a better chance of dying in a freak accident involving snakes on a plane, than of her snapping one day and reenacting Doom down her school's corridors.

    So a 40 year old guy has a MySpace page saying he likes cartoons. Ever met a Disney employee? They really do act like that, no hidden pedophile motives involved. And if he admits to playing with Legos - My god! Call the swat team, we might just... gasp... have an engineer on our hands!


    That MySpace should make a concerted effort to work with parents to ensure their children's safety

    Sure - Just as soon as those parents start paying MySpace to act as babysitters. Seriously - We have a basic issue of "responsibility" here, specifically, who bears it. Parents have a responsibility to raise their kids. MySpace does not, regardless of how many "tweens" use it.

    MySpace represents the modern equivalent of playground gossip and note-passing. And, like it or not, the swingset doesn't censor its occupants, nor does the pencil refuse to write down obscenities.



    What you do on the Internet has RL consequences and vice versa.

    No - What you stupidly do on the 'net under your own name has consequences. Not that, if really motivated, you couldn't figure out my RL identity - I've probably given more than enough info without you even needing to leave Slashdot to track me down. But you can't just type in my real name in Google and see 183 reasons to fire me, 26 reasons to arrest me, and four reasons to execute me for treason (hey, don't forget that nontrivial crypto used to count as "munitions"). If these stupid kids would figure out the same thing, and do just a teensy bit to obscure their identities (no real names, blur faces and obvious location-signs in photos), we would all-but-stop-hearing about the evils of MySpace.