Restrictions On Social Sites Proposed In Georgia

A state senator in Georgia, Cecil Staton, has introduced a bill that would require parents' permission before kids could sign up at a social networking site such as MySpace and Facebook, and mandate that the sites let parents see all material their kids generate there. Quoting: "[Senate Bill 59] would make it illegal for the owner or operator of a social networking Web site to allow minors to create or maintain a Web page without parental permission [and require] parents or guardians to have access to their children's Web pages at all times. If owners or operators of a company failed to comply with the proposed law, they would be guilty of a misdemeanor on the first offense. A second offense would be a felony and could lead to imprisonment for between one and five years and a fine up to $50,000 or both." The recently offered MySpace parental tools fall short of the bill's requirements. This coverage from the Athens Banner-Herald quotes Facebook's CPO saying that federal law forbids the company to allow anyone but the account creator to access it..

Comments

Perfectly Noxious

[mfh]

And when the parents give their permission -- OFF WITH THEIR HEADS!

people or property

[Anonymous Coward]

This demonstrates the battle between two competing and mutually exclusive legal approaches to minors: 1) as citizens with the same rights as any other, and 2) as the property of their parents.

Re:people or property

[gfxguy]

Such is the life of a slashdotting parent. When a predator victimizes a child, the parents get blamed for not better protecting their children. When a parent uses parental controls (because we cannot monitor our kids 24 hours a day) we get blamed for taking away their "rights."

Well, as a parent I'm legally responsible for my kids, so NO, they DON'T have the same rights as adults. Sorry to burst your bubble.

Uhh... what?

[JanusFury]

Staton cited statistics on dozens of teens who have been molested -- or murdered, in some instances -- by people they met through MySpace.com, according to law enforcement officials.

So, wait... dozens out of what, like 10 million myspace users? That's less than a hundredth of a percent. If anything, these statistics should indicate that he should be solving more dangerous problems, like car accidents or parental child abuse or teenage drug use, not chasing after imaginary problems.

why not ban parenthood?

[anagama]

Funny this from GA. Southern states have a rep for "close" familial relations. I doubt that most child-sex-crimes are perpetrated by outsiders anyway no matter what state we're talking about. Sure, the "be afraid of the internet" cases are the ones that get the headlines, but for the most part, it's mom or dad who are directly at fault. So why not just ban parenthood? Parenthood seems much more risky to children than the net.

Re:why not ban parenthood?

[anagama]

Indeed, a quick google search turned up this: http://www.districtadministration.com/pulse/commen tpost.aspx?news=no&postid=18080

Choice quote:

[chart showing 40% decline in sex abuse between 1990 and 2000]
All forms of child abuse, not just sexual abuse, are undergoing a dramatic decline. Of course, you'd never know this from the hype the media is giving the cases of online related sexual abuse that they can trace back to MySpace or Facebook.

[chart breaking down sex abuse by relationship]
The amazing and sad statistic that is so often overlooked and rarely discussed is that 95% of Child Abuse and Sexual Abuse is perpetrated by family members. 79% of perpetrators are parents. Other relatives accounted for 7% and unmarried partners of parents and "other" accounted for 4% and 5% of abuse.

Kneejerk reaction

[Skadet]

I was about to respond with the typical "parents' responsibility" blather, but then I thought about it some more and realized it's more insidious than that.

It really is about parental control, and parents should be up in arms about this. As it stands (in America, at least), once your kids are waiting on the corner for the public school bus in the morning, your kids belong to the State. A child student has to have parent's permission for an asprin, but not for an abortion.

Parental rights are increasingly in jeopardy in America.

This is one step down a slippery slope, and a good time to make a stand. The bottom line is that your kids are yours to raise -- no matter how much some may disagree with your parenting tactics -- and we are standing to lose that right. This is only the first step.

QFT - idiot.

[Irish_Samurai]

From TFA:
"Staton said the bill does not tell the companies exactly how to ensure that minors don't log on without parental permission. The companies can figure that out on their own, he said."

There is no real way to do that. Who is liable if the minor works around the security and makes a page? What if said minor created a page and NOTHING happened aside from a parent finding out the page exists? What is an acceptable form of verifying parental consent?

This proposal is a prime example of people who don't know jack about how the technology works trying to legislate it.

How about...

[frakir]

... requiring parents permission anytime kid wants to get on the bus? How about letting kids in the mall only with written permission?

you know, shit can happen on the bus....
in fact, shit can happen anywhere.
How about a site hosted in Romania or Israel?

State laws can not and will not replace neglecting parents.

Re:Normally I'm on the side of civil liberties...

[mobby_6kl]

I don't think My Space a net negative. IMO it's nice for the idiots to have their own place to hang out, instead of running around molesting the real internet.

Which has no place on Slashdot

[electrosoccertux]

This story has no place on Slashdot, as

a). we don't have kids
b). if we don't have any kids, then we're certainly not married
c). social networking? What is this adjective "social" you are talking about?

I kid, I kid [sorry].

Re:Which has no place on Slashdot

[Achromatic1978]

c). social networking? What is this adjective "social" you are talking about?

Don't get cheeky. We know perfectly well what social networking is. Social networking sites are what /we/ build so other people than ourselves can get dates!

Right to teach

[The Monster]

How about parents who want to teach their childred from birth that religion X is th eonly true way and that everyone else is a sinner and needs to be converted? What about parents who teach their children to be sexist? racist?

When they pick up weapons and try to translate that philosophy into reality, we'll just have to kill them. Meanwhile, we'll muddle through under this wacky idea that parents are presumed to have the best interests of their children at heart, and understand that hate mongers from Westboro to Wahhabi are the price of religious freedom.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Let's not blow this out of proportion

[dangermouse]

Cecil Staton, as another poster has pointed out, is kind of a known idiot. He's also all by himself on this. The response of the rest of the State Senate, and just about everyone else, has been: "What?"

It's not only a stupid idea, it's an unworkable stupid idea that's going nowhere. Yeah, it's been "proposed in Georgia", but it might as well have been proposed on the moon. It has no support in Georgia and shouldn't reflect on Georgia.

Re:responsibility or control

[hrvatska]

Speaking as a parent who has raised children, I don't think watching your kids means being invasive in every aspect of their lives. It doesn't mean pre-emptively reading their diaries. It doesn't mean saying that they can't have private phone conversations. And to me, that's what saying you have to have access to their myspace account amounts to. Watching your children means spending a substantial amount of time with them. Going to all of their school functions. Volunteering to be their coach. Talking to their friend's parents. Setting curfews and sticking to them. It isn't so much watching as participating.