Thursday, October 17, 2013

Facebook Makes It Easier On Child Molesters

Facebook has decided that not enough 13 year old kids are being stalked online and have changed their policy from friends of friends to friends which means that the teens can now have their posts made public and everyone out in the world can follow them.

This is ridiculous. Facebook is doing this to get more revenue for the company and is probably assuming that when a child is stalked online and molested that they can say it is not their fault because the company sent out a warning to teens telling them what posting publicly means. Plus there is some bean counter that has probably calculated what kind of settlement they would have to pay compared to the extra millions in ad revenue they will get with the reduced privacy settings.

46 comments:

Susan said...

I'm getting ready to go Ron Swanson and get off the grid.

Facebook's privacy rules suck, but I've also heard on the street (among the many teens who I see each week at piano lessons and the ones in my fam), that teeny boppers think Facebook is totally lame and like, for old people.

Seven of Eleven said...

"Teens are among the savviest people using social media, and whether it comes to civic engagement, activism, or their thoughts on a new movie, they want to be heard," Facebook wrote.

A teenager wanting to be heard? Duh.

Not sure why it's news, as any teen who "wants to be heard" knows enough to change the settings on the account to show their birthday as 18 or up. FB is losing out to Instagram and they're scrambling to grab the youth market.

Seachica said...

I was just looking at a survey of college freshman, and in one year, there was an 8-point decline in the percentage who thought Facebook was an important social media network for communicating with them. Teens are running away from Facebook because it isn't cool now that their parents are on it. FB is trying to keep up with other social networks that are hipper and allow more sharing. Saying it is "easier on child molesters" is lazy reporting.

Lucas said...

Anyone else amused at Enties snarking on Facebook for trying to get more revenue? Hello...almost reveals? 10 blinds a day? Reveals (with a celeb name that shows up in a Google search) every day? TONS of blinds about sexual abuse and pedophilia?

Pot, meet kettle.

Bacon Ranch said...

Am I reading this wrong? I must be.

So only friends can see your pics, as opposed to friends AND their friends (that you may not be friends with?)

Again I must be reading this incorrectly. Have they adjusted where you can go in and manually change privacy features? Do parents no longer have (Cartman voice) AUTHORITAH over their child's social media options?

I must be interpreting this wrong.

FrenchGirl said...

@searchica @lucas +1

hollywood dime said...

@seven Facebook owns Instagram :(

Unknown said...

@Lucas

+1

Don't forget blogging even on holidays.

Orvilla Bedinbacher said...

Facebook has and always will be freaking EVIL as shit. Everything about it is crap. So, glad I deleted my account years ago. I think I had an account for a month and realized that FB was truly a demon. I exorcised that bitch!

Also, I would be the parent that would never let her kid have an account. I have volunteered for a Trafficking organization for several years now. The atrocities of how Facebook can and does aid in a ring of sexual slavery is maddening.

I just can't!

Orvilla Bedinbacher said...

@Susan Gotta love Ron Swanson!

Mari said...

Agree 100%.

Anonymous said...

The teens are going to newer social apps and media where the rules are the same or easier than FB. When you think about it, it's really teens and those that prey on them that will really know the new media which makes the new media more dangerous. Parent's are always the last to know.

FB would be better off creating a new teen oriented app that could link to FB. Everyone knows teens loose interest in things once adults discover them.

Pogue Mahone said...

I don't even LET my kids use Facebook for that exact reason!

Brian Brown said...

Teens are among the savviest people using social media

Remember when those teens went into that ex-football players house, trashed it, and posted pics on Twitter?

Remember when those clowns in Stubenville raped a drink girl, took pictures, posted them and laughed about it on Twitter?

Um, that is a ridiculous and preposterous assertion.

H888FUL said...

My kids aren't ever going to have that crap until they are 18. I don't have any social media accounts either (ones for trolling don't count) and I'm not missing anything. Who really cares about what a bunch of assholes are doing? If I'm that pressed to know I'll just text them or call them.

Brian Brown said...

So in other words "savviest people" equals "people who use it a lot"

The 15-17 year old girls posting sexual pictures of themselves on Twitter are not in any manner "savvy" they are too naive and stupid to understand what they are doing.

The people at Facebook are idiots.

__-__=__ said...

Agree with Orvilla. Why is anyone posting anything that couldn't be public? FB is trolled with ads now anyways. Preserve your privacy should be the first concern on internet. You should be anonymous as possible whenever possible.

Unknown said...

This was coming from the first day Facebook decided to go public and sell shares.

Its just U said...

First off, parents should be more clued in to what their kids are doing. It's not up to Facebook to raise kids.
Besides, what do 12/ 13/ 14 year olds need social networks for? They do enough, physical, socialising in school and whatever else they have going on.
My girls don't have ANY. I check through phones and iPad every night. No internet in rooms with closed doors. No deleting search history.

Patty said...

I'm with you BR. Friends only is more secure than Friends of Friends. I think the Enty de jour got that backwards.

Anonymous said...

Oh waa. If you dont like the content move along. Pot meet shut the hell up.

Count Jerkula said...

I don't even use my bobo FB acct anymore, unless I see an article about a prostitution bust and they don't shoe a pic of the whore.

Lucas said...

@Anna - the content is what it is. What gets me is someone getting up on their high horse about pedophiles while they make their living publishing gossip about...pedophiles. If you are sucking on the same teat don't complain about the milk.

Its just U said...

@Anna Notmynamethisweek If you don't like the comments then don't read them. Or just stfu.
Are you the hall monitor of commenters now?

Anonymous said...

Hes outing pedophiles. Not catering to them. When did the comment section become a place to bitch,whine,complain about and attack the writer of this blog? We get tons of free superjuice and everyone just says: geez crappy grammar, this writer's a real bitch on the rag, roid raging etc. How Lame of him to put out ten blinds and several reveals a day?! W.t.f? And on holidays too? The nerve of him giving us a fun escape from family time either herding screaming brats or doing mountains of dishes. What a greedy bastard! I really hate him and this site. How can i escape this waste land of suck?

Elisha said...

What pedophile has he actually outed? He usually outs the victim before the abuser.

Unknown said...



Don't complain about bitching and then turn around and bitch about other posters.

Lucas said...

Which pedophile has he outed, specifically? Exactly.

And complaints about the amount of content derive from the resulting decrease in quality. Which is noticeable. And damaging to what had been a promising brand. Look I get that whoever runs this site has realized, particularly in the wake of the LA Weekly award, that they have a marketable commodity and I can't fault them for trying to make the most out of it. But is proper grammar too much to ask? Or consistency within postings in regards to core beliefs? 'I'd never give anyone a hard time for being fat' followed by 'Matthew Perry ate Tokyo'. That kind of inconsistency is damaging to the site's credibility with readers. This isn't rocket science. Pay someone $10 an hour to put commas in the right places and keep track of the site's purported stance on social and body-image issues. The jump in quality and resulting increase in revenue will easily offset the upfront costs.

And a whole bunch of us are here for the comments section, which is easily twice as entertaining as the posts themselves.

amused bush said...

Bacon Ranch - I was confused about the Friends of Friends >> Friends myself. It definitely is the othe way around.


FB better watch it, Snapchat is the way to go...you can share with a selected group and once the content has been opened and viewed, it disappears. Supposedly for good. This is the type of service "teens" are flocking to.

Lucas said...

@V - Except you can screen cap the image before it "disappears" and save it.

JoElla said...

I didn't know until recently that there was an "other" folder for private messages. People who you are not friends who send you messages go in there.

And now people who are not friends with you can "follow" you on facebook. (what the what?!)

My crazy ass Aunt who is not friends with my husband was "following" him, not only under her name, but my Grandmama's name. The only way to stop that from happening is to block them.

Also Hubby had 2 "unknown" people following him. And we can't figure out a way to see who those are.

My boys have FB accounts (they are 19and 17) but no way in hell does my 14 year old daughter.

I have always told my kids that in this day and age, everyone has pictures and videos on their phones, and if you don't want the world to see it, don't do it.

And each and every day I am thankful that I grew up in an era that they didn't have this tech when I was a kid. LOL

amused bush said...

Lucas, that is why I said supposedly ;)

From user experience, the screen capture trick is not always reliable, but yep, content can be saved in this manner.

chopchop said...

Lucas, you said everything I wanted to say and more. Kudos, bro.

Lucas said...

@V - Uh-huh. Someone has a sexy Snapchat collection ;)

Unknown said...

Teenagers are going to do what they want anyway. And never assume that yours aren't doing it behind your back.

Unknown said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Unknown said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
trogdor said...

I have several friends that work at FB as Dev Ops and Sys engineers and have even placed a few there. FB's privacy policies don't suck, they just have a hard time with growth. A really hard time with growth, actually. Every new million+ users, they have to adjust their systems to streamline for their Ad software, which is FB's only revenue stream. Since the sites basic use is posting and sharing, a lot of the software and systems have to be tweaked by changing those things in particular.

By default ALL of your posts are made public. You have to change the global setting by clicking the little globe right under your post. This was enacted almost 3 years ago.

Once Twitter or Instagram or whatever hit a billion+ users, you'll see things like this happen there, too. I would recommend never using any of these sites as the go-to platform for your online identity. Keep your full names of off it, keep your city out, don't geo-tag, don't tag pictures, don't allow friends to, don't allow friends to auto post to your wall, control who can send you messages...etc. These can all be found in the settings menus. If you decide you want to do they above things, then you have to roll with the punches. FB is LITERALLY is banking on you making it your first and last destination on the web, so that even if you complain, you still have to use it because you made it your online identity platform. Make it so that FB isn't.

JSierra said...

@Anna did you seriously just complain about complaining?

lesimple said...

@trogdor.....thanks for the tips. FB has always given me the creeps, so I've always chosen all the least public settings...but you are right about the changes a few years ago. How do I delete my city on? Following up on your post, I discovered FB tracks you under Security -> Where you log in. I do see that you can alter your last name (tho one has to be input). If I didn't need it for a work-related group, I'd delete altogether!

feraltart said...

Facebook was great when my brother died. I was able to post on there & let all his friends know that I wouldn't have known how to contact otherwise.

amused bush said...

*batting eyelashes* Lucas, what evah are you talking about?? ;)

Anonymous said...

No it just bugs me though. Its my opinion,just like others are expressing theirs. Its been bugging the everloving crap out of me to see people bitching in every single comments section about how lame the person writing it is,how stupid,bigoted,fake,etc. I usually dont say anything and find myself turned off by the comments section to the point i dont hardly comment or read them. Its my problem and my personal sense of decency that when someone gives you something you shouldnt tell them its awful and utter crap and theyre full of it. Didnt mean to get snappy. Just hit a wall with it.

Anonymous said...

Agree with you Lucas

Anonymous said...

Susan : I've done it
So liberating
I worked at an organisation where so many teens were being stalked, harassed on fuckbook. Decided all the people in my life who I give a shit about, don't need fuckbook to keep in touch.

Anonymous said...

Lucas you present an intelligent, cohesive view point. How dare you! You know how Anna Katherine hates when people do that!

Advertisement

Popular Posts from the last 30 days