Week of December 18, 2005

There was no bigger or more disturbing story in kid-tech news this week than the one told by the New York Times after a six-month-long investigation…

Kids & Webcams: Terrible trend

The story begins with Justin Berry, who got his start at age 13 buying a Webcam to meet other teenage friends online. Within weeks he was getting paid $50 "to sit bare-chested in front of his computer for three minutes" for a man who helped him instantly set up a PayPal account.

Over five years, reports writer Kurt Eichenwald, Justin developed an audience of 1,500 that paid him "hundreds of thousands of dollars" for nude images and worse. The connected computer was in his room, and he hid the Webcams behind it during the day so his mother wouldn't see them, the Times reports. Justin's activities were part of the "Webcam Matrix," a term dubbed by another teenager cited by the Times, who, also for money, operates his own site of self-published child porn.

The Times article is the first I've seen in 8+ years of following reportage on kids and tech pointing to a trend or a generalized pattern of actions and genre of Web sites. The pattern of behavior and sites/blogs, on the teenagers' part, are about money, naivete, the need to connect, or combinations of the above. The pattern of actions on the adults' part are well known to law enforcement (one of the things that confounds prosecutors is that these kids are both victims and perpetrators).

What wasn't known is how wide-spread self-published child porn seems to have become, based on what Kurt's investigative reporting turned up (if there has been any public-sector or academic research on this, I'm not aware of it). However, there have been scattered reports of teens exposing themselves for intimate friends, before the friendship "goes bad" and photos are maliciously IM'ed, emailed, or file-shared around (e.g., see "India: Child porn by teens"  and "Self-published child porn") - the Times also tells of how this social type of kid-generated porn, too, ends up turning its subjects into "pornographic commodities" on the Web. And a few years ago, there was a brief swirl of reporting on "camgirl" sites, linked by their teenage subjects to retail sites' wish lists so people viewing photos of the site owners in various states of undress could send them gifts (see this news item in 2003).

But now we know those phenomena were only the tip of the iceberg. "Easy money" is way too easy for tech-literate kids aided "wittingly and unwittingly" by Internet services like free instant-messaging, blogging, image- and video-uploading, Webcam and other communities, "bank" accounts, and wish lists.

The Times says its reporting for this article has led to "a wide-scale criminal investigation." After a series of meetings, it "persuaded Justin to abandon his business and, to protect other children at risk, assisted him in contacting the Justice Department."

The long article has a companion video interview with the boy, now 19, which hints at what Justin's been through and the integrity that compelled him to tell his story for other children's sake. Here are some key points in the article parents might want to be aware of:

  • "As soon as Justin hooked the camera to his bedroom computer and loaded the software [back in 2000], his picture was *automatically* posted [emphasis mine] on spotlife.com, an Internet directory of Webcam users, along with his contact information."
  • Contrary to his intention, "no one Justin's age ever contacted him from that listing" and "within minutes he heard from his first online predator ... followed by another, then another."
  • Video-hosting is offered by many services now, including blogging/social-networking sites, and IM services allow users to attach videos, but kids can also easily create their own video-enabled Web sites.

Further Info

In Other News

  • 'Santa' worm in IM. It's a sad day when we have to tell our kids to be very wary of any instant message about Santa Claus! You can tell them they're too smart to fall for this little social-engineering trick: the "IM.GiftCom.All" worm that's spreading through the AIM and MSN and Yahoo Messenger networks. CNET reports that this worm too will look like it's coming from someone on their buddy list, but - when clicked on - it installs Santa's little "gift."
  • Teen's blogged confession Blurty.com led to a guilty plea. "An 18-year-old passenger who caused a fatal crash [in Florida] … pleaded guilty to DUI manslaughter after prosecutors discovered a confession on his online blog," the Associated Press reports. The blog post was dated three days after the crash, though the boy, Blake Ranking, "had previously told investigators he remembered nothing of the crash and little of its aftermath." His sentencing is next week.
  • Granddad settles. It's a case people have been watching: that of a Wisconsin man, who was sued for $600,000 by the film industry because his 12-year-old grandson downloaded four movies via a P2P network. Fred Lawrence said he knew nothing about file-sharing at the time his grandson did the downloading, and they owned three of the movies anyway. The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reports that Mr. Lawrence will be giving talks to schoolchildren about Internet piracy as a part of the settlement with the Motion Picture Association of America (here's earlier coverage). Meanwhile, the music industry has just sued 751 more music file-sharers, CNET reports.
  • Lawsuits not "helping." I'm referring to lawsuits by the music industry against file-sharers and a just-released study about it cited in The Guardian.  The survey, conducted by market research firm Mori for AOL UK, found that "51% of those who currently download tracks do so illegally." It also indicated "a large degree of confusion among consumers about whether or not they were breaking copyright laws by using illegal sites. Only four in 10 said that they understood the law." Even so, more than 75% of respondents said they'd illegally downloaded music at least once (one in six said they use music retail sites exclusively).
  • US videogame law introduced. The trend at the state level is courts blocking laws against violent videogame sales to minors. But at the federal level,"a trio of Democratic senators with presidential ambitions introduced federal legislation" that basically would turn the gaming industry's current voluntary ratings into law and would fine retailers for selling to minors games rated "Mature" or "Adults Only" or with "ratings pending," the Wall Street Journal reports. The Journal says the senators - Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, and Evan Bayh of Indiana - "believe [their law, unlike the state laws so far] can pass constitutional muster."
  • 'Game moms' dazed & confused? They seems to have fewer clues than soccer moms, anyway. Not all, but a lot of them, based on the impressions given by a Washington Post reporter observing game moms behavior in what is not generally their natural habitat: game stores. "Salespeople at the game stores, as amused as they are a little agitated, say they can easily spot the three types of game moms: the indifferent, the clueless and the hip." The salespeople don't seem to mind this sub-category: clueless with a list. The other lists game moms and dads might want to check against is the National Institute on Media & the Family's lists of games to avoid and recommended games (p. 11 of its 2005 report) and the ESRB's list of game ratings and what they mean. 

For daily news, visit the NetFamilyNews blog or NetFamilyNews.org.