Wed May 30, 2007 4:28PM EDT
See Comments (244)
A friend of mine, a new mom who is very tech savvy and comfortable socializing and sharing info on the web, recently raised a good question for young parents. Like lots of first-time parents, she put images and videos of her child with her name on the web for friends and family to see. She used Flickr and Yahoo! Video, which makes it easy to send links that people can click on and be brought immediately to a public photo or video gallery.
But when she did a search on her daughter's name, she was surprised to immediately find links to the images. It made her stop and think about how they handle their child's images on the web before she is old enough to have any say in how she is presented online. For now, she has taken the most prominent links down, and she and her husband have decided not to use their daughter's full name on anything they post in the future. Friends of theirs take an even more cautious stance: they will not put any images of their children on the web before they are old enough to say whether they want them there or not.
Either way, it's an interesting dilemma for parents who have come of age at ease with sharing images and writings about themselves on MySpace, Facebook, YouTube, and other social-networking sites. But when it comes to children, parents need to weigh their kids' right to privacy with the desire to share their joy with the world.
When Richard M. Smith, an Internet security consultant based in Boston, searched on his grandson's name, he was surprised to come upon a page of Flickr photos of the baby set up by his son-in-law. "Seems like a problem," he wrote in an email message. Because Smith is concerned about safety as well as privacy, he notes that putting full names of family members online is not a good idea, especially when there are tools that allow people to search on names of adults and come up with home addresses.
If you've set up a family web site, Smith notes that you can use a ROBOTS.TXT file to tell search engines to go away so the site does not show up on search index pages.
The simpler solution, he said, is to choose web-based photo-sharing options that allow you to keep the sharing between family and friends and not in the public domain. With that in mind, here are a few ways to share in a less public way:
Privacy settings: Flickr now has a "hide your photos from public searches" feature in the "my account" section of the site. You can also change privacy settings to restrict those who view your photos to friends and/or family. If you do this, you'll need to invite some friends and family to sign up on Flickr, which may take a little explaining for some less tech-savvy family members. (Note: You can not make uploaded videos to Yahoo! Video private.)
Private photo and video sharing sharing: All the major photo web sites have sharing features, though many require the viewers to register with the sites to see the photos. Shutterfly does not, which is one of the reasons why I like it. To share videos with family members and friends, try Motionbox, which has a private setting, and One True Media, which allows you to share videos on a personal TiVo channel.
Family social networking sites: Some charge subscriptions, some are free. A few free ones worth checking out are Famoodle, FamilyRoutes, and Kincafe. For a scrapbooking approach, try Smilebox.
Those are a few ideas for sharing photos and videos of your family with the people you want to see them and not necessarily anyone who finds them on the web. If this is something you've given some thought to, too, please share in the comments below how you share images of your little ones with an eye toward privacy and safety.
Related:
Family Web Site or Family Network?
Where Families Meet on the Web
Join in the discussion. Here you'll see the comments in the order they were posted.
Good point about the phone book, but the problem isthat evry thing is all to accessable on the internet. From porn to terrorist to perverts and rubbish bands, scams, id theft, the list goes on. The internet has caused more trouble than good. Yes i use it, but its made the world an even sicker place than it was. Best thing is dont put up your pics or details. If you want family to see your pics, send em a copy in the post. The old way is the best way.
The pedophile seeing a photo on-line and stalking a kid scare is an urban myth. It has been analyzed and thoroughly debunked multiple times. One such excellent analysis can be found at . To quote from the conclusion, " Society would be much better off, if we could stop wasting time on these misguided fears, and instead apply the same effort to abuse prevention. Lost in all this is the fact that nearly every incident of sexual abuse is preventable, with simple steps that parents can take. The and lawmakers have done a great disservice to the public, by focusing on the problem of sexual abuse from the extreme fraction of a percent, and reinforcing traditional views of pedophiles which are far from accurate. If you don’t understand the way they work and act, you can’t protect your children. The ploys pedophiles use can be stopped, if parents simply take the time to address the things that make their childrren vulnerable to begin with. With simple steps that nearly every parent can take, just about every molester can be kept at bay."
I couldn't agree more with krister182
To Poster #8/mharbc: Three words "In Cold Blood" NO ONE IS IMMUNE TO THE SICKOS IN SOCIETY !
VERY GOOD ADVICE AND INFORMATION!
Yeah, keep thing on private setting, and be careful you you add on myspace, and you are good to go.
zenith012, Have you children, I am betting not. And, I am betting you are pretty willy-nilly about protecting your computer and yourself. This string is all about being cautious and establishing controls on who one wants to be touching the pictures of their children. Unfortunately with the various 'revolutions' that have occurred since the 60's we have seen some pretty bad characters emerge. And though they may be twisted sexually, that certainly does not keep them from being smart technologically. Be smart, and you son't have the unfortunate discovery someday that you inadvertently exposed your child and their personal information to a miscreant.
i think that it is putting kids at a bad risk and should not be done!!
Hmm. My attempt to point readers to a good URL was censored for some reason. Please search for "Stacy ----- tuck" and "Is Posting Children\'s Pictures Online Dangerous?"
I am a firm believer in protecting the privacy of the lives of my family especially in a world where personal data is so easily obtained and not always for noble reasons. Using full names- adult or other wise is not a smart thing to do. I love posting in MySpace but my grandkids and other family members are cited with first name only. One comment you made in the article, however, was a bit much: "But when it comes to children, parents need to weigh their kids' right to privacy with the desire to share their joy with the world." That is well intended but we are the parents and as parents have the right to make those kinds of decisions- not the babies! However- you may have a point when it comes to that "embarassing naked pic" that we have ALL made of our children.
Any picture can be copied once it's online with just a sipmple right click, or you can go to the properties and copy the url into your online photo album. This really shouldn't be an issue, either post or don't post photos. If you are wanting to share photos with friends and family, then develop or print them out and send them in the mail like people "used" to do. Put them on a CD and send it in the mail. Or better yet, make a photo album or scrap book that people can see when they VISIT you. Unless of course you don't visit people because it's much easier to do the social thing online.
our friends and family must use a password to access our daughter's online photos
I support this.
For me, the baby posting picture is basically the same with posting an adult picture. With, I think the posting of pictures of a baby or an adult is not good. It disturbs your privacy.
Also a quater of a century ago but it seems like yesterday sometimes I was given a T shirt (Vest?) with my name on the front and just like seeing the name and photo to match on the web anyone new my name so straingers would walk up and say hello (insert name) and I would assume they were somone who knew my Mum or Dad because they knew my name scary for the parents isn't it but this story reminded me of the Shirt Mums reaction when she realised what was happening and how easy it must be to match a name with a face thanks to the internet photo's.
Honestly - what a fuss about nothing! First of all, what exactly is this unspecified danger that is hinted about in the article. Is it abuduction? Is it that someone might use the pictures for their sexual gratification? Or is it both; that they might see the images, abduct the child and abuse them? The overwhelming majority of children who are abused know, or are related to their abuser - are we to stop putting pictures of our family on cards we send out, just in case? Abduction by strangers is extremely rare and are almost always spontaneous. So rare as to be statistically insignificant. (I know it's terrible for the tiny few who experience it, but that doesn't make it something we should be disproportionately concerned about.) This obssessional fear about the abuse of children is doing harm to far more children than the abuse ever could. They are losing their innocence, being corraled into 'safe' environments where they are unable to engage in the meaningful play and risk-taking that is essential to Honestly - what a fuss about nothing! First of all, what exactly is this unspecified danger that is hinted about in the article. Is it abduction? Is it that someone might use the pictures for their sexual gratification? Or is it both; that they might see the images, abduct the child and abuse them? The overwhelming majority of children who are abused know, or are related to their abuser - are we to stop putting pictures of our family on cards we send out, just in case? Abduction by strangers is extremely rare and are almost always spontaneous. So rare as to be statistically insignificant. (I know it's terrible for the tiny few who experience it, but that doesn't make it something we should be disproportionately concerned about.) This obsessional fear about the abuse of children is doing harm to far more children than the abuse ever could. They are losing their innocence, being corralled into 'safe' environments where they are unable to engage in the meaningful play and risk-taking that is essential to developing a balanced view of the world around them. Secondly – what is this hogwash about a not putting pictures of your 'children on the web before they are old enough to say whether they want them there or not.' What is wrong with us? We so crippled by the social trend for unthinking equality that we can't recognise that until children are adults we, as their guardians, make their decisions for them. So what if they turn out not to like it? Tough! Life is full of things we don't like, children know this instinctively and accept it. Trying to protect them against every minuscule hurt or risk is pathetic and counter-productive. The first chance they get they're off to do all the things you'd hidden from them. As we did with our parents.
I think people are just too paranoid. So what if someone can see your naked baby's pictures online... they see them other places too. Yes there are predators but unless you're posting this is where this child lives at so and so it's fine. And really people are just getting so overparanoid about the net that a fear is arising that i think is completely unnecessary. Yeah I've searched my name and realized it's a link back to my web site I created when I was 12, but so what? It's not hurting me just as seeing someone's random child pictures won't hurt anyone else. The real predators might be a bit creepy but really what isn't creepy in this world? And those that like animated pictures of what some might consider child pornography, well they like animated pictures, which I can tell you personally is a completely different thing than fantasizing about a real child.
The way individuals are able to get information on any one now a days is scarey, I cant even imagen having a psycho get a hold of my childs information. The internet is always community never private and easily accessible for information about you that one would never even begin to realize. Never take it for granit because about the time that you do, someone out there may do something as major as defamation of charector to something as common as transaction reversal fraud. dont become a vic like me. read about it, learn it, and educate everyone you can! Protect yourself and your kids
You should be more careful about putting pics of 8 - 12 year olds because the number of child molesters and abducters is increasing and you could get dumb people bothering you.
Please enable your browser's cookies to activate the My Tech column.
| Computers | Home Office | Wi-Fi & Networking | Phones & PDAs | Cameras & Camcorders | TV & Home Theater | Portable Audio |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
26 Posted by mylilbigsy on Thu Sep 3, 2009 7:31PM EDT Report Abuse
I have also been having reservations about posting my kids' pics online. Recently, while looking on myspace, I came across a woman age 35 posting nude pics of herself on myspace and right next to them pics of her young daughter. They included pics outside of her home, inside the child's bedroom, her bedroom, and on the front porch with the house number visibly showing! Now how dumb is this woman? I would say ... she is very naive or just plain stupid. Any pervert could be lurking on myspace and see her and the prey upon her child. And BTW, the woman listed here occupation as a public relations coordinator.