To expect Facebook to enforce it's own rules?

[CHC74]

Facebook has an age limit. It's 13. In theory, nobody under the age of 13 should be able to have an account, and yet there are millions of primary school kids using the website, being exposed to pages promoting hate speech, illegal activities, anorexia as a glamorous lifestyle etc etc etc as well as the risk of coming into contact with predators.

Parents try and stop their kids from signing up, but they use friends computers, mobile phones and other 'net connected devices to go against their parents wishes.

Is it unreasonable to expect Facebook to put in place some measure of age verification to ensure that under 13's don't get to use their site? Should they be forced to do so?

Hulababy - I'm pleased that your children don't have unsupervised access to the net. Unfortunately, millions do (see the latest OFCOM media literacy survey for figures).

School filters are relatively easy for a savvy kid to get around (I've seen it done by 8 year olds) and at least 1 in 10 under 10's have an iPhone or equivalent device.

I agree that education is paramount, but web service operators have to play their part too.

I agree with those who have suggested that it's a parents responsibility to teach their child how to be safe on the internet. It is, but even that won't protect all children.

My friends daughter (aged 11) is on, with terrifyingly cute pics etc, so I became her friend, so that I could report back to her mum! Fortunately she likes me, so she accepted.

I do agree that FB should try and minimise the younger element - but I have no idea how that might be best acheived. maybe this is why I am not a multi-millionaire social network developer...

Paypal has a system of bank account verification which you have to go through to get "verified" status. Basically, they pay in 2 small amounts to your account (ranging between 1p & 10p) and to verify you have to confirm what these amounts were.

Paypal has 200 million plus users. If they can verify them, why can't Facebook?

I would quite like Facebook to enforce its own rules re not allowing hate speech. I don't see how things like this, or the pro-rape sites, are NOT hate speech, but they seem to think they are fine

Keep it free but limit access for those accounts with free email, i.e. yahoo, hotmail, gmail. Full access for accounts with ISP emails. This is something parents already have control over as they pay the ISP bills.

Give everyone a couple of months to change their email address over.

@TotemPole - I like that idea. Hadn't considered that one.

CHC74 its the way a few of the childrens sites work. A free email address means they can't chat or message other players, the can only play the game and do challenges.

It is not Facebook's job to make sure children are safe.

They have a rule that no one under the age of 13 should use Facebook, but if a child chooses to disregard that rule then it is the responsibility of the child (and the parent, if the parent knows that they are on FB). Do not blame FB because children under the age of 13 use it... blame the children who think rules don't apply to them.

ThisIsANickname - I'm assuming you're not being serious with that comment.

In an ideal world, kids would obey all the rules. We'd have no underage sex, no underage drinking/smoking, no truancy, no teens smoking weed and being a parent would be dead easy.

It's not an ideal world and kids will break the rules. That doesn't mean that we don't do anything to protect them when they do and simply let them "lie in their own bed".

Facebook has to take some measure of responsibility for a) the content it allows to be published and b) who is allowed to see that content.

That's ridiculous. Some 13 year olds will flaunt the rules. It's a teenager thing. Others will obey the rules. Facebook is harmless if the profile is set up properly. Yes the hate pages should be banned but you can report these if you see them. Children are given a lot if information about the dangers of the Internet and parents should know what their children are doing online.
To be perfectly honest if there is ever a credit card joining process all that will happen is the kids 'borrowing' mum and dads cards to sign up

"To be perfectly honest if there is ever a credit card joining process all that will happen is the kids 'borrowing' mum and dads cards to sign up"

And when the charge from Facebook appears on the statement?

The kids will end up being grounded, computer taken away for a few weeks and then the cycle will repeat

pyjamas, if the children have set up an account without parents knowing then who has set up the profile properly?

With other under age activities such as drinking and smoking, the retailer is held accountable and can be prosecuted. The shops ask for ID to protect themselves.

I don't see why there can't be something in place to verify age. Some will slip through and find a way around it but it would stop most.

Sorry I didn't explain properly. If a parent is ok with their child having an account then they can set it up properly. If a parent isn't ok with it then its surely up to the parent when they find out to either arrange an age with their child when it is ok, set up the account properly or punish the child for going behind their back.

I think the OP has a good point i just don't see it happening or why it's facebooks problem that some children are signing up underage

Any age verification or other process put in place will have a certain percentage of users who find some way round it. However, anything has to be better than the current "honour" system that means that any child who can count backwards can sign up.

Imagine a similar system in the off-license:

"Bottle of Vodka please"

"Are you over 18? - What's your date of birth"

....Counts on fingers, "ummm, 21/9/1990?"

"Ok then, £12.99 please"

Saying "it's down to the parents" is frankly naive in the extreme and displays a lack of understanding of the technology kids use to access the 'net and a blind trust in the parents of their friends to exercise the same caution you do.

When you bear in mind that 51% of all parents recently surveyed said that they had no parental controls on their computers, 40% said they believed the internet to be "regulated" and around 61% of children under 15 have access to an internet connected computer in their bedroom the problem becomes obvious. Parents don't know enough about internet safety.

Facebook is a child protection nightmare and they know it. They've already proven that they don't give a toss about imposing changes on their users, so lets see them impose some changes that will do some good instead of just lining pockets.

cross posted with TotemPole who makes an excellent point and pyjamas who agrees (in part)

Surely it's the parents responsibility to give their child the information they need and to enforce it. I really don't see how it's facebooks problem. Or should we blame the police for allowing paedo's and that to have Internet access? Facebook was created for adults. You aren't having a go at porn sites that don't verify the users age. Also to be Frank so what some 13 yr old might read something hateful. As parents we should be teaching them that this isn't right and preparing them to come across this material with the attitude and respect to report it and make up their own minds.

Also on here there are threads about bondage, abortion copy and paste things etc etc etc but you dont need to be a member to see them. There's a lot worse on the Internet for an under 13 to come across than Facebook.

CHC74 - I ama ware of the stats. I was an ICt teacher and I am still involved in education and ICT. However I still believe it is down to teaching children about keeping themselves safe on the internet, and that that shpould lie with the parents.

The internet is here to stay. The likes of social netwroking such as Fb is here to stay. If FB goes something else will arise in its place. We can't control all that.

What we can do is educate our children and teens on internet safety.

Parents have to take responsibility for their children and know what their children are up to. And I am afraid that for primary school age there is no excuse.

Once secondary rather than banning them - educate them.

Nowhere have I said that parents can abdicate responsibility. What I have said is that Facebook should be made to enforce their own rules (and ensure that they operate within the law).

Porn sites that don't verify age are another matter (and yes, I'm also challenging the porn industry as part of my work) and yes, children have to be prepared for what's out there in the wider world and we can't wrap them in cotton wool.

We have to accept that kids WILL access the 'net without our supervision and that they WILL try and get around these rules. Don't operators like Facebook have ANY responsibility to try and make it harder for them to do so?

Facebook or any other website isn't responsible for your children. You are. No matter how much you want to off-load responsibility for what your children do onto someone else it does not change that fact.

The Internet is not, repeat not child-friendly. If any parent is so dumb or so wilfully woefully under-informed to believe otherwise then quite frankly Facebook's handling of under-13s is very much the least of the problems here.

"Also on here there are threads about bondage, abortion copy and paste things etc etc etc but you dont need to be a member to see them. There's a lot worse on the Internet for an under 13 to come across than Facebook."

I agree. However, kids on Facebook are sharing every detail of their life online and indiscriminately adding "friends" that they don't know from Adam. It's about more than them seeing a pair of tits or reading about anorexia. It's about them coming into contact with someone who wants to put them in the boot of their car, drive them to a deserted field, rape and murder them and dump their body in a ditch.

EVERYBODY has to take responsibility for preventing that. Including Facebook.

"No matter how much you want to off-load responsibility for what your children do onto someone else it does not change that fact."

Where have I said anything about offloading responsibility?

When you claimed that expecting parents to keep an eye on their children was "frankly naive in the extreme".

@Snorbs - Perhaps I should have said that saying it's solely down to the parents is naive