Talking and Browsing on Phones is Blasé Users Spend More Time on Apps

March 18, 2011

One of the interesting news pieces coming out of last month’s Mobile World Congress was new data from mobile research firm Zokem that shows mobile phone users now spend far more time using applications on their phones than actually talking. When application use is looked at as a whole – combining messaging and other applications – the app usage is now two-and-a-half times greater than voice usage.

Average Minutes of Screen time by type – January 2011
Messaging (email, text, multimedia, and IM) 671 minutes
Apps (maps, gaming, entertainment, productivity, and social networking) 667 minutes
Voice 531 minutes
Browsing the Web 422 minutes

This finding provides further evidence that mobile users – particularly younger users – view of phones has shifted to the point that they now   consider the device in their pocket to be more of a computer than the single-purpose device.

How quickly technology and our expectations change.  It is just over 30 years ago that Bill Gates shared his vision of a computer on every desktop and in every home. My own first PC back in 1980 was a screamingly fast monster with 64K (yes, K) of memory that we didn’t think there would ever be enough data to fill.  I was thrilled with the freedom from typewriters and the new world where you could edit text, shift paragraphs and actually save documents.

And it’s just over 16 years ago that the first commercial phone with paging and voice capabilities were ready for mainstream consumers.  For any of you who had a phone back then, you’ll remember we had to pull out the antennae in order to get a signal, and while those phones were a generation better than the ‘brick’ phones, they were still huge and required a carrying case on your belt.  It wasn’t until 1999 that the mobile web was introduced on phones, and it took until 2000 to get rid of that darn external antenna.  Jump forward to 2003 when the first camera phones really hit the U.S. market (japan had them in 2001), browsing actually began to be interesting, and the U.S. finally realized the handiness of text messaging.  Another hop forward to 2007 brought the first iPhone, and since then applications have been sprouting like mushrooms after a rain.

What new mobile capabilities mean to you and your kids

First and foremost, the new phone functionality means a better mobile experience. It also means more power in your hand, more responsibility to use the device appropriately, and a greater need to protect the phone and the information on the phone.

How do you learn more about teaching kids to use mobile phones safely and in a socially responsible way? I’ve got just the information you need… Check out these blogs:

Linda

Comments Off | Linda's Blog | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by Linda Criddle

Operation Rescue Busts Online Pedophile Ring with 70,000 Members

March 16, 2011

Once over-hyped as lurking behind every online contact, then dismissed as statistically insignificant, child sexual predators constitute a very real concern, and they are constantly trolling for new victims.

Nothing highlights this more starkly than the news of what is thought to be the world’s largest Internet pedophile ring that operated behind the online forum called ‘boylover.net’. The bust of this pedophile ring, which may include up to 70,000 members, was announced today by Europol.

Though investigations are still underway, the news report says, “670 suspects have been identified across the world already, 184 arrests made and 230 children safeguarded. The number of victims safeguarded is the highest ever achieved from this type of investigation, and is set to rise even further in the coming weeks.”


Of those arrested, 5 are known to be US citizens. In the UK, the children exploited were between 7 and 14 years of age, and Australian Federal Police commander Grant Edwards said suspects arrested in Australia ranged in age from 19 to 84.

Called ‘Operation Rescue’, the investigation has been underway for over three years, and Europol has brought together law enforcement agents from 13 countries to track offenders on what the report calls “ a truly global scale”. Participating countries include Australia, Belgium, Canada, Greece, Iceland, Italy, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Poland, Romania, Spain, United Kingdom and the United States.

The website, ‘boylover.net’ has now been taken down. But according to Europol’s press release it “attempted to operate as a ‘discussion–only’ forum where people could share their sexual interest in young boys without committing any specific offences, thus operating ‘below the radar’ of police attention. Having made contact on the site, some members would move to more private channels, such as email, to exchange and share illegal images and films of children being abused. Computers seized from those arrested have harvested huge quantities of child abuse images and videos.”

As sickening as the topic is to most people, it isn’t illegal to talk about abusing children, and a simple search reveals thousands of websites dedicated to ‘boy love’ and ‘girl love’ – thousands more can be found using similar key word searches.  What is interesting however is that a search on Google for ‘boy love’ doesn’t bring back any purchased ad results, while  the search for ‘girl love’ has several – some appear to be positive, others offering contact. It would be interesting to hear Google’s take on their ad policy for key word phrases such as these.

Why this matters to you

With sexting and cyberbullying being the internet risk topics de jour, there hasn’t been much in the way of focus on the ongoing assault youth face from online pedophiles.

Though far more kids get harmed by schoolyard bullies than get hit by cars – we still go to great lengths to teach youth how to look both ways and follow traffic safety rules. This same pragmatism must be applied to online safety issues as well; we cannot fail to address in a careful and thoughtful way the full scope of potential online issues youth may face and this includes sexual predators.

Some internet safety “experts” have all but dismissed the threat of sexual predators online as a rarity that essentially only involves troubled youth, and have advised that efforts should instead focus on areas like bullying that impact a larger number of victims. This is shockingly poor guidance.  This is not an either/or scenario.

While successful sexual exploitation of a minor met through the internet is far less common than many other forms of abuse, it is not a rare outcome. The potentially horrific and life-long consequences of sexual exploitation demand that focus, education and prevention efforts remain a priority for families, schools, and others who teach youth about online safety.

Another common, though unfortunate, observation is that most of the youth who were solicited online were already experiencing trouble in other aspects of their lives. While this is true, it doesn’t present the larger more accurate picture.

Some youth who have fallen victim to online sexual predators were shockingly ‘normal’ with great grades, strong friendships, and popular. Others have been in trouble at home, at school or with the law multiple times. Some are lonely, vulnerable, questioning their own sexuality, unsupervised, or have already been victims of sexual exploitation.

All youth are more vulnerable at some points than they are at others, and predators, including child sexual predators, are constantly probing online and offline for youth who are in one of those vulnerable moments.

It is essential for parents, teachers and caregivers to candidly discuss with kids and teens how to appropriately engage with others, how to reject inappropriate contact, and how to seek help when needed whether the contact is online or offline.

As you discuss online safety with kids and teens, talk about the full breadth of potential threats, teach what youth can do to stay safer and avoid harm, and assure your children that you will give them your total support if problems arise.

This does not mean scaring children, nor does it mean banning youth from using the internet. In fact, banning youth from social networking or other online activities is likely to backfire and lead to deception. It also places youth at an extremely high level of vulnerability as youth who have been told they can’t use these online tools, can’t turn to you if things go wrong.

Actively engage with your child online, understand who they are interacting with, teach social responsibility, family safety and privacy, and be in tune to changes in their behavior that could indicated issues.

We need the ongoing discussions about cyberbullying and self-exploitation through sexting, but we cannot set aside teaching youth about online sexual exploitation, and other potential areas of risk.

To learn more, here are additional blogs on internet sexual exploitation

Linda

Comments Off | Linda's Blog | Tagged: , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Linda Criddle

6 Tips to Identifying the Real Costs of Virtual Goods

March 14, 2011

Though selling virtual goods isn’t new, marketing these items to kids is. Apple has changed their purchasing policy in response to overwhelming outrage by consumers, and federal and state law enforcement bodies. At issue was the lack of clear notice and information that ‘virtual’ purchases cost real money, and the 15-minute policy that said after a password is entered for a purchase on Apple’s IPhones and IPad devices additional purchases could be made without reentering the password.

The idea behind Apple’s previous policy was to allow users to be able to quickly make several purchases without having to enter their password every time, but it did not foresee the in-app purchase confusion this could lead to.

In practice the old policy meant that if a parent bought a game for their child to play, then handed the device over to their child, purchases could be racked up without the parent’s knowledge or consent, and without the child realizing that the charges weren’t in ‘virtual currency’.

After hearing of exorbitant charges facing families whose children had naively purchased items, Washington State Attorney General Rob McKenna’s office wrote to Apple in December of last year.  The policy change “is a victory for consumers,” said Paula Selis, senior counsel for State Attorney General Rob McKenna. “Our attitude about enforcement is that we are most effective with positive change without litigating, and talk an issue through with a company to affect change.”

McKenna’s office wasn’t the only one to take notice; last month the FTC’s Chairman Jon Leibowitz informed congress that he was looking into Apple’s practices as well as the marketing and delivery of these types of mobile applications. And Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass) went so far as to call Apple’s practice deceitful marketing.

Apple isn’t the first company to come under fire for their virtual purchasing policies, nor is this issue a ‘mobile’ problem. Facebook took a beating last fall over ‘Farmville’ an app became hugely popular among users. Kids racked up enormous bills through purchases made on that service as well, sending families into the same kind of purchase shock that Apple’s users now face.

Learn more in my blogs Scamming Users Part of Social Gaming Company Zynga’s business model, Could Facebook Go the Way of MySpace?, and TechCruch’s article Social Games: How the Big Three Make Millions.

Though selling virtual goods isn’t new, marketing these items to kids is

The Smurf’s Village and Farmville have been lightning rod for protests, but the business model of selling games cheaply (or giving them away) and then charging for virtual items within the games or ‘worlds’ is widespread, and far from new.

Back in 2007 when the app-de-jour was Second Life and the buzz was over their “Linden dollars”, companies like Reebok (see example), scrambled to create a presence on the site and market their real products through interactions with consumer’s avatars. What companies discovered however was twofold:

  • While the ‘inhabitants’ of Second Life spent millions of dollars on digital clothes, homes, even perfume (!) for their avatars, they were largely disinterested in using virtual sites to purchase real world products.
  • The tangible tie between Linden dollars and real currency, as well as the lack of kids on the site, largely meant consumers were conscious that they were spending real money for items.

A couple of business model iterations later, the lessons of how to successfully sell things online is much clearer – Virtual goods are best sold in virtual environments while real goods sell best through web versions of real stores.

Game developers have seized this model to make their games enormously profitable – what could be more ideal than making money from digital goods? They don’t cost to ship or store, they aren’t taxed and they don’t rot, and when fashions change, you aren’t stuck with costly inventory.  It turns out that the fable of the Emperors new suit by Hans Christian Andersen was off target; he failed to account for consumer’s desire for entertainment.

The questions that will need answering over the next few months as these issues are fought over are: Did developers deliberately targeted youth with their products? (Given titles like Smurfs’ village, and Farmville it is hard to argue otherwise, but that doesn’t mean they won’t try.)  Did they deliberately sidestep the consumer protections in place for products and advertisements targeting youth? And, do new laws and regulations need to be put in place to better protect consumers of all ages, but youth in particular?

In the meantime, here’s what this means to you and your kids

There is nothing wrong with paying for entertainment as long as you understand all of the potential costs, and herein lies the rub. Consumers of all ages are struggling to see the fully burdened costs of online entertainment, and kids have no skills by which to measure the impact. Until better controls are in place, consider the following possible ‘costs’ before purchasing or downloading a game or service:

  1. Identify any financial costs that may be associated with the application. Your review needs to identify any the up-front costs, as well as potential in-app costs. While these should be clearly understandable, until better business practices are developed, or regulation is set in place, the onus is on you to tread carefully. To date, efforts to increase the transparency around real costs has fallen short – many believe the steps Apple has taken to rectify problems will still not be enough.
  2. Does the company behind the application make money off of you through other means? In addition to the actual costs, will you or your child be exposed to advertising while playing? If so, are the types of ads offered ones you feel are appropriate? Are these marketing techniques ones your child understands and knows how to appropriately evaluate?  Does the company resell user information? This question may be impossible to answer, but many of the largest game brands have been caught doing this – see my blog 10 most popular apps that Facebook’s 500m users play or use to share common interests, have been selling user’s information to outside companies
  3. Look for supervisory tools. These should be built into products and give parents the ability to block or limit any potential costs that minors want to (or are) playing.
  4. Consider the ‘opportunity cost’. We all need downtime and fun-time, but if you or your child is going to use the application, what are you/they NOT going to be doing? Work or homework? Exercising? Getting fresh air? Spending time as a family?
  5. Understand the application’s values, do they benefit or ‘cost’ you? Does the game or other application match your personal values? Is it reinforcing the values you want to instill in your child? Is it creating an instant gratification or impulse purchasing pattern?  How commercial is the game – how much can you do for existing cost vs. how quickly do you need to spend more to keep playing or keep it interesting?
  6. Has the application been tested for malware? Just because an application is offered through a web store does not necessarily mean it has been tested for safety, or that it complies with safety guidelines.  Similarly, the number of users on a site is no guarantee the application is secure. Just last week it was discovered that 21 mobile app games downloadable from the Android Marketplace contained malicious code. See my blog More Mobile Apps Caught Inappropriately Collecting User Info and Installing Malware. Identifying which applications are safe and responsible is no simple matter, so follow these three principles: 1) Only download from sites you trust AND that test applications for malware and policy compliance before allowing them on their marketplace. 2) Research the company behind the application. For example, you should feel very confident about the ethical standards behind products built by well-known companies with sterling brands, but if the application is developed by a company that has previously been found to use unethical or malicious practices, or is unknown, you may want to turn away or tread very cautiously.

Once you’ve worked through the answers to these – and any other concerns you may have – you can make an informed choice.

Linda

Comments Off | Linda's Blog | Tagged: , , | Permalink
Posted by Linda Criddle

Take 3 Minutes to Protect children from Slavery and Sex Trafficking

November 13, 2010

An estimated 3,287 children are trafficked around the globe every single day according to the United Nations Children’s Fund, (UNICEF).

To counter this horrific practice, anti-human trafficking organizations around the country are advocating for the passage of the Child Protection Compact Act – critical legislation designed to help protect children in targeted countries from slavery and sex trafficking.

This bipartisan legislation passed the Senate Foreign Relations Committee unanimously in September, and the bill was sent to the Senate floor for a vote. Though the bill was close to a vote, Congress adjourned for the elections before it came up.

On November 15, Congress will return to Washington, D.C. giving us an opportunity to pass this urgent legislation through the Senate, and the opportunity to get the bill out of committee and through the House.

Donate 3 minutes NOW to help stop the trafficking of children

You can help ensure that this vital legislation is passed by contacting your Member of Congress today to urge him/her to support the Child Protection Compact Act. Then ask your friends to do the same.

This important and innovative legislation has been endorsed by International Justice Mission, World Vision, Amnesty International USA, Freedom House, Not for Sale, the SOLD Project, Polaris, Equality Now and Sojourners.

Together we will make a difference.

Linda

Comments Off | Linda's Blog | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Linda Criddle

C’mon! Match Terms of Use Text to Users’ Comprehension Level

November 4, 2010

When users register on a website, they are obligated to adhere to the site’s Terms of Use [i], but how realistic is this obligation when users can’t understand the Terms? It would see the notion that Terms of Use should be written in language accessible to a site’s target audience is a concept sorely lacking in many company’s considerations.

To show how inaccessible the content in Terms of Use are, I ran several through a readability index – which is designed to gauge how easy a text is to read and calculates an estimate of the  (U.S.) grade level needed to fully comprehend the text. (I chose the Flesch-Kincaid Grade level model for this comparison.)

It doesn’t require a lot of thought to see how far out of end-user comprehension many of these Terms of Use actually are. To fully understand the iPhone App store’s or MTV’s Terms, a user needs a PhD – yet their target audience is teens. And little kids don’t stand a chance – they need to be in college before they’ll be able to grasp the Terms imposed by Club Penguin or NeoPets.

Comprehension level required to understand the Terms of Use for common adult sites:
  • Bank of America  – requires a college graduate’s reading comprehension level (Grade17)
  • Amazon – requires a third year college student’s reading comprehension level (Grade15)
  • New York Times  – requires a first year college student’s reading comprehension level (Grade13)
  • Twitter – requires a third year college student’s reading comprehension level (Grade15)
Comprehension level required to understand the Terms of Use for common teen sites:
  • iPhone App Store – requires a PhD’s reading comprehension level (Grade20)
  • MTV – requires a PhD’s reading comprehension level (Grade21)
  • Facebook  -requires an high school junior’s reading comprehension level (Grade 11)
Comprehension level required to understand the Terms of Use for common kids sites:
  • Club Penguin – requires a first year college student’s reading comprehension level (Grade13)
  • NeoPets – requires a first year college student’s reading comprehension level (Grade13)
  • Webkinz – requires a high school senior’s reading comprehension level (Grade 12)

If we want users to improve their behavior and be better digital citizens, it wouldn’t hurt to explain their obligations in terms they can grasp.

Linda

 

[i] For more information on consumers’ obligations, see my blog Website’s Rights and Responsibilities – They are Far More Than ‘Fine Print’)

Comments Off | Linda's Blog | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by Linda Criddle

Google Family Center Launched – Tools & Advice About Keeping Kids Safe Online

October 12, 2010

Google has launched an excellent new site focused specifically on increasing consumer safety online. I strongly recommend you check out their Family Safety Center site for it’s advice, but perhaps more importantly to get a clear understanding of the tools they provide consumers for managing their own, and their children’s online experience.

Well done Google.

Linda

Comments Off | Linda's Blog | Tagged: , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Linda Criddle

Generation M2 Media in the Lives of 8 to 18 year-olds

October 6, 2010

I am continuing my practice of sharing recent internet safety research pieces:

Excerpt

Study by the Kaiser Foundation:

Understanding the role of media in young people’s lives is essential for those concerned about promoting the healthy development of children and adolescents, including parents, pediatricians, policymakers, children’s advocates, educators, and public health groups. It is the purpose of this study to foster that understanding by providing data about young people’s media use: which media they use, which they own, how much time they spend with each medium, which activities they engage in, how often they multitask, and how they differ from one another in the patterns of their media use. Our aim is to provide a more solid base from which to examine media’s effects on children and to help guide those who are proactively using media to inform and educate America’s youth.

The study is one of the largest and most comprehensive publicly available sources of information on the amount and nature of media use among American youth:

  • It includes a large national sample of more than 2,000 young people from across the country;
  • It covers children from ages 8 to18, to track changes from childhood through the transitional “tween” period, and on into the teenage years;
  • It explores a comprehensive array of media, including TV, computers, video games, music, print, cell phones, and movies;
  • It is one of the only studies to measure and account for media multitasking—the time young people spend using more than one medium concurrently; and
  • It gathers highly detailed information about young people’s media behavior, including responses to an extensive written questionnaire completed by the entire sample, plus results from a subsample of approximately 700 respondents who also maintained week-long diaries recording their media use in half-hour increments.

Finally, because this is the third wave of the Kaiser Family Foundation’s studies of children’s media use, it not only provides a detailed look at current media use patterns among young people, but also documents changes in children’s media habits since the first two waves of the study, in 1999 and 2004.

Youth suicide continues to be a significant public health concern in the United States. Even though suicide rates have decreased 28.5 percent among people in recent years, upward trends were identified in the 10‐ to 19‐year‐old age group.  In addition to those who successfully end their life, many other adolescents strongly think about and even attempt suicide.

One Factor that has been linked to suicidal ideation is experience with bullying. That is, youth who are bullied, o bully others, are at an elevated risk for suicidal thoughts, attempts, and completed suicides.  The reality of these links has been strengthened through research showing how experience with peer harassment (most often as a target but also as a perpetrator) contributes to depression, decreased self‐worth, hopelessness, and loneliness – all of which are precursors to suicidal thoughts and behavior.

Without question, the nature of adolescent peer aggression has evolved due to the proliferation of information and communications technology. There have been several high‐profile cases involving teenagers taking their own lives in part because of being harassed and mistreated over the Internet,7‐9 a phenomenon we have termed cyberbullicide – suicide indirectly or directly influenced by experiences with online aggression.10 While these incidents are isolated and do not represent the norm, their gravity demands deeper inquiry and understanding. Much research has been conducted to determine the relationship between traditional bullying and suicidal ideation, and it can be said with confidence that a strong relationship exists.11, 12 Based on what we found in the extant literature base, we sought to determine if suicidal ideation was also linked to experiences with cyberbullying among offenders and targets.

Highlights from the Research:

  • 20% of respondents reported seriously thinking about attempting suicide
  • All forms of bullying were significantly associated with increases in suicidal ideation
  • Cyberbullying victims were almost twice as likely to have attempted suicide compared to youth who had not experienced cyberbullying

Click here to learn more: Generation M2 Media in the Lives of 8 to 18 year-olds

Linda

Comments Off | Linda's Blog | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by Linda Criddle

Cyberbullying Research Summary: Cyberbullying and Suicide

September 18, 2010

I am continuing my practice of sharing recent internet safety research pieces:

Excerpt

From the cyberbullying Research Center:

Youth suicide continues to be a significant public health concern in the United States. Even though suicide rates have decreased 28.5 percent among people in recent years, upward trends were identified in the 10‐ to 19‐year‐old age group.  In addition to those who successfully end their life, many other adolescents strongly think about and even attempt suicide.

One Factor that has been linked to suicidal ideation is experience with bullying. That is, youth who are bullied, o bully others, are at an elevated risk for suicidal thoughts, attempts, and completed suicides.  The reality of these links has been strengthened through research showing how experience with peer harassment (most often as a target but also as a perpetrator) contributes to depression, decreased self‐worth, hopelessness, and loneliness – all of which are precursors to suicidal thoughts and behavior.

Without question, the nature of adolescent peer aggression has evolved due to the proliferation of information and communications technology. There have been several high‐profile cases involving teenagers taking their own lives in part because of being harassed and mistreated over the Internet,7‐9 a phenomenon we have termed cyberbullicide – suicide indirectly or directly influenced by experiences with online aggression.10 While these incidents are isolated and do not represent the norm, their gravity demands deeper inquiry and understanding. Much research has been conducted to determine the relationship between traditional bullying and suicidal ideation, and it can be said with confidence that a strong relationship exists.11, 12 Based on what we found in the extant literature base, we sought to determine if suicidal ideation was also linked to experiences with cyberbullying among offenders and targets.

Highlights from the Research:

  • 20% of respondents reported seriously thinking about attempting suicide
  • All forms of bullying were significantly associated with increases in suicidal ideation
  • Cyberbullying victims were almost twice as likely to have attempted suicide compared to youth who had not experienced cyberbullying

Click here to learn more: Cyberbullying Research Summary: Cyberbullying and Suicide

Linda

Comments Off | Linda's Blog | Tagged: , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Linda Criddle

Facebook Updates While Driving? C’mon!

September 16, 2010

General Motors’ OnStar division has developed a system that provides drivers the ability to record audio updates that could be posted to a user’s Facebook page. The system would also allow drivers to hear their friends’ status updates read to them by a computerized voice. OnStar says the idea reflects society’s growing desire to be connected at all times.
What could possibly be so urgent to post or read on Facebook that it would require a driver’s immediate attention?

Research from the University of Utah found that distraction from cell phone use while driving (hand held or hands free) extends a driver’s reaction as much as having a blood alcohol concentration at the legal limit of .08 percent. I’d need to see some hard data to convince me that the distraction level wouldn’t be similar for those listening to posts or adding their own posts on a Facebook page.

As late as last week, OnStar was apparently still deciding whether it will make this service available to drivers or not. “The company will not implement a new service simply because it’s technically feasible, it has to be the right thing to do for the customer,” OnStar said. “All of our technologies are rigorously evaluated prior to launch.”

Company president Chris Preuss says OnStar has data showing there is no correlation between pushing a single button and vehicle crashes, and justifies the service by saying people will continue to send text messages in cars and update Facebook statuses from their phones, so the company decided to let them do it “with safety in mind”. “I don’t think we’re at all engaging in activities that are going to make it worse,” he said. “We’re absolutely engaging in activities that will make things better.”

If we accept the argument of ‘people will do it anyway’, why don’t we apply it to speeding, drinking while driving, and drag racing on residential streets? Why not enable drivers to take these dangerous actions – ‘with safety in mind’?

I get OnStar’s motivation – if nothing else, the deployment of this service should boost their core business of responding to accidents.

GM isn’t alone

GM isn’t the only auto manufacturer going down the distraction path. Ford Motor Co.’s Sync system, available in 2011 Ford and Lincoln models, is very similar. Besides allowing drivers to hear and reply to text messages, Ford’s system also allows drivers to interact with cell phone apps for things like Internet radio and Twitter.

Opponents of these technologies point to the existing body of evidence to say these systems will lead to greater driver distraction, but Ford has a different point of view. They believe that systems like these allow drivers to do things they’re already doing anyway, such as checking text messages, while keeping their eyes on the road.

Ford spokesman Alan Hall said, “Our research has shown that the most dangerous part of having these devices in your car is when they take your eyes off the road or your hands off the wheel.”

That flies in the face of the information on the U.S. Department of Transportation website. Distracted driving is defined as “any non-driving activity a person engages in that has the potential to distract him or her from the primary task of driving and increase the risk of crashing.“

The site goes on to say there are three main types of distraction:

  • Visual — taking your eyes off the road
  • Manual — taking your hands off the wheel
  • Cognitive — taking your mind off what you’re doing

Hmm. Does Facebooking while driving qualify as a distraction under this definition?

Following OnStar and Ford’s assertion, your eyes and hand would only have to be off the road for a tiny moment – and we don’t hear recommendations urging a ban on pushing a button to change your radio station….  But there’s that last pesky cognitive point about taking your mind off driving and focusing attention on Facebook, that’s the deal breaker.

To learn more about distracted driving, see my blog post Distracted Driving? Take the Distractology 101 Learning Challenge.

And that’s not all

GM’s OnStar team is also testing a system which would allow drivers to hear text messages read to them by the “OnStar Virtual Advisor” computerized voice. By pressing a button on the steering wheel, drivers would also be able to reply using one of four pre-written responses.

The only message your car should be sharing with you is “keep your focus on the road”.

Linda

Comments Off | Linda's Blog | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by Linda Criddle

Childrens Identity Theft for KKZZ radio

September 15, 2010

Safe Internet Alliance CEO, Linda Criddle, discusses a growing crime against children on the Internet, Child Identity Theft. Organized crime groups target children to steal their identities for financial gain. Children have, what Linda calls, “virgin credit.” Stealing their Social Security Numbers is ideal because the crime may not be detected for years. Children’s identity can be stolen at any time, but the sweet spot for identity theft is aged 17-25 years old.

Linda offers these tips on protecting your child’s identity against identity theft: 1) Check your child’s credit report annually. You can check your child’s credit report for free once a year at each of the three major credit reporting agencies: Experian, Equifax and TransUnion. 2) Put a freeze on your child’s credit. This process costs approximately $10. You can go to any one agency and freeze credit.

The Safe Internet Alliance is pushing legislators and credit agencies to make one small change that will reduce child identity theft. Requiring the credit issuing companies to take one additional step to look for red flags is all it takes. If credit issuing agencies would check teh date of birth of the person seeking credit and match it against the Social Security Number, that would reduce identity theft. How likely is it that a Social Security Number that has been issued two years ago (indicating a child of two years old) would need a credit card or mortgage? Of course, this would be a guideline. There are legitimate cases where an adult would have a Social Security number that is new, such as immigrants to this country that are issued a Social Security Card or people who had to have their Social Security Card reissued because of Identity Theft.

We also discussed cyberbullying in this interivew.

Listen to this chilling and thought provoking interview below:

Comments Off | In The News | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Linda Criddle

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,703 other followers