The Unfriendliness of Kid-Friendly Social Networks
May 19th, 2010 |
Everyone’s talking about the launch of Togetherville, a social network designed to bring parents and their kids together with the goal of learning responsible social networking. Does it occur to anyone that children six to ten years old (Togetherville’s target) don’t need social networks, and to encourage them to use one is the antithesis of responsible social networking?
Katherine Boehret, in a May 18 piece on the Walt Wall Street Journal’s Mossberg Solution column, wrote that Togetherville is intended to ease parental worries about the perils of Facebook and other grown-up social networks:
“Togetherville offers young children their first taste of social networking like grown-ups, using their real-life identities (not cute avatars) and real-life relationships.
Togetherville smartly restricts certain online activities, but does so in ways that don’t make a child feel too restrained.”
Any serious adult user of Twitter, Facebook, or MySpace knows these sites are both social and anti-social. They encourage introverted behavior and the partial/total substitution of real world personal relationships with their online equivalents. Togetherville is also the Web 2.0 version of the Happy Meal toy. It is designed to deliver to marketers an elusive group of big spenders.
Children should be encouraged to read, write, paint, draw, take walks, think, play act, talk, be creative, be curious, be kind, be tolerant, question the established order, and respect others. These are things that are not learned by showing children how to upload video or add strangers to their contact lists.
Togetherville’s banner image. Note the “girls and their mother” are happy because they are outdoors in a green field. In other words, they are not using a social network.
I love that Mossberg Boehret says Togetherville doesn’t “make a child feel too restrained.” They’re meant to be restrained! There are dangerous people online who prey on children. Cyber bullying is a growing problem. Constrained chat is a gateway drug to unconstrained chat, which can lead to personal meetings. Why ease children into this process? The only goal is to make them comfortable chatting with strangers. My goal is to make my child aware of the dangers of speaking to strangers, in preparation for some day letting her make these decisions on her own. The age at which a child should be allowed to speak to a stranger anywhere in the world is different for each child, but I don’t think any child under 12 needs to be encouraged to do that.
The idea is not to teach them to use social networks. That will come in time. They need to be taught the importance of privacy and personal space, the value of real relationships, and to be aware of their own self worth.
My daughter is nine. The CD was pretty much gone when she was born. I’m no Luddite. She’s had three iPods. There is plenty of technology in this house. I work in the IT industry. BUT TECHNOLOGY IS NO SUBSTITUTE FOR PARENTHOOD.
The responsibility for preparing children for sociological or technological change rests with parents. Whether our kids say, “Daddy, please please please can we go to McDonald’s?” because they want the Barbie toy, or they say “But mom, everyone’s on Togetherville,” we need to make decisions based on what we know about our children and what we want for them, and not simply roll over, saying “social networking is inevitable, so let’s get them going!” According to research from New Dream, “The nagging strategy is paying dividends for kids and marketers alike: 55% of kids surveyed said they are usually successful in getting their parents to give in.” The same survey also found “57 percent of children age 9-14 would rather do something fun with their mom or dad than go to the mall to go shopping.”
I like that Togetherville is at least thinking about this, because it will become a bigger and bigger problem, though I don’t think a great many adults understand “proper” social networking either.
But the introduction to social networking is not to say, “Look, sweetheart, social networks are cute, just like Hello Kitty.” Really, have we forgotten the lessons from earlier this month? Facebook, the world’s leading social network, trampled the privacy rights of well informed technically literate adults. Let’s not escort our children into that world prematurely.
Note: It was pointed out to me after I published this that the Wall Street Journal piece was written not by Walt Mossberg, but by Katherine Boehret, and edited by Mossberg. It appeared in a section of the Wall Street Journal online edition titled “The Mossberg Solution,” and Ms. Boehret’s picture was on the far right sidebar so I did not realize she wrote the piece. This has been corrected and I regret the error.
Tags: Togetherville, Walt Mossberg, privacy, social networking, kids, children
| Sphere This |
I have to agree with you. It may just be my instinct, but it seems kind of sick to try and involve children into the social networking world. I kind of view it as a vice: people 16 and older use social networks primarily to waste their time. Sure it’s an avenue for communication, but how many hours a day are wasted mindlessly clicking around facebook? Do we really need to teach our children from an extremely early age to waste what precious time they have on this planet creating meaningless connections with other people?
They should be outside, getting in trouble, learning from experience, forming real relationships with other kids… not “friending” and communicating with people they can’t solidly interact with. Are we really getting to the point in our culture where it’s now a good idea to allow our children to limit their real contact with the outside world and replace it with the equivalent of an electronic mannequin?
I see the market potential (stupid parents and their unfortunate children…?) but I disagree with the potential consequences.
Comment by Andrew — May 19, 2010 @ 1:04 pm
Hi Joel,
This is Erika from Togetherville. I appreciate your critique of our site. Reading through your points, I found myself nodding my head at (almost) everything you call for.
“They need to be taught the importance of privacy and personal space, the value of real relationships, and to be aware of their own self worth.” You also point out that technology is no substitute for parenting. And that kids shouldn’t talk to strangers online.
Our product was built because we wanted kids to do the fun things online that they normally do - play games, watch videos, create artwork - with their parents, extended family members, and real-world friends there to see and encourage them.
Most parents that we talked to while designing our product were very specific about how much time their kids were allowed to be online. For many families, it was less than an hour a week. Togetherville isn’t mean to be where kids should spend all their time (like some adults do), it’s meant to be a smart, connected solution for parents who allow their kids to be online.
I encourage you to take a look at the product. Kids are not permitted to upload videos or photos, nor do they have chat or people-search capabilities, as you claim in your review. Parents create kid accounts and then connect them to family and trusted friends. There is no way any adult or child that is not Facebook friends with a child’s parent to have any access to that child.
Thanks for the post!
Comment by Erika — May 19, 2010 @ 2:03 pm
Your picture link seems to be broken.
Comment by Kerry — May 19, 2010 @ 3:17 pm
Hi Erika,
Thanks so much for taking the time to stop by and leave a comment. I appreciate that you agree with me on many points and that Togetherville was developed with these concepts in mind.
We do not have a Togetherville account, and I have not logged in and tried it. I don’t want to represent my post as a review. It is a reaction to the idea of social networking for children, Togetherville, and Walt Mossberg’s excited, breathless, technogeek coverage.
Let me try to address some of your points. Based on Walt’s column, Togetherville has some form of the ability to upload photos and the ability to make connections with strangers.
Mossberg, who claims to have seen the product, says (I quoted him in the post) “Togetherville offers young children their first taste of social networking like grown-ups, using their real-life identities (not cute avatars) and real-life relationships.” I find that downright frightening! Do you or any of the parents you surveyed think it’s a good idea to put the real-life identity of a six-year-old on the Web? I know these are supposedly private, but in light of everything that’s come out in just the past 30 days, no one reasonably believes that information held by commercial Web entities is secure.
The lack of avatars and use of real-life identities leads me to believe that children’s photos are uploaded to the site somehow.
Also, according to Mossberg, Togetherville has a kind of junior chat, a stripped down version of grownup chat that can’t help but prepare children to eventually talk to strangers. There is also a moderated means of making contact with strangers: “kids choose from several pre-set quips, including sayings that they or other kids submitted for approval. The quips can range from questions kids ask one another (‘Who saw ‘Avatar’?’) to ‘I (heart) my family.’ And rather than directly sending friend requests to other kids, children first send a request to their parents, who give their consent and send the invitation to make the connection.”
This is very similar to KinzChat available on Webkinz. I don’t want my child using either one. I don’t want her chatting online yet. Period. It’s not going to inspire her, help her grow, validate her or enrich her. I don’t care how well controlled it is.
I’m not suggesting that the use of Togetherville is an immediate threat to any child’s well-being. I simply feel that we are trying to teach children to use online tools too soon.
I thoroughly appreciate your response on so many levels. First, I commend you for monitoring commentary about Togetherville, and responding to it. Secondly, I appreciate your agreement on some of my points. Finally, you stepped up and identified yourself as a representative for Togetherville, which is, sadly, so unusual. There are comments on this blog in the last few days which are clearly from company spokespeople who did not identify themselves.
I wish you and Togetherville the very best of luck,
Joel
Comment by joel — May 19, 2010 @ 3:17 pm
Hey Joel,
I have to say the idea of social networking for a 6-10 year old scares the heck out of me, they have NO need for it. Thank you for bringing it to my attention.
Comment by Leah McChesney — May 19, 2010 @ 6:30 pm
[...] socialized blog » The Unfriendliness of Kid-Friendly Social Networks [...]
Pingback by Articles4You » Friendship Bracelets and Kids Birthday Parties — May 19, 2010 @ 7:40 pm
You made me look.
Wow, that site is the opposite of what any family needs. As moms have become more public, the last thing we need is to connect with our kids publicly.
When the kids are older the FIRST thing everyone tells you is to make sure you are NOT friends with your kids or their friends.
I could write a whole other post about why I’d NEVER let my 8 or 11 year old use the site, but I won’t. You hit the high notes here.
Great post.
Comment by Jessica Gottlieb — May 21, 2010 @ 9:51 am
It makes me said that otherwise intelligent and probably well-meaning people would think this is 1. a good idea and 2. a responsible way to make money.
There may be ways to use technology to enhance child development but having them “play” at social networking cannot be one of them.
Comment by Jim Coffis — May 21, 2010 @ 1:43 pm