Comments on: How COPPA Fails Parents, Educators, Youth

By: Lindsay

Lindsay — Tue, 07 Jun 2011 22:01:50 +0000

Thanks danah! I’m trying to help a client redesign the registration process which is solely intended for adults on this particular family-oriented web property, but since they advertise this web property on their children’s games, they have to abide by COPPA. It’s a tricky interaction, and I’m trying to figure out what the minimum interaction should be for a child (to persuade them to move away from the registration process, or invite their parents to use the site).

My client is convinced they have to ask for the specific age or birthday to funnel the user in the correct interaction, but I think we have to persuade the under 13 to follow one process and the over 13 to follow another.

Anyway, won’t get into the design problem here.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 03:17:03 +0000

Is it so bad to train children to lie about their age on web sites? I never use my real age or birthday on sites. I think it’s simply good practice.

By: Jeff Chester

Jeff Chester — Sun, 27 Jun 2010 13:59:13 +0000

COPPA has played a important role limiting the data collection practices of online advertisers targeting children under 13. It has been a very effective safeguard. Anyone who actually researches the online ad business recognizes that: once you are 13, online marketers treat everyone the same in terms of behavioral targeting and other applications that threaten privacy. But if you are under 13, because of COPPA–you don’t see the same kind of targeted online marketing. Berkman should do a better job in its research providing its readers a more informed assessment of how online marketers have created what the industry calls a digital advertising “ecosystem.” The system is designed to collect tremendous amounts of data on individual users, track them everywhere [including merging online and offline databases instantly, so a user can be auctioned off to the highest bidder]and also deeply influence our behaviors. Companies involved with Berkman or Berkman staff are even using the latest advances in neuromarketing to create digital ad campaigns designed-in their own words–to influence our subconscious. When Berkman writes about COPPA and other online marketing issues, it should always prominently disclose [page 1] that it is funded by many leading advertisers–including Google and Microsoft [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/about/support]. Mr. Palfrey should also ensure his work as a venture investor–including with online marketing companies–is part of that disclosure–especially to Congress and the FTC: http://www.hcp.com/john_palfrey
I hope Ms. Boyd will also address the extensive work done by her employer on online marketing–including its targeting of youth (for such things as junk food). See, for example:http://advertising.microsoft.com/research/Doritos-Xbox; She should also examine its efforts on neuromarketing:http://www.emsense.com/press/game-advertising.php
This is a brief comment.

By: Mark

Mark — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 03:40:57 +0000

Although many websites mention age restrictions there is no way to actually verify the age of the children creating profiles. Because of this many children under 13 have profiles that say the are 18+ just so they can have all the benefits of the adults.

By: Alison

Alison — Mon, 14 Jun 2010 09:47:49 +0000

Interesting. My son (and from what I can see, his entire school year) got on Facebook last year at 12. I think they basically tell each other how to set up their accounts – they often change names a little, so as to be harder to find, and their profiles are very locked down. I wasn’t aware that he was on, for a while, and by the time I was, it seemed wholly inappropriate to come down on him like a ton of bricks.

But you’re right: I assumed that membership policies were to do with the appropriateness of the content. 13 for Facebook seemed reasonable; an 18 limit would seem completely over-the-top (and be entirely unenforceable). I value having some age restriction guidelines, but I always assume it’s about maturity and content.

By: LMT

LMT — Sat, 12 Jun 2010 14:08:43 +0000

This seems very related to the ways in which research IRBs are structured in order to protect academic institutions from liabilities. Not until recently, after learning about the ways in which one research institution was faced with a gigantic lawsuit by a Native American community whose data was misappropriated. The impact of the use of this data was part principle, but largely the fact that the results collected would violate and negate the community’s cultural history, code, and practices.
On the other side of the coin, for participatory action research, whereby researchers are directly interested in collaborating with, serving, and properly crediting the very community they work (this could be parents, children, teachers), privacy protections via IRB can make this challenging.
It would nice to see researchers and businesses also writing policies that protect their researched communities from the motivations and underlying desires of the researchers themselves. But maybe that doesn’t fit widely accepted common research philosophies?

By: Jack

Jack — Fri, 11 Jun 2010 12:26:17 +0000

Good points all danah!

My takeaway is that this is more government failure.