Letter to the Editor
Cyberbullying bill
Published Thursday, June 5, 2008
Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Mixx
Reddit
Stumble It!Cyberbullying bill
June 2, 2008
To the editor:
I read Dr. Judith Kleinfeld’s recent opinion piece on cyberbullying with great interest (May 25 — “Rise of ‘cyberbullying’ gives a high profile to Internet attacks”). Dr. Kleinfeld has a national reputation in child development. Her opinion piece gives much needed attention to this serious issue.
Cyberbullying has been extensively covered in the news — most recently regarding the young girl who was bullied on a social networking site and subsequently committed suicide. Our society must recognize and address issues like this. Education for children at a young age is an important first step, and on May 22 the U.S. Senate passed a bill that I introduced to do just that. The “Protecting Children in the 21st Century Act” (S. 1965) would require schools which receive E-rate funds to provide education regarding online behavior, including social networking, chat rooms and cyberbullying awareness. E-rate funds are used by schools to connect their students to the Internet — which is a vital learning tool when used properly.
The bill will also create an interagency working group to identify and encourage technologies and initiatives which would help parents protect their children from unwanted Internet activities such as cyberbullying.
By working together, schools, parents and children can be prepared to meet these new technology-related dangers. These efforts will keep our children safe while allowing them to learn and grow in an ever-changing online world.
Sen. Ted Stevens
Washington, D.C.
Community Discussion
Newsminer.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full user's agreement.
This sounds like worthwhile legislation. Kids of all ages are vulnerable in cyberspace, and it would be good to educate them of the dangers. I've met some kids who are actually very aware of cybersafety and the need to be cautious in order to protect themselves. I, an adult, have learned quite a few things from these kids. I hope astute kids like these will also participate in the interagency working group.
Stevens is writing to the DNM? Stevens cares about children?
It must be election time!!! Yaaaaayyyy!!!
(It does sound like worthwhile legislation, it's just typical for one of our federal representatives to act like they CARE and are IN-TOUCH and TALK with Alaskans. Since when did Ted Stevens need to inform us of this kind of pending legislation? We are spoken TO every 4 years.)
Sorry, I meant every 6 years.
EVEN BETTER!
If you're curious to see the actual legislation, go to http://thomas.loc.gov/ (the Library of Congress's public database for legislation) and search by bill number "s 1965".
On the surface, the bill looks benign to me, though:
(1) It amends existing statutes in ways not immediately obvious, requiring some research into those statutes (see http://www.gpoaccess.gov/uscode/index.ht... and http://www.gpoaccess.gov/plaws/index.htm...), and
(2) As with most legislation, the key is in the implementation: for all I know, it could be a cover for promoting the content filtering software industry or for forcing internet service providers to become our censors.
Most of us (certainly I) could use some analysis from communications and Internet experts before deciding whether Sen. Stevens has really taken a stance against cyber-bullying.
Hey Goat and Paul, the exact same thoughts you expressed crossed my mind as well, so thanks for posting. Politics and ulterior motives go hand-in-hand.
But, at the end of the day, if something objectively good can come from it, the (inter)net result of an action - or legislation - should weigh more heavily than the reasons behind it.
I have no doubt that this legislation will promote the more benign aspects of Big Brother (if it's even possible to use "benign" and "Big Brother" in the same sentence). But, cyberspace can be a creepy and dangerous place for adults. That much more so for children. I don't believe in censorship and spying for adults. But when kids are involved, that's just good parenting.
That's true LadyNYC, but in my opinion the "spying" should be done by the parents. All to often legislators use these tactics to push there own agenda's and those of the special intrests. It is outright wrong to hide there ulterior motives for a way around a Constitutional right or liberty in such a innocent package. I'll tell you who else used to do something like this.....THE UNABOMER... think about that one for a minute.
It should work.Unless the "Tubes" get full.
Is this an effort to force on-line folks to be nicer to Benny??
My sentiments exactly "mackie." Unless the tubes get full. Nonetheless, we seem to have enough government interference in our lives. Is this just one more form of big brother bringing law and order in taming the wild internet? The best excuse there is "for the protection of the children." There is a danger in letting kids do anything much less letting them having unsupervised internet access. As I read it that is what this bill is suppose to do, provide an education by creating a new federal interagency group. Now why doesn't this reassure me? Oh well, back to the tubes, mine is overflowing. With luck a little vigorous plunging in this upcoming election cycle may just flush out some of the old blockage that's corrupting the system.
It's just one more piece of legislation on something I no longer have to worry about teaching my kids. Kids are no longer expected to have any knowledge when they show up to kindergarten, not even basic colors or numbers. I can't teach them the difference between winning and losing because it will affect thier self esteem. I can't teach them the difference between right and wrong because that is imposing my beliefs on someone else. I certainly can't dicsipline them because that is abuse. I can't teach them about sex because then I am encouraging sexual behavior, and the list goes on and on. If the government would pass legislation to teach my kids to walk and use the potty, then I could just sit back with a six pack and watch tv. As long as the government approved my programming choices.....
Hmmm...a bill against cyberbullying. Do you think it will apply to the DNM comments section???
Re: Applying to the comments section.
I'm assuming we're all adults here and are able to handle ourselves without running to legislation to help us. If you choose to post your opinion here, you should be able to handle criticism. It's the proverbial hot kitchen around here.
Kids are a different story, but I’m willing to bet that they’re a lot more savvy than we realize and can handle this issue better than a lot of adults can and do.
IUR...I'm not so sure a lot of people posting here are adults. They sure don't act like it with all the juvenile name-calling and whatnot. Didn't someone recieve death threats regarding one of his posts a few days ago??? I'm not afraid of criticism, but I'm not all that keen on people looking up my personal information and contacting me at home to threaten my life. Then the DNM wants to know why people don't use their real names.
Is the general population really so lacking in their ability to run their own lives? This is exactly like the bucketloads of money wasted on trying to pass laws making it ILLEGAL to market or solicit via the telephone. If you feel you need some highrise flunky to police your phone...maybe you need some therapy or self-esteem classes. I personally know how to hang up my own telephone. Or for that matter, get caller ID for crying out loud. As to the cyber-spying this is really getting at....NO WAY. These are both inconspicuous, innocent-looking little bills/laws that are in all reality, a clever way to strip the American citizen of yet another liberty. And with each one, it just slowly will go down the line until we may as well be parking our rears in a Communist country. And those of you who dont think so...get a grip. Adopt a little realism in your life. Would I like to see our children protected from cyber monsters and cyber bullies? Of course, but I am fully aware that it is MY RESPONSIBILITY as a parent. Not the governments. If anyone is going to be "monitoring" my children online...it will be my husband and I. My heart aches for the parents of the girl who killed herself over a fake boy online but maybe the mom should have been watching out for her a bit better rather than feeling she should just give her obviously out-of-the-norm acting daughter some room. In no way was this her fault but perhaps a little less "pc" and lenient parenting could have saved her girls life.
Some of the wisest words of wisdom I ever heard didnt even make sense to me until I became a parent....
My mother told me when I was a teenager that if I didnt hate her at some point, then she wasnt doing her job correctly.
I now believe this wholeheartedly.
And for the record, I am not saying that we shouldn't educate our children on the dangers lurking on the net. They should be constantly reminded of this...in school and at home. But, yet again, it is our responsibility as parents and in the community to do so.
How is this legislation censoring or corrupting the American youth? It seems to me it's simply designed to keep children safe while using the internet. Virtually every American child has access to a computer with internet capabilities either at a public library, at home, or at school.
I think there is a serious lack of acknowledgment of how serious the issue of cyber crime is. I was taught things like "don't get in cars with strangers" and "don't answer the door if no one is home". What is so wrong with teaching children things like "don't give people your address over the internet". If adults know so much about divulging too much information over the internet, how come identity theft is so common in America? Perhaps there's something parents can learn from this too.
Internet predators prey on the ignorant. The more these children know about computers from an early age, the more protected they are for the rest of their lives. It's up to people like Senator Stevens to insure programs like this don't fail, a person who has protected Americans since WWII and has served his country with honor. He sure has my vote, good luck finding someone better fit to fill his shoes.
Steph_March, you are totally right. I appreciate your bold and articulate expression of your logical, reasonable principles. The worst thing we could do for our children is ask US Congress to do our job as parents.
Big Brother is alive and well in my home, although it is affectionately known as MOM and DAD. We "spy" on our kids by checking on what they are doing on the computer. We constantly "invade" their privacy by asking them who, what, where and when. We are intent on "ruining" their lives by restricting their access to individual e-mail accounts, IM accounts, chat rooms and the like. Our kids hate us "bugging" them. We must be doing something right.
Government needs to stay out of my home and let me parent my kids as I see fit.
Boombam1215 I don't for one second underestimate the seriousness of cybercrime. But it is NOT the governments role to teach my child to be safe, nor to control thier access to the internet. THAT IS MY JOB. The government can concentrate on protecting our borders and protecting our nation. Raising and educating MY children is MY job. We are giving money to the schools to promote cyber bully awareness?? Who are they kidding?? When you were a kid did the school need to pay someone to point out the playground bully to you?? The kids know who and what these bullies are, and we as PARENTS need to teach our children how to deal with them. the government can stay out of it.....
I agree with you FrozenFish. Death threats are a lot different than criticism or calling somebody out when they're saying something inane. (Which I will defend everybody's right to do.)
There were death threats in the comment section? I liked your first post AKangel
Yes, it is parents' responsibility to teach their kids how to be safe and to help keep them safe. But it's also parents' responsibility to teach kids not to steal or kill...yet we have laws against those things! I guess we don't need them based on the logic of many posting comments here. Anyone who's been a teen or has a teen surely knows that teens take risks, and go out of their way to do the very things their parents tell them not to do. That's why there are laws that don't allow young people to drive, to drink, to make major decisions for themselves. Even the best parents cannot watch over their children every single second of every single day.
Akangel, you couldn't be more wrong about what children should know when they arrive at school. When I was starting school several decades ago, basics were taught in kindergarten. With testing and expectations, schools are expected to more in kindergarten, and often start with less. A child who goes to kindergarten not knowing some letters, numbers, colors, etc, will be considered behind and will have a lot of work to do to catch up.
I know exactly what children should know when they go to kindergarten. I've sent two already that could read when they got there. fat lot of good it did either of them. Sitting in class having to learn what orange and red were when they could already spell them. I know what they should know, but it would hurt thier little feeling to not let them in. So they get in, unprepared and the classes are taught at the lowest common denominator, and everyone passes regardless of what they can do. I had a seventh grade teacher tell me that thier textbooks are written at a third grade reading level in hopes that most of thier stundents can try to comprehend them. This is what comes from government intervening in the raising of our children. It's just like No Child Left Behind. We get a law that funnels more money to schools so they can spend more time teaching little Johnny and little Jill that everyone is a winner and participation is all it takes and everyone must be nice to everyone and no one will ever hurt your little feelings. Its legislation like this that is turning out young adults that are absolutely unprepared for real life.
AKangel, I believe it's pure ignorance thinking that a child with little knowledge of the internet will recognize a cyber bully the first time they meet one online seeing as most adults can't. This is a new kind of bully that doesn't push you down on the play ground and demand your lunch money. This is the kind of bully that gains your trust, then exploits that trust by gaining personal knowledge with the intention of inflicting harm.
Please don't think that I am calling your parenting into question as you are among a minority of parents who actually care what your children are doing while on the internet. But this legislation is to help those children whose parent's either refuse to or don't know how to protect their children from the internet.
h2os, I hope your definition of "parent my kids i see fit" isn't throwing a laptop into your kid's room closing door behind you thinking they'll make the right decisions. Perhaps this legislation has already worked seeing as more parents might take initiative in protecting their kids on the internet instead of relying on the government to do it. The point I'm trying to make is besides whatever YOU teach your kids, there are other kids out there who won't learn the same things from their parents and could get hurt as a result.
I can garantee you that if I don't know how to protect my kids....I'm gonna find out. That is what parents used to do. The more legislation out there like this, the less parents need to step up and figure out. It is my job as a parent to teach my children to back off from things that just don't feel right. The same way it is my job to teach my child to recognize an uncomforatble situation in person. You cannot educate a child against every danger out there. I understand that, but school needs to teach kids the academics, and leave the rest of lifes lessons to me and life.
If people are more concerned about being a parent (read as "ADULT") to their child instead of being the kid's BFF or indulging little Johnny's every whim just to spite the ex, then I wouldn't need to worry about what the "other" kids are doing online or on the playground.
By the way Boombam, my kids do not and WILL NOT have a computer, TV, DVD player, telephone, gameboy, video games or cell phone in their room. Whatever they need to do on those devices (IF they earn the privilege and the money to own those devices), they can do in the common areas of our home.
"...school needs to teach kids the academics, and leave the rest of life's lessons to me and life."
Now there is an argument I will completely agree with. Well done Akangel. However, I don't see the harm in students maybe learning a few things in school about the internet, then bringing some questions home to mom and dad or vice versa. Sexual education is a good example of children learning about sex, puberty, etc... from both their parents and their teachers.
I feel it's fair to say, setting aside the cyber bullying legislation, the government has the POTENTIAL (careful word usage there) of approving legislation that could benefit the student. Let us hope, but not assume, that all legislation passed by congress dealing with education is with the intention