E/CN.15/2014/CRP.1 Risky online behaviour and inattention to online safety and privacy The extent to which children engage in risky online behaviour and neglect privacy and safety measures is one key factor that affects the degree of exploitation encountered. Children who engage in risky behaviour, both on- and offline, face a higher risk of exploitation. The 2009 EU Kids Online study found that half of young Internet users made personal information available to strangers, 40 per cent viewed pornographic content online, 30 per cent viewed violent or hateful content of some sort, while ten per cent agreed to in-person contact with an online friend.163 In a 2012 survey, 44 per cent of teens surveyed admitted they have looked at something online of which their parents would not approve164 and, according to a 2011 survey, 42 per cent of teens admitted they had cleared their browsing history after using the Internet.165 Regarding cyber-enticement, solicitation or grooming, young people who engage in risky or aggressive online behaviour, such as making rude comments in online forums, visiting pornographic websites or opening material they receive from strangers through peer2peer-networking sites, tend to receive more explicit solicitations.166 Levels of risk increase with children’s willingness to discuss sexual topics with strangers online.167 One recent study noted that children who engaged in four or more risky types of online behaviours were much more likely than others to report receiving online sexual solicitations. Although some technologies can be more easily utilized for purposes of solicitation than others, solicitation risk levels appears to be more clearly associated with psychosocial profile and risky behaviour, than with any particular technological platform.168 Closely related to the topic of risky online behaviour, is young peoples’ inattention to online safety and privacy. Children who are not sufficiently attentive of online safety precautions may be at much greater risk of cyber-enticement and cyber-stalking. Whereas perpetrators might initially target a wide array of children, they will be most successful in amassing information about children who carelessly share personal information and pictures, especially certain kinds of information, such as age and geographic location. Children may reveal their age, for instance, by publishing dates of birth or by posting pictures, commenting on age-specific subjects such as movies or video games, or by mentioning their school. Along similar lines, offenders may gain real-time information about physical location where a child uses online applications to “check-in” to places and track their current location. Youth who do not follow online safety precautions may also tend to receive more harmful content than more prudent peers. Similarly, children with publicly available social media profiles are likely to receive more unsolicited messages from strangers via Internet messaging, e-mail and text and experience higher levels of cyber-harassment and -bullying than those with private profiles. 169 In addition to social profiles that are inextricably linked with real world identity, the Internet also offers children the opportunity to create a separate identity, through which they can be whomever they wish and perhaps take risks that they would never take offline. One relatively new channel of access to victims has arisen through the phenomenon of connected, or online, gaming. Online gaming can be adrenaline-charged with depictions of violence, and is designed to engage players for sustained periods of gaming time. Many gamers become attached to points, “assets,” or other markers of gaming success, leading even to cases where children have committed suicide after losing such indicators.170 Some users, including children, become obsessed with online gaming and begin to prefer their virtual life to their slow-paced and less easily controlled reality. As a result, youthful gamers are especially vulnerable to offenders who try to engage them in relationships in the virtual setting. Like other online forums, online gaming communications do not offer the real-world __________________ Livingstone, S., Haddon, L., 2009. P. 16. Cox Communications, “Tween Internet safety survey,” June 2012. http://ww2.cox.com/wcm/en/aboutus/datasheet/takecharge/tween-internet-safety-survey.pdf (accessed Dec. 27, 2012). 165 GFI Software, 2011. 2011 parent-teen Internet safety report. P. 7. Available at http://www.gfi.com/documents/GFI%20_2011_parent_teen_internet_safety_report_june.pdf. 166 The Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University, 2008; see also Wolak J., Finkelhor, D., Mitchell, K.J., Ybarra, M.L., 2008. Online "Predators" and Their Victims: Myths, Realities, and Implications for Prevention and Treatment. American Psychologist 63:118. Available at http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/amp-632111.pdf. 167 The Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University, 2008. P. 20. 168 The Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University, 2008. 169 Lenhart, A., et al., 2011. Teens, Kindness and Cruelty on Social Network Sites. Pew Internet & American Life Project. Pp. 6164. Available at http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2011/Teens-and-social-media/Part-3/Introduction.aspx. 170 Bose, A., 2013. 163 164 V.14-03040 27

Select target paragraph3