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