Two faces of social network websites

Mar 14 2010 by Colin Patterson, Sunday Sun

SOME might call it free advertising, others might brand it bad publicity.

During the last week, the word “facebook” has been written and uttered innumerable times in newspapers and on radio and television. And the circumstances have been distinctly unedifying ...

The murder of Darlington teenager Ashleigh Hall, who was killed after meeting her predator on the social networking site.

The innocent father wrongly accused by a facebook group of murdering toddler James Bulger.

And Paul Bristol. He’s the jealous ex-lover who murdered his former girlfriend after seeing her on facebook with another man.

All these disturbing stories made me question my own relationship with the site. It’s described as a “social utility that connects with friends and others who work, study and live around them”.

But I’m not convinced that facebook, and other networking sites, are the problem. The issue, surely, lies with the behaviour of those who continually abuse it.

I’m one of the millions of people who log on, albeit intermittently, and I try to be fairly astute. For example, I keep personal details to an absolute minimum to avoid any risk of identity theft.

Friends total about 200 because I try to ensure every “friend” is known to me or I know them through someone else.

However, my number of friends’ requests stands at nearly 500.

Let’s contrast this with a member of my family. She’s 16, still at school and boasts nearly 1,000 so-called friends. I doubt she knows a quarter of them, but she probably competes with her mates to see who boasts the greater total.

Another girl is just 13. She has more than 300 “friends” which I also find astonishing. When I asked, she claimed she knew every one of them and “if I didn’t know them I wouldn’t add them, would I, because they could be a paedo”.

I have no idea how parents can constantly monitor their child’s internet activity.

I guess the most realistic option is to pump them full of sound advice, keep the channels of communication open, trust that they’re streetwise enough to avoid getting duped and, if necessary, jump on their profile page when they’re not looking.

I’m sorry but invading your child’s privacy is neither here nor there if it means protecting them.

Remember the old times? Before the advent of email and widespread use of the internet, we were all taught never to talk to strangers.

It’s so much harder now. If your child is on facebook it’s possible they are talking to strangers every day. Except they don’t realise it, especially if there’s a nicely-posed picture with the friendly messages.

So the answer, when it comes to protecting our children, lies in them being internet savvy and socially aware.

Facebook, if used correctly, can be a positive communication tool. One gentleman emailed our programme last week saying he had met his beloved wife through it and even attached the wedding photos.

The fact that I’ve also re-established contact with an old friend also makes me navigate away from the log-out button despite all the recent negative publicity.

The murder of Ashleigh Hall should be a salutary lesson about the dangers of trusting strangers, whether it’s in cyberspace or that first meeting in a nightclub.

If just one young person wises up then Ashleigh’s death will have helped protect – and educate – hundreds of potential victims.

Surely a sentiment echoed by Ashleigh’s mother Andrea as she struggles through Mother’s Day.