Transcript The Internet: Protecting yourself and your service users

THE INTERNET:
PROTECTING YOURSELF
AND YOUR SERVICE USERS
David Niven
Twitter: @DaveNiven
www.socialworldpodcast.com
DNA SURVEY: SOCIAL NETWORKING
AND CHILD SAFETY

The past decade has been witness to the increasing
popularity of contemporary communication tools; social
networking sites.

Social networking is becoming increasingly part of
everyday life, with the number of users continually growing
and spanning a wide age range. Although positively
providing a new means of communication the innovative
nature of the service creates a number of new challenges,
particularly within a social work/child protection setting.

We commissioned a survey which aimed to gain an insight
into current attitudes towards the use of social networking
sites with relevance to safeguarding issues.
METHOD

An on-line survey was constructed using a typical Likert
response scale to measure respondents’ attitudes by asking
the extent to which they agree or disagree with a particular
question or statement.

The survey was distributed via the company’s extensive
network of contacts in order to attract individuals with an
interest or investment in the topic area. This involved various
channels including the DNA Associate network, newsletter
mailing list and Linked-in groups.

We deliberately stopped the snapshot survey at 100
responses, which we estimated to be approximately a 20%
response rate. 82% of respondents work involved contact
with children and 18% did not. The survey was completed
entirely anonymously, as such no further demographic
details were collected.
QU. 1: ONLY LAW ENFORCEMENT
SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO INVESTIGATE
SOCIAL NETWORKING ACCOUNTS FOR
EVIDENCE.
 Agreed
or strongly agreed = 40%
 Disagreed or strongly disagreed = 39%
QU. 2: SOCIAL SERVICES SHOULD
BE
ALLOWED TO INVESTIGATE SOCIAL
NETWORKING ACCOUNTS FOR EVIDENCE.
 Agreed
or strongly agreed = 63%
 Disagreed or strongly disagreed = 23%
LESSONS TO LEARN

An interesting point was the behaviour of Peter Connelly’s mother,
Tracey, who according to a Guardian Newspaper report regularly
shared on social networking posts that, instead of nurturing Peter
she spent her days drinking vodka, watching pornographic films
and having sex” with her new boyfriend, Steven Barker.

She also stated that she was “madly in love with the most amazing
guy ever” and that “her fella is nuts.”

Given that many professionals were unaware of Steven Barker’s
presence in the house, or the nature of their lifestyle, accessing
posts on social media sites might just have tipped the balance and
provided clearer, important information.
[The Guardian Newspaper, Tuesday 11 August 2009, ‘Tracey
Connelly: the story of a woman defined by abuse’]
QU. 3: CHILD ABUSE PROFESSIONALS,
SOCIAL WORKERS, TEACHERS, POLICE
AND HEALTH PROFESSIONALS SHOULD
NOT HAVE PERSONAL SOCIAL
NETWORKING PAGES THAT ARE OPEN TO
PUBLIC ACCESS.
 Agreed
or strongly agreed = 60%
 Disagree or strongly disagree = 22%
“VILE' HATE SITE FACES LEGAL ACTION
FOR NAMING SOCIAL WORKERS”

Social workers and professional bodies have condemned a 'vile' and
'offensive' website that threatens to 'expose' UK social workers by
publishing their names and photographs online.

The website, called UK Social Workers Exposed appeared online in
August 2012, features Nazi symbolism and claims to be exposing social
workers' identities in the best interests of parents and children. “Here on
this website we will expose the social workers that have stolen and
continue to steal the children of the UK,” the site’s mission statement
reads.

The names and photographs of around 20 social workers and Cafcass
guardians have already been published on the site and a related
Facebook page, with the site's creators asking web users to share more
names. Some photographs include further details, such as the number of
children the social worker is believed to have taken into care.
[From: Community Care Online,]
QU. 4: MANY MORE RESOURCES SHOULD
BE CREATED BY SOCIAL NETWORKING
SITES TO PROTECT THE VULNERABLE.
 Agreed
or strongly agreed = 90%
 Disagree or strongly disagree = 6%
QU. 5: ON-LINE SAFETY SHOULD BE
ENTIRELY DOWN TO PARENTS.
 Agreed
or strongly agreed = 16%
 Disagreed or strongly disagreed = 65%
QU. 6: THERE SHOULD
BE NO AGE LIMIT
TO HAVING A SOCIAL NETWORKING
ACCOUNT.
 Agreed
or strongly agreed = 8%
 Disagreed or strongly disagreed = 83%
WHAT CAN BE DONE?

Age limits should be protected. We do it for alcohol,
cigarettes, driving, sex, marriage, joining the army, voting,
cinemas etc. Why is this different?

A registration delay with proof of identity and age?

A well funded education programme for parents and
carers?

Comprehensive research programme for technological
improvements?


Clear universal, national guidance for all people working
with children (BASW already has developed a policy for
social workers).
And . . . . . ?
AGE LIMITS

Serious rumours exist about Facebook reducing the
age of account holders from 13, which it currently
is, to allow any age of child to have, own and
operate a Facebook account. This move to allow
younger children to own accounts highlights what
analysts say will be a recurring problem for the
newly publically floated Facebook as it needs to find
a way to increase revenue and please its
shareholders. As children expose themselves on
these social networks with pictures, location
information and details about their personal lives
advertisers and others who wish to take advantage
of children will find it easier to do so
(Washington Post).




Many parents falsify the age of their children anyway,
according to Facebook (at a Bath Spa University
Conference, 2012)
The accuracy of information has always got to be in
doubt as there is no guarantee of honesty.
In a recent declaration by Facebook, 82 million profiles
exist today that are false. There are a whole variety of
reasons for this - many people just don’t like exposing
all of their own information, others create false personas
for spamming purposes and then there are the most
worrying and that is those who wish to perpetrate
criminal activity in one form or another.
The conclusion therefore is that there are more dangers
that have to be taken into account when making
professional judgments about social networking.
THE ONLY WAY IS ETHICS. . . ?
Twitter: @DaveNiven
www.dnivenassociates.co.uk