The seemingly motherhood issue of protecting our young from the dangers of the internet is being assumed by ill informed bureaucrats and pollies in Canberra with their misguided federally funded $189 million NetAlert program.
In the lead up to the election a costly advertising campaign is being led around the country by TV on all channels, newspapers big and small and billboards near you.
Of course the traditional media is not going to object … easy money is always nice to get … and they now own most of Australia’s major websites and online properties anyway, and all have strong links with the major US based portals and search engines.
The predators and so-called groomers, which are claimed to be the main online danger, overwhelmingly utilise mainstream US internet portals and search engines many of which are un-moderated and with ill defined procedures to identify or apprehend offenders.
Call me a cynic but I suspect the government supplied filters will not block out major players such as Google, Yahoo or YouTube which operate outside of this country’s legislative structures.
So if John Howard’s minions are to be believed the government is paying the so-called perpetrators to warn the potential victims – talk about vampire in the blood bank stuff. Don’t expect any powerful editorials exposing this beat up soon.
The fact, as any educator will tell you, is that there is no single ‘top down’ way to prescribe safe behaviour for children in any activity, be it playing sports, flirting with illicit substances, driving cars, travelling on public transport systems or even mixing with potential terrorists.
Interestingly, the tagline “Be alert not alarmed”, coined as a response to September 11 and which was much derided at the time, holds the seed of a powerful idea to combat any would-be internet predators.
We all recognise parents are the major influencer in any child’s behaviour and, what’s more, they live together, i.e. are in the vicinity of any perceived danger from PCs linked to the internet.
It is every parent’s duty to not only protect their children but also to educate them so they can make informed choices but, for instance, we can’t simply stop our children reading books because there may be some which contain challenging images or ideas.
There are strong parallels here with the introduction of the printing press. Before the 15th century obtaining access to hand written books was severely curtailed by the privileged classes and it was only the increased exposure provided by publishing multiple copies that ‘knowledge’ finally became readily accessible to the masses.
In reality the options are stark since it is not possible to artificially create an environment which is completely free from all dangers … all of the time. And it never has been.
What is possible is to set guidelines and instil values that children will learn to respect and observe as they grow up.
Of course, experimenting is a natural consequence of growing up. So pushing barriers and getting it wrong from time to time should be expected along the way.
But having open communication with your children is the only viable and sensible way to help children protect themselves from the dangers that surround them every day of their lives.
It doesn’t always work but it has proven over millennia to be the best form of survival - and I don’t think any advertising campaign will ever change that.
Your Opinion Counts. Click here->
| 
