NYT Peeks Into World of Webcams, Child Porn

Editors of This New York Times story I’m about to discuss, which involves child pornography, should have warned how upsetting it might be to parents. Be aware that my post below discusses said upsetting issue.

It took me a long time before I was comfortable posting pictures of my children on DadTalk. After all, it is very easy to appropriate a picture, alter it and use it for nefarious purposes. I don’t know if my fear was misplaced or not, but eventually, I relaxed a bit and decided to run selected pictures.

I bring this up because technological advancements are moving faster than we can determine whether the innovations are good, bad, neutral or all of the above.

It turns out some technology, such as webcams and high-speed internet connections, can be a predator’s dream. Just ask Justin Berry, a boy who was lured into the latest version of the child pornography subculture, reports The New York Times.

Justin was a 13-year-old boy when he received his first webcam. As soon as Justin’s image showed up online, male predators started asking him to disrobe. They sent him money and gifts via Amazon.com. Eventually he made hundreds of thousands of dollars for his sexual poses. Justin developed a following of about 1,500 perverts who prodded him into broadcasting his eventual sexual activity.

In an unusual but sensible break with journalistic tradition, New York Times writer Kurt Eichenwald became part of this story by persuading Justin, who is now 19, to give up webcam porn and become a witness against those who are committing sex crimes against children.

I won’t go into the more gory details of the story, which is lengthy. But as I said at the beginning of this post, it’s an example of how some parents can lose their kids, at least in part, to technology. For those wondering, the story describes how Justin was able to hide his alter ego from his mom.

Granted, Justin does not come from a healthy family. At one point his biological dad, who was hiding from troubles in America, helped Justin run his pornographic webcam business from Mexico.

But it also is clear that there are predators and vulnerable children out there. It is incumbent on parents, especially those who are not home for part of the day, to find ways to manage their children’s access to computers.

We’ve discussed before on this site that your child’s computer should be out in the open in a place easy for parents to observe. If computers are in a child’s room, they should not be hooked up to the Internet without software controls.

Norton Internet Security 2006, for example, allows users to control what programs and websites children can access. And fellow blogger Mark Sicignano sells ComputerTime, which limits the amount of time a child can spend on the computer.

When I was a kid, the lowly videotape was the vehicle that brought child porn into the home. Before that, it was magazines. Instant Messaging and chat rooms allow predators to pose as innocent children.

Even if parents know all this, they must remain vigilant for each new technological onslaught. Perhaps phone cams will become the tool of choice in the future. Or maybe it will be something that hasn’t hit the market yet. Even if our own kids are not in direct danger, we should also remember that one of their friends from the troubled family down the street might be.

Additional
Stories I haven’t had time to read yet.

• The Customers: Where the Credit Card Trail Leads
• The History: A Shadowy Trade Migrates to the Web
• The Law: Documenting a Crime That Thrives on Anonymity

Comments

[Phil]

WebCam - added to the list of "things my kids won't have"

The thing that troubles me the most about kids and computers is how many parents just turn it all over to the kids to control. "They know more about it than I do" is not a valid excuse.

There are just way too many kids out there who have a room with a computer, TV, DVD, phone, fridge, and a LOCK ON THE DOOR. I just don't understand that.

[Elizabeth]

Such a scary article.

One of the very disturbing bits was from the article that you haven't read yet, Brett: "Of the 300 subscribers to Justin's site whose identities were checked, a large percentage were in professions that placed them in the proximity of children on almost a daily basis. There were pediatricians and elementary school teachers, as well as lawyers who represent children in court. ... Experts in the field of child sexual exploitation said such findings - particularly the prominence of adults having careers that placed them near children - were consistent with anecdotal evidence from law enforcement."

[brettdl]

Phil: I totally agree.

Elizabeth: Thanks, but I'm almost glad I didn't read that story. Well, I probably will later today.

[Mark Sicignano]

Brett, Thanks for the link and for tipping me off to the story. I read it and it's so sad and very, very sick.

I mentioned the story on my blog as well and then this morning, I found a story about a guy who got an email as the result of the Sober worm, which said that the authorities had found child porn on his computer and he was under investigation... so he turned himself in. If only it was that easy to catch these guys.

BTW, I tried to trackback last night and this morning but typepad must not be working right (still)?

[brettdl]

I think I'm going to write my own worm and see if I can get more perverts to turn themselves in.

As for Trackbacks, I'll look into it. Typepad was really messed up last week.

[Clayton]

The most disturbing aspect of the story to me was the way his father participated in the exploitation of his own son.

[brettdl]

I agree. It's truly frightening to see a dad that bad.

The more information I read about this story, the more intersting and sickening information I find. Speaking from a relatively young point of view (and growing up in a family that wasn't so great) I have to say that taking away such items as computers and cameras really won't get rid of the predators. Although it does eliminate one or two routs that they would take. They will still be in public bathrooms and on the walks to and from school, and in various other places. Learning of Justin's family history creates no surprise in me that he kept going with his websites. There was something missing in his life (a family) and he didn't know how to fill it, so he did what made him feel good at the moment. And what others told him to do. As parents you really have to let you kids know EVERY DAY that they mean the world to you and that they can come to you for anything when they need help. You can't tell them once a year, or even once a month. They won't know what it means, because they rarelt experience it. It was very obvious, from the articles, that his parents didn't have the "right" roles in the family. They didn't take an active part in his life, which is why he felt he needed these new "friends". He was clawing for help and no one was there to give it to him, until the NYT reporter came into the picture. Why does it take such gory stories like this one before people realize that aren't doing something right?

[brettdl]

All very good points. It sounds like you are a very perceptive person.

I agree that the answer is more complicated than taking away the computer or restricting access. But at least parents who do care will get the message of what lurks out there.

I have no answer, of course, as for what to do about those parents who do not care enough.

[KC]

I think you meant to say "peeks" in the title. :)

[brettdl]

Oh jeesh, thanks. Fixed!