California is considering a bill that would give parents access to their children's Facebook (TM) pages. From the article, I think there are more weaknesses than strengths to the proposed bill. I agree that the security settings should default to most secure. I have a list of weaknesses however.
First, parents would supposedly have to ask Facebook to remove content only and it appears to only deal with text, not photos or apps (personally, the idiotic apps and comments my eleven year old cousin disseminates reflect more ridiculously than her atrociously spelled updates). Would the override extend to the "Account" in addition to the "Page"? Could a parent be able to manipulate more than just content? There is also no mention of whether or how the parent's reach would change once the child would become of age, whether Facebook monitors the child's coming of age, or whether the content is completely destroyed or merely cached & stored on a FB server (potentially outside the parent's own jurisdiction, ie California). Facebook also sounds like it would be surrendering its proprietary rights over the posted content to parents, which is inconsistent (and unfair) to the proprietary rights it maintains over other users' content. Finally, there does not seem to be a mechanism (other than charging someone with fraud) to prevent one from posing as a parent to gain access to another's Facebook page.
This raises interesting questions about Lisa Austin's individual right to self-presentation (Austin 2010)* as well as invasions of privacy and trespass. As we've seen, torts of invasion of privacy are recognized in some circumstances and not others and court orders impeding accessing an individual's Facebook page have been upheld. I think it may be recognized in this case, although the arguments for child safety may stymie them. I think some of the comments make good points about the need to be an involved parent, but one who doesn't need to rely on indirect channels to parent their kids. What I do find troubling is the automatic assumption that children deserve reduced privacy. I come from the perspective that treating kids with dignity, respect and integrity ensures positive communication that would render moot the need for asking Facebook for more control. I guess I also think that the steps taken depend on the age of the child/adolescent.
Photo credit: Rapunzel in the castle from Johnny Gruelle's illustration for the Gutenberg Project, Wikimedia Commons 2011. The image is fitting because Rapunzel was trapped by her witch-mother in a castle and told the world was a scary place to be and that the only person she could trust was her controlling mother. Unfalsifiable, clearly.
* Lisa Austin, "Privacy and the Private Law: The Dilemma of Justification," (2010) 55 McGill L J 165 at 203.
No comments:
Post a Comment