3 Ways to protect kids online

PROTECTING CHILDREN ONLINE
Finding Real Solutions

3 real ways we can get started …
* An exclusive domain extension for kids
* Technology education forums for adults through schools
* Co-operation of user generated content websites

To protect children in the real world, we group them together and put up a fence. When we leave our children at school, libraries, sporting fields and day-care centres we accept that certain rules apply to this location which is designed to protect children. We would not drop our children off in a park or street or with a stranger and leave them alone for hours on end and expect that they would be safe.

The Internet is new, and it doesn't yet have an effective system to provide safe areas for children. While free speech groups, religious leaders and governments argue over semantics of non-existant law, child pornography has grown into an epidemic. Law enforcement around the world is fed funding scraps, until recently when Americans finally voted to increase the money and resources for those that work against the production and distribution of child pornography online.

The recent government censorship plan is reaching for the impossible – filtering of all websites which might be unsafe for children. Not surprisingly, ‘objectionable’, ‘questionable’ and ‘offensive’ websites will be filtered for all adults as will the discussion of actions which are illegal such as suicide and euthanasia. It is a thinly disguised attempt to filter adult material and other subjects which make the government uncomfortable, but it also wastes another $100, 000, 000 under the false idea of protecting children.

Blacklist filters do not work on file sharing networks, which is where almost all child pornography is traded. Blacklist filters don’t protect children from online chat predators, who show up in ALL chat rooms where children hang out. Blacklist filters don’t block all websites which may be inappropriate for children as proven by recent trials.


An exclusive domain name extension for kids

There have been 4 applications for the right to sell license to the domain extension 'dot kids' (i.e. www.websitename.kids) but each application has been rejected for different reasons - ranging from objections by free speech groups to rejection on the basis of commercial bias.

What that means is that free speech groups have spoken loudly against it because it could open the door for other subject related extensions like 'dot sex', which would allow adult and political material to be easily filtered. In my interpretation, commercial organisations have been deemed exempt from applying due to the previous applicant’s potential to be biased when distributing licenses. (see icann’s latest “Criteria for Assessing TLD Proposals”)

This leaves the Governments. Australia. America. United Kingdom. Between these governments over $1 billion has been spent on subjects related to the filtering of the Internet. To setup an entire business dedicated to the management of the domain extension 'dot kids' would cost somewhere between $1 million and $25 million. Even if we double it, triple it or quadruple it to allow for bureaucracy’s stuff ups, the solution is still cheaper and more effective at protecting children from material that may be harmful.

The Dot Kids domain extension would be licensed for around the same cost as a dot com dot au extension, which is 4 times the price of a dot com domain extension. The application for a domain would be accompanied by a completed website which would be assessed based on a set of criteria which are suitable for children.

To be issued the right to license the domain www.disney.kids Disney would simply have to submit their existing website, as they present their material in an age appropriate way already. Most organisations that target products and services at children would simply need to register the new domain extension and use their existing website. However some websites, such as those advertising video games to a variety of age groups, may be required to submit a new website for their dot kids domain which just features G rated material.

With all sites which are safe for children existing on the same domain extension, it is easy to filter these websites via software, browser settings or filtering systems. This is the first step to creating an Internet which reflects our society – including the way we protect children.

Technology education forums for parents

My parents were amazed by Tetris back in 1990 – orange boxes on a black screen. By the time I graduated in 1994 the Internet was a commercial tool and the digital age was well underway. Then came the new millennium and technology is like a snowball, changing so fast that I wonder how I will ever keep up. And I’m only 31!

My parents have a computer now – a full colour one in fact - and have recently returned from a trip around Australia where they blogged their digital photography from the middle of the country via wireless broadband. Children are teaching their parents how to use the tools we now need to get by in our everyday lives. If kids are teaching their parents, who’s teaching the kids?

Parents don’t need to be computer experts to understand the basics of how they can protect their children, so if there is $189, 000, 000 in funding available to help with filtering the Internet then free Internet classes for parents shouldn’t be a problem. The right collection of experts and 3 hours in a school hall would be more than enough to arm most parents with the tools they need to start digitally interacting with their children.

There’s a very simple way to keep an eye on your child’s MySpace or Facebook account, and that is by having one of your own. If that doesn’t make the sites ‘uncool’ for the kids it will certainly help you keep up with the lingo – for example getting poked on Facebook isn’t what you first thought!

An ideal technology forum would feature speakers to teach parents about free filtering software available from the government, which might help counter the appalling take up rate of the $84, 000, 000 software.

Annual parent and teacher forums held in schools featuring volunteer guests should cost no more than $500 per school depending on the resources required. There are approximately 10, 000 schools in Australia bringing the total expense of an annual seminar campaign to a maximum of $5, 000, 000.

Did you know? The last time our Government attempted to solve child
pornography with a filter was a few years ago – it could be downloaded for free
from a website and was cracked by a 16 year old in 30 minutes. They spent $84M
(Yes, $84,000,000 of tax payers money) to develop and license filtering software
which was download less than 150,000 times and installed less than 30,000 times.

That’s $2800 per installed copy.

In addition to the real world education forum, an online forum would also help provide parents with a place to get the latest information about filters, learn about new dangers and provide input on child protection issues. Parents, teachers and the community can share their knowledge with each other via the very tool they are learning about.

A website like this would cost no more than $15,000 to develop and would require the services of 1 to 2 full time webmasters on a salary of $50, 000 to $85, 000 per year.


Co-operation of user generated content websites

YouTube, Blogger, WikiPedia, MySpace and FaceBook are just a few examples of websites which exist due to ‘user generated content’, meaning the website is made up of content added by its users. This includes sites like the above along with chat forums, picture posts and blogs.

The business model of a user generated website is generally to sell advertising like newspapers or magazines, without the expense of actually generating content to fill the site. Thanks to MySpace profiles added by members the site has millions of images, blogs, music of every style and videos from all over the world.

In order for these sites to protect themselves from legal issues they separate themselves from their responsibilities with clauses in their terms and conditions that most members have never bothered to read. These sites can’t filter much content due to free speech but they use this as an excuse to take no responsibility for the content on their websites and who access it.

YouTube offers a warning that a video contains adult material which fits within the guidelines, but I’ve stumbled across far too much porn (not within guidelines) on YouTube to accept that this policy is strictly upheld. I have attempted to have fake Facebook and MySpace profiles disabled in the past and have followed all instructions only to wait almost 12 months for action.

There will be many changes in the law over the coming decades to accommodate the rapid changes in technology, so somewhere along the line these sites will be forced to abide by stricter and stricter guidelines.

A proactive approach would involve taking responsibility for the content on their websites by introducing stricter monitoring, better response to complaints and increased co-operation with law enforcement.

A rating system would work on a site like YouTube where a submitter could rate their video on submission for anything outside of a G rating. Parents could setup a single profile with multiple sub accounts so they can change the user’s age in a single click. These basic additions to popular, existing websites would help parents to identify material which may require supervision or discussion.

If all online communities take some responsibility for the protection of young children from material that’s intended for an adult mind then the problem instantly becomes smaller – as does the cost of finding a solution to protecting children from the very content these sites host, store and broadcast.

INTERNET CENSORSHIP

"Labor makes no apologies to those that argue that any regulation of the internet is like going down the Chinese road," he said. "If people equate freedom of speech with watching child pornography, then the Rudd-Labor Government is going to disagree."

Aaaaah I see what you did here Mr Conroy! If we disagree with your poorly structured Internet Censorship plan, we must want to watch child pornography! A most excellent way to manipulate silence in a democratic society – but also a dangerous sign of the weakness of your ‘plan’.

Australia has reached our place in the queue – it’s time for our two-yearly Internet Censorship attempt, where the Government spends in excess of $100 Million each time to educate, filter, administer, prosecute, fix and block ‘the problem’. While politicians argue about filtering ‘objectionable’ and ‘questionable’ material, and what these words even mean to the average citizen, child pornography has grown and spread like a virus.

A common pattern exists in many industries which hover on the edges of moral and legal boundaries – sex, guns, drugs – to name just a few. As laws become stricter, the underground economy grows, fed with unchecked crime and violence. Child Pornography has become such a big industry that global networks now exist to HELP pedophiles molest children – for profit! Isn’t this the very thing the last round of filtering was supposed to fix?

So it would be safe to say filtering hasn’t worked so far to prevent the transfer or production of child pornography. Our latest attempt reminds me of the definition of stupidity – to continue to do the same thing expecting a different outcome. This time our Government will spend nearly $200M - because somebody believes twice as much money will surely be twice as effective!

The issue of Internet censorship is hovering dangerously close to Government propaganda – the government is twisting facts and logic with statements that accuse anyone who is against censorship of being a pedophile to gain the support of the Australian family.

I will not sit back and accept being labeled as a supporter of child pornography because I expect my government to respect the rights given to me under a democracy. I resent being accused of defending child pornography websites because of my belief that consenting adults should be able to have sex. I am appalled that complex, controversial subjects like euthanasia and suicide are being classified as illegal simply because the acts being discussed are illegal.

Suicide is illegal - should we stop people from entering into online discussions about killing themselves which may in fact prevent their actions? Euthanasia is illegal - should we prevent people from around the world from connecting and talking about their pain, beliefs and experiences? Sexual abuse is illegal – should we stop people from talking about rape? Genital mutilation is illegal – should we stop victims from sharing their stories? Gay marriage isn’t legal in this country – should we jail anyone who dares to discuss the subject in a public forum?

The Internet is a new tool and has spawned a new era of digital technology that nobody saw coming, bringing with it a unique set of issues that we have never before had to address. Before progress can be made, both sides need to find a common ground … can’t we can all agree that solutions are needed for protecting children online and move forward from there?

Firstly, let’s eliminate some popular myths in both social and political discussion …




FACT 1: PORNOGRAPHY IS NOT CHILD PORNOGRAPHY

It’s one of those really subtle situations where a single word makes a world of difference. Pornography to me is defined as sexual entertainment involving consenting adults in both the production and viewing process. Child Pornography is a sexual, physical and emotional crime against a defenseless child. When did consenting sexual entertainment and pedophilia become the same thing?

The official definition of Pornography is:

Pornography or porn is the explicit depiction of sexual subject matter, especially with the sole intention of sexually exciting the viewer. It is to a certain extent similar to erotica, which is the use of sexually-arousing imagery for mainly artistic purposes. ...en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pornography

creative activity (writing or pictures or films etc.) of no literary or artistic value other than to stimulate sexual desire wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

The adult entertainment industry is governed by many strict laws – most of them ridiculous shades of grey, but some are simple and necessary to create boundaries between legal and illegal activity. 2257 was passed a few years ago, formalizing existing guidelines to ensure all producers of adult material kept strict records to prove the age and consent of their stars.

It created a big expense for existing content producers who had to attempt to track down past models, but it was accepted by adult webmasters eventually and would seem to most like a logical global law for adult content producers. The exception was the many content producers who shot models who were 18 and consenting at the time, as outlined in the 2257 law, but didn’t have the documentation in the exact format required by the new guidelines.

This meant all content shot before a particular date was no longer ‘legal’, a clever way to put porn producers out of business. The flaw in that process is that those who were already following a common sense law were subject to the most expenses and losses, some going out of business, while giving a clean slate to those who had previously broken common sense laws - such as not checking thoroughly that models are over 18.

The official definition of child pornography is:

Child pornography refers to pornographic material depicting children. It has been described as a form of child sexual abuse and is illegal in most countries. ...en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child pornography

While we discuss and debate this important subject, we must be careful not to look for a solution to a single issue. Pornography and child pornography are not the same, and using an illegal activity to manipulate a law against legal activity is simply unreasonable – and useless in actually protecting the children. While child pornography is illegal in most countries, the variations on the ‘legal age of consent’ provide plenty of grey zones for criminals to operate.

Did you know?
The last time our Government attempted to solve child pornography with a filter was a few years ago – it could be downloaded for free from a website and was cracked by a 16 year old in 30 minutes. They spent $84M (Yes, $84,000,000 of tax payers money) to develop and license filtering software which was download less than 150,000 times and installed less than 30,000 times.

That’s $2800 per installed copy.

FACT 2: FILTERING DOESN’T FIX EVERYTHING, OR MUCH AT ALL

I know its been done to death, but let me quickly eliminate the keyword filtering debate by explaining that by filtering the word ‘sex’ we also filter: all discussion about ‘sex’, forms with ‘sex’ instead of gender, ‘sex’ education websites, and the popular salt’n’pepa track “Lets Talk About ‘Sex’” … oh and don’t forget ‘breast’ and the entire breast cancer awareness campaign … ‘poo’ and colon cancer sufferers etc. Filters are more complex than that now, and in some cases are an excellent solution to controlling the flow of information, but they are flawed when used in a blanket movement.

When the keyword filter didn’t work in the late 90’s, the Government decided instead to apply more rules to the filters to allow more complex keyword combinations. It worked ok, but still did nothing to prevent the 2 main issues at hand - children accessing pornography or the trading of child pornography.

Now our Government has decided to eliminate a selection of sites – site by site – based on a set of rules defined by an already conservative Governing body ACMA. Initially the statement told us that less than 700 sites would be on the list, and only weeks later that number has crept to 10,000 websites with 1,000’s of new sites each week that wouldn’t pass the ‘law’. Today the figure of 1300 websites is being quoted, with around 400 child pornography or related websites on the list. What does the rest of the list contain?

Can I suggest something logical for a minute?

Wouldn’t it be quicker to manually approve sites which are ok for children to view rather than try to manually find every site which needs to be blocked? Aren’t we effectively just looking at this backwards? If resources must be assigned to monitor new ‘bad’ websites to add to the filter, wouldn’t it make more sense to just let in the ‘good’ sites while kids are online?

Why not just setup a family safe zone where sites are issued with the right to publish a website in that section? This could be achieved via a domain extension, rating system, browser block or the more commercially viable but totally unnecessary software purchase.

There is already a G, PG and M15+ rating as defined by the ACMA which would make it easy for companies to produce websites aimed at children or teenagers within already approved (however conservative) guidelines. Each rating could be set using the parent’s password, so individual children will have access to different age-appropriate sites using a browser setting or controlled by external software. A website can pass hidden, encrypted information in the header which can be read by the browser. At the parents discretion the filter can be lifted so older teenagers can be given more responsibility.

It is a lot of work to hand edit a network of sites, but DMOZ has long been one of the most successful online directories because each category is moderated with love by its members. If there is a budget for staff to decide which sites to block, a never ending uphill battle with a dead end result, then it seems logical to me that a filtering system with manually approved content for children couldn’t possibly be more expensive.

As a society, we don’t send children to school in the back alley behind the pub and we do everything we can to keep pedophiles out of schools. To keep children safe, we define a zone for them and assign people to care for them age-appropriately while they visit that zone. This is how we must approach the Internet.

Safe zones for children. Free speech for adults.

Did you know?
Do you think cartoon porn is funny? Under current and new laws you could be arrested for the possession and distribution of child pornography if the cartoon characters are under 18. Yet genuine child pornography investigators fight for every cent of funding to catch and prosecute criminals with real victims.

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/1001729/latest-from-wire

FACT 3: CHILD PORNOGRAPHY IS RARELY PUBLISHED ON A WEBSITE

Long before the first web page went live, child pornography had been traded across the Internet. The Internet was invented to transfer information between 2 computers – the concept of a web page came later when business and hobbyists saw the benefits of a central place for their information.

A website needs a host – a business which offers the service of hosting the website files on their high speed computers to allow for high performance, 24/7 access. If you have a permanent connection to the Internet in your home, technically you could setup a website using your own computer as a host, but that opens up all sorts of security issues that someone else can tell you about.

To setup a website, you need a host. To setup a host, you need an upstream to provide you with data transfer services – much like a phone company who leases access to the cables of another company. For this reason, a website which is setup on a web host can be removed from the Internet within a short period of time as there is a chain of supply which can easily be terminated.

If a child pornography website was put up on a host within Australia, USA or England it would be removed as soon as it was reported because the hosting company would be directly breaking the law of HOSTING illegal material. Hosting companies within countries where the legal age of consent is less than 18 are much less strict however they risk having their entire network blocked by the rest of the world which might upset their other clients.

There is also the issue of the domain. To own a domain you have to follow a set of guidelines, which means at some point you are agreeing to the laws of the Government where the domain registrar is based. If I buy a domain from a company in USA, I have to follow those rules. If a webmaster were to publish child pornography on this domain, the registrar has the right to terminate the client’s license to the domain.

While there are still some websites out there which offer child pornography by slipping through loopholes, they tend to be very nomadic and rarely live at the same place for long. Visiting a website leaves a trail of statistics both on the user’s computer and on the host’s computer, so by visiting an illegal website pedophiles online movements can often be tracked - helping law enforcement.

In technical terms, child pornography is traded in the same way as another illegal activity – pirating music and movies. There is rarely a website, because that is too easy to close down, but the ‘back to basics’ usage of file sharing networks that music and movie fans love so much is also responsible for easy access to excessive volumes of child pornography available around the world.

File sharing networks can not be filtered like a website can. As yet, there is no technology which is freely available to scan files and accurately guess which are illegal images, although we're not far away. An Internet filtering plan might block out a few obvious networks but will completely ignore the file sharing issue.

This means that when a solution is discovered for blocking, filtering and intercepting content on a file sharing network that those who download movies and music will be traced and prosecuted. The very same technology used by much of the population to pirate digital content and hide the act from the authorities is used by pedophiles to do the same with child pornography content.

FACT 4: WE NEED REAL SOLUTIONS TO REAL PROBLEMS

The Christian lobbyists and conservative politicians will successfully bring this issue to the forefront regularly because it is a genuine problem that really does need to be addressed. Parents are genuinely concerned about digital safety for their children, making them vulnerable to word twisting by politicians – such as this cleverly structured censorship campaign which labels anyone opposed to filtering the Internet to be a supporter of child pornography.

While lobbying for the rights and freedoms we’ve grown to expect, we must also step up to offer solutions to the real problem of protecting children in the new digital age. If we expect our rights to be respected in our democratic environment, shouldn’t we also consider how we might logically fight to protect them through real solutions?

There are many ideas which could provide a safe haven for children online while letting adults maintain our freedom of speech. Domain extensions, rating systems, children safe site filters, white lists, education, research, funding for law enforcement … what’s your suggestion?

The Oprah Forums discuss Child Pornography

The below is a post I have made on the Oprah forums in response to a discussion about Child Pornography after a show about Internet Predators. The show was actually about non-internet predators using the Internet to distribute their material ... this may be considered semantics, but misleading titles and accusations are not helping us fix what's really the problem. 45% of cases are committed within the home of family or friends, by a family member or friend ... guides are being distributed online teaching peadofiles how to molest children, broken down into age groups and specifically showing how not to get caught ... we need to take action and change the way we all live and respond to the oversexualization of children, both offline and online.

Hi Abikath5,
I can't help but be concerned by this post and the off track direction your research has taken when considering the initial topic of discussion. You mention the issue of children 10 - 17 having access to adult pornographic material ... while this is a major problem for society, its completely irrelevant to this subject and we have to be careful not to lose sight of the urgent issue at hand. Children are being molestered in their own homes by their parents and families - this is not an internet issue and has been a problem since long before the Internet existed. If anything, the Internet has given us a tool to find these people as shown by the technology on this show. Now that the bill has passed hopefully the law can catch up with the technology ...

Its very dangerous to continue to blame the existance of the Internet for every problem we have in society even though it has definately brought subjects to our attention that we'd probably rather stay ignorant about. Its assumed far too often that the existance of pornography at all is the reason why we have problems like child pornography - a religious view that dangerously covers up important facts. If the religious politicians had their way, adults wouldn't be able to have sex at all except for reproduction. Issues like child pornography are allowed to grow and prosper because governments spend their time arguing about the moral aspects of CONSENTING sex, and how we should police the population to meet the agenda's of the church.

So far, between America and Australia (my home) we have spent at least 500 million dollars that I am aware of in the past decade on trying to pass legislation to ban all pornographic material, under the premise that this will also stop child pornography. The absolute ignorance behind these attempts angers me. The waste of money angers me. The misinformation angers me. The lack of progress angers me. There are people out there like Flint Waters who have had this type of technology for several years, but they have been beating their heads against a wall trying to get someone to listen to them, help them and fund them. Our politicians ignore them and continue to rant about Internet Censorship - an entirely separate issue with its own set of problems and concerns.

The issue of child pornography isn't new. Before the internet there were mailing lists where this material was exchanged and clubs where pedo's could get together to normalize each others behaviour. The Internet has given them the tools to do this easier, but its also given us the tools to find them. The issue has been able to grow to the size it is because our politicians have been too busy arguing about pornography in general, trying to get it banned under the premise that this is the reason people molest children. While we might find it weird and offensive to see grown adults wearing clown suits and pleasuring one another, how is this consentual act even comparable to the molestation of a BABY with a freakin' pencil?!

I agree that there is a major problem concerning children and what they can access online. But the mass production of child pornography is a different issue involving the physical safety of children. Both issues require different resources. They can not be solved together, which has surely been proven with a decade of wasted time and money and the sheer volume of child pornography which exists today.

I have been ranting for this entire decade about the need to create a safe place for children online, which simply won't be achieved by filtering or censorship of the Internet overall. We don't send children out into the streets to go to school, we send them to a safe building with security and rules. Until the Internet creates a safe and separate place for children and brings together key parties like government, google, disney and web hosts we will resolve nothing.

Where child pornography is concerned, the best thing that will come from this show is arming women with this information. As Flint Waters said, many of the crimes are committed in the home while the Mother sleeps. Lets continue to educate ourselves so that we know what to look for, what to do and how to make a change.

Original post at: http://www.oprah.com/community/thread/88211?start=1305&tstart=0

Tips for better Family Portraits

Your Photo Shoot
So, you’ve decided to get a photo taken of your family – aint that sweet! Below are some tips to make sure you get the result you are hoping for … a beautiful family portrait that you can store in your wallet, give as a gift, hang on your wall and treasure forever.

Getting the most out of your photos:
There’s a few simple things you can do to make sure your pictures are the best they can be

• Get individual shots taken at the same time as your family portrait – it might take a bit longer but you’re already dressed up anyway so make the most of it!
• Take shots of mum & dad together, siblings, best friends etc – group your family members together to get a wide variety of shots you can use for your wall or your wallet
• Make the most of your budget by being creative and look at the options that fit within what you are prepared to spend – decide on the budget before you start, so you don’t get carried away after you see the shots and buy them all!
• If you want to avoid expensive printing costs from premium photographers, shop around for a photographer who will give you a CD of photos to print yourself. You will probably pay a little more up front, but it will save you from returning to the photographer each time you want a reprint.

What to wear:
While matching clothes may be a bit corny, the effect of a family dressed the same can give a real unity and consistency to the photo. It also makes sure the photo is more about the faces, the people, the relationships and the ‘moment’, rather than being about what you are wearing. Now before you head out and buy Dad a dress, ‘the same’ can be as simple as a repeated element or color such as:

• Dress everyone in black shirts & jeans or white shirt & jeans
• Dress everyone in the same colored shirt or boys & girls in opposite colors
• Ensure nobody is wearing clashing or prominent colors such as bright red and yellow or hawaiian shirts, unless this is the effect you are going for! At least talk before you leave the house!
• Nose rings rock! But in photos they look like ‘something landed on your face’. Your call.
• Dress to create the photo you want to achieve. If you only want headshots, make sure your heads look good. Do your hair. Wear a nice, clean, pressed top. Don’t drink a bottle of bourbon before hand. If you want full body shots, wear decent shoes or none at all. If you want a relaxed, beachy feel to your photos or a country, farm feel then dress appropriately.
• If you’re a silly family, then be silly. What’s wrong with a family portrait of the whole family wearing clown noses? Or dressed in costume of the same theme? It’s your family, so capture what makes you special.

Makeup:
Some portrait companies may offer you the option of a full makeover before your photo – if this is within your buget, DO IT! It’s fun having someone else do the work … and being pampered with some attention is a great way to relax you before your photos and bring out your inner confidence. Good foundation will clear out any blemishes in the skin, but then so can good photoshop in the editing process so don’t be too concerned!

If you are doing your own makeup, try not to overdo it but it is a good idea to wear lipstick and some eyeliner and mascara. Too much makeup and you’ll look like a drag queen, but not enough makeup and your features may disappear into your face.

Think of the future:
Did you ever have a portrait done in the 80’s? And did you think you were super cool back then? And is that family portrait now hidden in the depths of the family photo box, never to be seen again? Firstly, you should get that portrait out of the closet and display it proudly on your wall – you might not like what you were wearing NOW, but you loved it then and a photo is meant to capture a moment in time and freeze it forever. So you had a mullet and wore flouro plastic beads – so what, its part of who you are – and besides, it will give all your new friends a laugh.

However if you don’t want a portrait that dates too obviously, avoid trends and stick with classic … classic clothes, classic makeup, classic hair, classic setting. If you want a portrait that you can look back on and laugh at, then pull out those fashion mags and glam it up baby!

Do your research:
There are millions of talented photographers around the world with web pages to showcase their work. Browse their websites, look through galleries and visit as many websites as you can to get a wide variety of options and ideas You may find someone you like who happens to be in your area.

Here’s some good examples of portfolio’s featuring family portraits:

http://www.mccrystalimage.exposuremanager.com/
http://www.creativeportrait.com/
http://www.snapshotpics.com/
http://www.vanostrom.com/family.html

Location:
Indoors
A studio will give you a range of benefits such as clean backgrounds, additional lighting, green screen, instant photo viewing and a host of other effects which can only be achieved with electricity and technology. Decide the type of photo you want to achieve and ask your photographer if they have a studio to produce the result.

Outdoors
There are beautiful outdoor locations everywhere like waterfalls, beaches, rainforests, ponds, mountains and funky smelling, inner city, back alleys with that certain ‘urban chic’. Be careful not to stand in front of a backdrop that you will get lost in or that clashes with your clothing.

Time of Day:
The recommended shooting times are early morning or late afternoon and the worst time is noon, but this really can vary depending on your location. Shooting in late afternoon is risky, as the sun may set leaving you with no light at all. Shooting in the afternoon in some locations can also cause long shadows which can be frustrating to shoot around.

Posing:
There’s nothing worse than a photo of people trying hard to appear happy and relaxed – that usually results in stiff smiles and tense bodies and a photo that does nothing to capture your spirit. Be creative with angles, heights, activities and silly fun. Jump around, build a sandcastle or go sky diving!

What NOT to do:
· DON’T stress out!
· DON’T be boring!
· DON’T try to be someone else!
· DON’T take it too seriously

Did the Internet break the Economy?

Well, did it?

Naked Children as art?

"I see their [children] work [posing naked] with me only giving them a sense of pride and pleasure in later life."

You would be forgiven for thinking the above sentence was spoken by a paedophile in a police interview in defence of owning a collection of inappropriate photos of children - but it's actually a statement from Australian artist, Bill Henson, attempting to justify his 'art' to an outraged world.

Bill Henson's star has grown, making him a household name with the media outrage about his recent exhibition filling news and current affairs programs for months. The exhibition featured photos of a 12 year old girl simply standing naked, beautifully lit and showing an innocence on her face that might bring an art lover to tears ~ a beautiful piece of art.

Previous exhibitions have seen girls of similar ages posed naked in a variety of settings, including a piece titled "Untitled 1985/86" which shows a young girl naked on a bed, with her legs slightly spread ... it is here that the true controversy begins - the line between capturing a moment of innocence or drawing the viewer (and therefore, the subject) into a sexual space.

Art has always brought with it a set of rules - or should I say, exceptions to rules - where the standards and laws that apply to the rest of society can be broken, provided the subject or action has 'artistic merit'. This includes photos of naked children.

Artistic Merit

'Artistic Merit' is a well known grey area used successfully by much of the porn industry, famously battled in the courts by media man Larry Flynt who fought obscenity laws by using 'artistic merit' as defence. Suspected obscenity is not considered obscene if the subject or message has artistic or educational merit ~ a vague law which means simply adding an article or some information to a pornographic image makes it 'art'.

Does it seem strange to anyone else that parents have been prosecuted via child pornography related charges after bringing rolls of film featuring their children playing in the bath to an over cautious photo development store while Bill Henson's exhibition is met with congratulations from those who consider themselves more cultured than the rest of us?

After a decade of working with adult material, I can almost guarantee that the photos of the young girl have made it into paedophile collections around the world, her budding pubescent nipples providing titillation for a disturbed portion of our society. The photos will be stored on hard drives, printed in albums and stuck on walls alongside clothing catalogues and in many cases with truly disturbing shots of children being exploited in ways most of us can only imagine.

While our laws may allow the photo of a child on a bed with her legs spread to be legal due to artistic merit, paedophile rings clap with glee at this major loophole that could very well protect them in their 'business'. While toddlers go missing from hotels in foreign countries and children are sold by their economically struggling parents into hellish sexual circumstances, we sit back obliviously arguing the acceptability of naked children as art.

Protecting our children

I'm sure you will forgive me for taking the creative rights of this artist a little less seriously than I take the rights of these children to be protected and cared for. How can we teach children that it is not acceptable for them to let themselves be photographed naked while our most popular media representatives garble on about 'artistic merit'?

What message are we sending to other 12 year old girls when we express how beautiful Bill Henson's 12 year old naked subject is, while at the same time we are trying to teach them to avoid all of the sexual messages thrown at them by our society and media? How can we tell other 12 year old girls, desperately looking for love and approval of their appearance, to keep their clothes on and respect their bodies when we allow artists to exploit the desires of young girls in the name of art, publicity and money?

Bill Henson told Fairfax Media, "The girl's parents are fine because they believe in what they believe in," a statement that scares me more than anything else I've read about this subject. The assumption that all parents are only concerned about what is best for their children is simply wrong. While these parents might have thought it a great honour for their child to be asked to be a subject for a famous artist, have they let this feeling overpower their common sense and better judgement in their role as parents?

Child Beauty Queens as Sexual Objects

For over a decade, since the Internet became a major part of our lives, web sites have existed which fall completely within the legal bounds of American law (which means the sites are available for us to view in Australia). Young girls in the pageant world have their own websites, filled with images of themselves in their costumes, getting ready and generally telling the story (in photos) of their life as junior performers.

The name given to these groups of sites is 'non nude'. As these sites fall into a high risk billing category, the parents use billing companies which specialized in porn site billing to charge a monthly subscription fee which allows members access to the content on these websites.

The children are fully clothed, so technically no laws are being broken - but the very existence of these sites has no other purpose than the entertainment of those who like looking at young girls in Lycra.

For me the art of Bill Henson falls somewhere into this category - it is simply unnecessary for it to exist at all when the cost (the right of a child to be sexually innocent) is so high. Parents are blinded by their selfish desires to make their offspring famous where they failed in their own goals completely ignoring the long term effects of sexualizing children on the individual and society alike.

What is a Paedophile?

About.com provides a definition of the qualities of a Paedophile, designed to help parents and children alike recognise someone whose intentions are less than honourable. These are some of the points made in their article:

• Many paedophiles often prefer children close to puberty who are sexually inexperienced, but curious about sex.
• He will often refer to children in pure or angelic terms using descriptives like innocent, heavenly, divine, pure, and other words that describe children but seem inappropriate and exaggerated.
• The paedophile will often be employed in a position that involves daily contact with children.
• Paedophiles work to master their manipulative skills and often unleash them on troubled children by first becoming their friend, building the child's self esteem. They may refer to the child as special or mature, appealing to their need to be heard and understood then entice them with adult type activities that are often sexual in content such as x-rated movies or pictures.
• It is not unusual for the child to develop feelings for the predator and desire their approval and continued acceptance. They will compromise their innate ability to decipher good and bad behaviour, ultimately justifying the criminal's bad behaviour out of sympathy and concern for the adult’s welfare. This is often compared to Stockholm Syndrome - when victims become attached emotionally to their captors.
• One factor that works against the paedophile is that eventually the children will grow up and recall the events that occurred. Often paedophiles are not brought to justice until such time occurs and victims are angered by being victimized and want to protect other children from the same consequences.

Quotes from the artist

"They see their involvement in the work as a good thing, a positive thing."

"Unlike everyone else, I do have first-hand experience of working with these people (children) - working with them for years and seeing them grow up.

"I see their work with me only giving them a sense of pride and pleasure in later life."

In Conclusion

It is no secret that children like to do the exact opposite of what their parents tell them, which brings us to the scary prospect of your 12 year old daughter asking you if she too can have a beautiful portrait of herself just like Bill Henson's subject.

When you say no, can you be sure she hasn't been influenced by the discussion in the media, leaving her open to predators and exploitation?

How can we expect our children to use good judgement when, as adults, we can't even agree on a subject that should be black and white rather than the ever-increasing shades of grey we continue to make with our debates?

How are you going to teach your child the difference between a sexual predator and an 'artist' who wants to capture their innocent beauty? Do you know the difference yourself? And more importantly ... does the artist?

More information:

http://www.theage.com.au/news/arts/auctioneer-defends-henson/2008/09/09/1220857549207.html

Internet Marketing & Development

This will be the home of my articles in relation to Internet Marketing, design, development, web strategy and eCommerce.