Facebook is a huge industry that has taken over the lives of the teens, the young adults, and the older generation. With the exponential growth of the Facebook-World population, the question has emerged: Should children under the age of 13 be allowed on the website??
The New York Times came out with a story titled "Why Facebook is After Your Kids". The title alone positions Facebook as the bully and children the victims. The article is quite long, so we will only examine the major claim made regarding Facebook's intentions of accumulating more users via allowing pre-teens access (legally that is, since "7.5 million kids age 12 and younger are on Facebook").
The article discusses why Facebook, specifically Zuckerberg, wants to allow these kids access to their website through passing legal rights. Here, the NY Times makes the claim "What is clear is that Facebook thinks it needs access to kids' lives in order to continue to dominate its industry." On the flip side of their argument, maybe alllowing kids to sign up earlier can "accustom them to 'sharing'" and get them comfortable with the "big audiences that are at their small fingertips."
But the NY Times provides evidence to support its view of Facebook's selfish motives. They discuss the trippled "spending on lobbying" and the "political action committee" from officials connected to the Bush and Obama administration that Facebook has acquired to allow the pre-teens access online. They even further their argument's support by ending the article in a discussion on facebook's non-endorsement of the "Do Not Track Kids" legislation; this has been supported by both the Republicans and Democrats (a "rare show of bipartisanship"). Just before this piece of information, the NY Times discussed the economical gains facebook can aquire by keeping things "private" but not too-private.
In their article, the NY Times has appealed to the views they believe readers hold. One warrant includes their assumption that adults are their main audience, as they constantly appeal to information regarding online parental protection. (Since when do children care about that?). They assume that safety is a concern of the older, mature generation. Otherwise, they would not have discussed that facebook users don't really change their privacy settings that much.
The NY Times obviously has its concerns about the allowance of children under 13 using Facebook, but whatever the results, it will be interesting to examine several issues: whether or not the "Do Not Track Kids" legislation will pass, how many more young kids will be entering into the Facebook world since so many already use it illegally, and what new safety regulations Facebook will provide in order to create an (almost) ideally safe environment for its users.
I agree with your analysis here. NY Times definitely appears to be targeting parents and their concern for children's safety.
ReplyDelete