Google Confirms That It's Designing Kid-Friendly Versions of Its Services 52
An anonymous reader writes USA Today reports that rumors about Google working on specific services catering to young kids are true. From the article: "With Google processing 40,000 search queries a second — or 1.2 trillion a year — it's a safe bet that many of those doing the Googling are kids. Little surprise then that beginning next year the tech giant plans to create specific versions of its most popular products for those 12 and younger. The most likely candidates are those that are already popular with a broad age group, such as search, YouTube and Chrome. 'The big motivator inside the company is everyone is having kids, so there's a push to change our products to be fun and safe for children,' Pavni Diwanji, the vice president of engineering charged with leading the new initiative, told USA TODAY. 'We expect this to be controversial, but the simple truth is kids already have the technology in schools and at home,' says the mother of two daughters, ages 8 and 13. 'So the better approach is to simply see to it that the tech is used in a better way.'"
The real question is (Score:2, Interesting)
besides the obvious filtering of content, will Google also be limiting advertisements and tracking of kids searches?
Re:The real question is (Score:5, Insightful)
besides the obvious filtering of content, will Google also be limiting advertisements and tracking of kids searches?
I would imagine it will be targeting adverts at kids, and tracking just as much.
Re:The real question is (Score:5, Interesting)
besides the obvious filtering of content, will Google also be limiting advertisements and tracking of kids searches?
I would imagine it will be targeting adverts at kids, and tracking just as much.
A more interesting question is "how will Google determine who is a kid?". Will adults have to login to get the grown-up version, and prove that their login really belongs to an adult by providing, for example, credit card details?
Now you have tracking that's worth big money to marketeers.
Re:The real question is (Score:5, Insightful)
How hard is it to provide www.youtube.com along with kids.youtube.com and let folks decide for themselves where to go?
PBS is quite capable of broadcasting child friendly content without worrying about how to make certain that it really is being watched by kids. Nor are they really concerned that a kid could switch from PBS to Cinemax. That's the role of the parents.
Content provider provide content. Parents parent.
Re:The real question is (Score:5, Interesting)
besides the obvious filtering of content, will Google also be limiting advertisements and tracking of kids searches?
I would imagine it will be targeting adverts at kids, and tracking just as much.
That's going to be a serious problem. I don't know about other jurisdictions, but here it's illegal to target advertising to young kids.
Re: (Score:3)
That's going to be a serious problem. I don't know about other jurisdictions, but here it's illegal to target advertising to young kids.
I see where you're coming from, but it'd be better than the political and weird stuff that comes up. I see it as there's no real difference between which commercials show up on Cartoon Network or any other kids oriented network. Just playing to the primary demographic.
Re: (Score:3)
besides the obvious filtering of content, will Google also be limiting advertisements and tracking of kids searches?
I would imagine it will be targeting adverts at kids, and tracking just as much.
That's going to be a serious problem. I don't know about other jurisdictions, but here it's illegal to target advertising to young kids.
Right, but the adverts will officially to "inform the parents who are viewing with the child", just like all the adverts on children's television. Everyone will know that they are targeted ad kids but officially they won't be to comply with the law.
Re: (Score:2)
Really? Where is that exactly?
I haven't heard of a place without McDonalds and toy shops. Sounds like a nice place to live.
Re: (Score:2)
partial extract [news.ubc.ca]
A UBC study of Quebec’s 32-year ban on fast food advertising found that people in that province bought less junk food and their children tend to weigh less than their North American counterparts.
“That regulation effectively reduced fast food consumption in households by as much as 13 per cent each week,” says Asst. Prof. Tirtha Dhar, a marketing expert at UBC’s Sauder School of Business.
In the first study of its kind, Dhar investigated the impact of the world’s first and oldest advertising ban on fastfood. Enacted in 1980, Quebec legislation prohibits advertising of products such as toys and fast food which target children in print and electronic media. In the past decade, other countries have followed suit with similar bans, among them Norway, Sweden, Greece and the U.K.
Dhar says the annual drop in household fast food purchases represents the equivalent of US $88 million in 2010 dollars. "In terms of meals, that reduction represents 13 and 18 billion fewer fast-food calories a year."
Billions and billions of calories not served ...
the actual law (warning pdf) [gouv.qc.ca] which is actually a consumer protection law.
non-pdf version [pubzone.com]
No more weekend cartoon shows with kids going "I-want-It-I-want-It-I-want-It-I-want-It-I-want-It-I-want-It-I-want-It-I-want-It" for the latest piece of plastic junk.
Of course, you have to deal with stupid language laws that treat English as a disease.
Re: (Score:2)
Eww Quebec. I'd take fast food over french personally.
Re: (Score:3)
"Eww Quebec. I'd take fast food over french personally."
So you're going to boycott french fries?
Re: (Score:1)
will Google also be limiting advertisements and tracking of kids searches?
Almost guaranteed. Ads don't exist in google apps for education, and the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) strictly limits how much data they can collect and how they can use it.
Re: (Score:3)
This sounds like a good idea (Score:2)
I'm not worried about sex, as we had various talks on the subject and we're open about that (though after all the talks I actually find concepts like sex stores or s
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Otherwise, if you're networking-minded, you could play around with running squid and dansguardian as a content-based filter to at least reduce the amount of age-inappropriate content they come across?
Re: (Score:3)
We will continue to have a book-only education FOREVER and we will ALWAYS teach our kids how to write by hand before typing. Because the paradigm never changes.
Believe it or not I have shown them wikipedia, at least the version in my own language, because they are inquisitive. Yes, I could read it to them, I could study it in advance and present the information to them and so on. But to be honest I actually believe the paradigm has shifted
Re: (Score:3)
At 8 years old they shouldn't be using the internet at all. You are a failure as a parent.
Totally disagree. I think children should be taught about the internet and internet safety (i.e. dos and don'ts, never give out information, don't talk to strangers, etc.) from as early as they seem ready. But with a LOT of parental guidance. I would never set an 8 year old free with, "Have fun, and don't google goatse!" But I would teach them and closely supervise them, both with software (like netnanny or something) and by just being involved.
Re: (Score:2)
At 8 years old I was already SysOp of my own BBS and programming TI-BASIC games.
My father did a decent job as a parent. Yours quite obviously gave you the rod too often, which is why you're an anonymous failure.
Re: (Score:1)
If you've prove to them that they can trust you, such as not getting angry at them when they tell you they did something wrong, you can have faith that when they stumble into darker corners of the internet and are confused about that they find, they'll ask you about it.
Though I wouldn't worry about it. My parents never had a sex talk with me and I found dark corners of the net and figured out everything on my own. I'm annoyed I never had a close relationship with my parents, but I've turned out alright.
Re: This sounds like a good idea (Score:1)
Darknet for kids (Score:2)
Will this be a darknet, where google and wikipedia pretend that santa claus exists?
Re: (Score:3)
Will this be a darknet, where google and wikipedia pretend that santa claus exists?
What do you mean "pretend"...
Kids are a challenge. Especially with software. (Score:4, Interesting)
Camel (Score:1)
And a baby friendly version called googoo.com (Score:2)
Probably SJW infested (Score:5, Funny)
"I'm sorry, I can't find anything for monogamy. Perhaps you'd like to research transsexual group anal sex orgies instead?"
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe there'll be a conservative version too...
Google Search: gay marriage
Did you mean "may marriage"?
Google Search: abortion
Did you mean "adoption"?
Google Search: the big bang
Showing results for "Genesis 1":
That language "13 and younger?" - because of law (Score:4, Informative)
COPPA - Children's Online Privacy Protection Act [coppa.org] is the law they are attempting to skirt through directed effort, which defines a child for the sake of all its protection as an individual under 13.
(1) IN GENERAL.â"It is unlawful for an operator of a website or online service directed to children, or any operator that has actual knowledge that it is collecting personal information from a child, to collect personal information from a child in a manner that violates the regulations prescribed under subsection (b). ... and it continues.
I wonder how they expect to monetize or indoctrinate this audience. As long as they don't violate the terms of the privacy law (which got iOS contact-stealing app company Path fined $800,000 [arstechnica.com], in part for collecting on children) they can run a kid's site. This means that as long as they aren't wantonly scarfing details, they can still pitch sugar cereals.
Re: (Score:1)
I wonder how they expect to monetize or indoctrinate this audience.
monetisation - the parents will like Google for this, so use Google, so see ads. Child version ad-supported by their parents usage.
indoctrinate - they'll get used to using Google for search, email etc. Naturally on becoming a teenager they'll switch to the adult version, knowing and trusting the Google brand. Or perhaps a teenage version that'll exist by then.
Very easy for Google to comply with COPPA. If Google knows they're a child then serve them the child version (no ads, no/limited tracking), if they do
Terribly difficult to filter image search (Score:2)
Employees at Google having kinds? (Score:1)
he big motivator inside the company is everyone is having kids,
Yeah right.
The average age of an employee is still in the mid to late 20s. Those that start having families and kids leave and are replaced by new employees who don't yet have kids.
Re: Employees at Google having kinds? (Score:2)
Nope.
What is good for them may be good for us (Score:1)
Design for kid (Score:1)
... Like Apple dumbified the NextSetp interface for Mac OSX, is the design for kid specifications the thing Google calls "Material Design"?