“The risks minors face online are complex and multifaceted and are in most cases not significantly different than those they face offline.”
There are opposing views from law enforcement and other advocacy groups:
Jeffrey Chester, executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy, a District-based consumer advocacy group, has been critical of the report because its expenses were underwritten by interested parties such as MySpace, Google and Microsoft. “Surprise, surprise,” he said. “They pay for a study, and it says there’s no problem. It was kind of a brilliant PR move.”
However, note that Chester doesn’t provide data to oppose the report, he attackes the source of funding for the report. The lack of data is actually a concern, for both sides of the argument do not have enough data from which legislators and policy makers can make competent choices:
One online safety advocate, named as a member of the report’s task force, said she is embarrassed by the report because it highlights the fact that there isn’t enough good data on the subject and it doesn’t give lawmakers a clear to-do list. Parents’ concerns about Internet predators are sometimes overblown, said Parry Aftab of WiredSafety.org, but it’s nearly impossible to tell how overblown they are; when quizzed about online activity, kids don’t usually tell the truth if their parents are around, she said.
Market failure occurs, among other reasons, for lack of sufficent information for the market to behave efficient and effectively. Public failure occurs for the same reason.