Print
See related documents
Report | Doc. 11924 | 25 May 2009
The promotion of Internet and online media services appropriate for minors
(Former) Committee on Culture, Science and Education
Summary
The Internet has enhanced opportunities for information and communication in an unprecedented way, but does not alter the established standards of freedom of expression and information, which also include proportional legal restrictions necessary in a democratic society for the protection of minors.
Traditional media regulation prohibits or restricts media content which is likely to impair the physical, mental or moral development of children and adolescents. Newspapers, radio and television have a declining audience among minors, thus reducing the effectiveness of traditional media policies for their protection.
It is therefore recommended that several concrete actions concerning illegal content, as well as content harmful to minors, be taken at national and European levels. The availability of child pornographic material is of the utmost concern in this respect and requires further action by states, as well as by Internet service providers and telecommunications industries.
A. Draft recommendation
(open)1. Twenty years after the idea of setting up the World
Wide Web was born at the European Organisation for Nuclear Research
(CERN) in Geneva, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe
recalls the decision of the Heads of State and Government taken
at their 2005 Summit in Warsaw, that the Council of Europe should
pursue work on children in the information society, in particular
as regards developing their media literacy skills and ensuring their
protection against harmful content.
2. The Internet has enhanced opportunities for information and
communication in an unprecedented way. The new technological dimension
in information and data exchanges does not alter the established
standards of freedom of expression and information, which also include
proportional legal restrictions necessary in a democratic society
for the protection of minors.
3. The Internet constitutes an increasingly important part of
our culture. It conveys almost all kinds of cultural items in a
faster and more efficient way than any other medium and has an impact
on society and its culture by reshaping relations and by introducing
new forms of communication, especially among minors. If we want
a strong cultural base, we should implement appropriate measures
for the use of the Internet by younger generations.
4. Children and adolescents are increasingly able to broaden
their social and cultural horizons beyond traditional geographic
boundaries, which may lead to greater international understanding
and co-operation among people. New communication technologies and
services provide new opportunities for informal and formal education,
creativity, social interaction and civic participation. These opportunities
should be used for the benefit of children and adolescents. Social
interaction online should not, however, substitute real life with so-called
virtual reality, the psychological and social impact of which is
yet unknown.
5. Minors often have access to Internet and mobile telephone
services without supervision by parents or teachers. Pictures and
sound can be transmitted and accessed easily. The availability of
child pornographic material is of utmost concern in this respect
and requires further action by states as well as Internet service providers
and telecommunications industries.
6. Parts of their private life are shared publicly on the Internet
by a rapidly growing number of minors, while many firms offer information
on, and profiling of, individuals based on such private information.
Private life and intimate details thus enter the public domain for
an unforeseeable time. Individuals, commercial enterprises, universities,
employers and others are increasingly using the information available
on the Internet about individual persons in order to predetermine
their contacts with them. States have the obligation, however, to protect
privacy under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
7. The continuing increase in advertising and business on the
Internet and online media leads to more aggressive commercial practices
which also target minors. With the global dimension of the Internet,
ethics and legal norms may differ drastically. It would be most
useful, therefore, to elaborate standards which are recognised Europe-wide
and possibly beyond.
8. Traditional media regulation prohibits or restricts media
content which is likely to impair the physical, mental or moral
development of children and adolescents. The Assembly emphasises
that parents can and should define for their children what they
consider harmful or not. School directors and librarians, for example, have
the obligation to restrict harmful content and services accessible
at school or in libraries.
9. In order to handle the challenges of the Internet at home,
parents need the support of social institutions for families and
schools. The state has the responsibility to raise awareness, provide
guidance – also against gender stereotypes, and set up minimum standards.
These minimum standards should include access restrictions to violent
content, pornography, advertising for tobacco and alcoholic products
and gambling. Such access restrictions could be achieved by filters
employed by parents, teachers, librarians or others at their access
devices as well as by providers of content or services for minors.
10. Technical security is constantly increased with regard to
computer networks. Firewalls and individual security settings of
personal computers are refined, in order to keep pace with the technical
progress of those seeking to bypass security systems. The Assembly
therefore believes that it will be helpful, especially with regard
to minors, to develop secure and restricted computer networks often
referred to as Intranets, walled gardens or gated communities, which
are accessible to an identifiable group of users only, typically
require adherence to a code of conduct, fall under a clear set of
legal rules and the jurisdiction of a given country and filter content
harmful to minors. Technical security systems, however, cannot replace
widely accessible and adequate education.
11. The Assembly emphasises that anyone who produces or makes
available illegal content or services should be held liable by law.
Illegal content and behaviour online have unfortunately grown over
the past years and thus increased the risks for minors. This development
is aggravated by the steady growth in Internet use, the growing
amount of content produced by individual users instead of institutional
content providers, the rapid expansion of social online networks
often referred to as Web 2.0, and the technological progress in
transmitting and accessing audiovisual content. In contrast, traditional
media such as newspapers, radio and television have a declining
audience among children and adolescents, hence reducing the effectiveness
of traditional media policies for the protection of minors.
12. The Assembly recalls the Council of Europe’s Convention on
Cybercrime (ETS No. 185) of 2001, which sets up the legal framework
for international co-operation against illegal behaviour and content
on the Internet and other computer networks. It regrets that this
convention has not been signed by Andorra, Monaco, Russia, San Marino
and Turkey, and not yet been ratified by Austria, Azerbaijan, Belgium,
the Czech Republic, Georgia, Greece, Ireland, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg,
Malta, Moldova, Montenegro, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland
and the United Kingdom as well as Canada, Japan and the Republic
of South Africa, although these states have signed it.
13. The Assembly welcomes the European Union’s Safer Internet
Programme 2009-2013 as well as voluntary initiatives for child safety
by the Internet and online media industry and civil society. Internet
hotlines, for example provided by members of the International Association
of Internet Hotlines (INHOPE), are a helpful tool for children and
parents to signal potentially harmful or illegal content and behaviour.
Internet content which may be harmful to minors can be rated voluntarily
by content providers in accordance with the standards set by the
Internet Content Rating Association (ICRA), which subsequently allow
for parental filtering of adult websites, for instance.
14. The Assembly calls on member and observer states’ parliaments
to:
14.1. assess the technological
possibilities of increasing the safety of minors using Internet
and online media services including mobile audiovisual telecommunications,
in particular filtering devices and access restriction technologies;
14.2. initiate, together with the Internet industry and child
protection organisations, public awareness campaigns targeted at
the risks and opportunities for minors using Internet and online
media services as well as the technical opportunities to restrict
harmful content;
14.3. support the creation and marketing of services adequate
for children and adolescents, including restricted networks described
in paragraph 10 above as well as free software for parental filtering
of content deemed by them as being potentially harmful to their
children;
14.4. promote, in co-operation with the Internet industry and
child protection, equal opportunities and other civil society organisations,
public quality standards and ratings of Internet and online media services
adequate for minors, and ensure that access to adult content is
effectively restricted by age-verification systems installed by
the providers of such content;
14.5. encourage public or private educational institutions,
museums, orchestras and other cultural institutions as well as public
service broadcasters to provide Internet and online content for
children and adolescents, thus making European cultural heritage
more competitive and attractive for minors via Internet and online
media;
14.6. ratify without delay the Convention on Cybercrime and
its Additional Protocol as well as the Convention on the Protection
of Children against Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse, if their governments
have signed them.
15. The Assembly recommends that the Committee of Ministers, in
accordance with the decision taken at the Warsaw Summit in 2005:
15.1. assist member states in the
implementation of this recommendation as well as the relevant Committee
of Ministers’ recommendations aiming at a safer use of the Internet
and online media, in particular by minors;
15.2. establish co-operation with the Safer Internet Programme
of the European Union and seek additional funding for Council of
Europe action through voluntary contributions by member states as
well as the private sector;
15.3. instruct its competent steering committee to analyse the
potential psychological risks for children and adolescents using
Internet and online media excessively, in particular social online
networks suggesting virtual reality such as Second Life as well
as violent online games and networks such as World of Warcraft,
and to propose appropriate action by the Council of Europe and member
states;
15.4. call on those states that have not yet signed the Convention
on Cybercrime and its Additional Protocol to do so without delay,
and initiate an international campaign aimed at accession to the Convention
on Cybercrime also by states outside Europe, in order to cover better
the world wide map of cyberspace and avoid geographical loopholes;
15.5. initiate work towards ensuring greater legal responsibility
of Internet service providers for illegal content, whether or not
this originates from third parties or users; this work may require
the drafting of a new additional protocol to the Convention on Cybercrime;
15.6. analyse the feasibility of drawing up legal standards
for the regulation of online gambling and other commercial online
activities, which may be harmful to minors and are typically restricted
by national legislation when provided offline.
16. The Assembly calls on member states to create a national institution
for the co-operation between the Internet and media industries,
civil society organisations and government in order to develop and
implement the regulation of Internet and online media services.
17. The Assembly invites the Standing Conference of European Ministers
for Education to define policy guidelines for teaching media literacy
to children, adolescents, parents and teachers with a focus on Internet and
online media services, in order to detect potential opportunities
as well as risks linked to such services.
18. The Assembly appeals to the online media industry to develop
and apply codes of conduct with regard to privacy protection, equal
opportunities, commercial activities targeted at minors and content
potentially harmful to them. Internet hotlines and other complaint
mechanisms against potentially illegal and harmful content or conduct
should be maintained by Internet service and content providers.
Commercial services provided in conformity with high ethical standards
and high safety protection for minors will be in growing demand
in an ever expanding Internet and online media market.
B. Explanatory memorandum by Mr Kozma, rapporteur
(open)1. Introduction
1. Following an initiative by my British colleague,
Robert Walter, the Committee on Culture, Science and Education appointed
me as rapporteur on this subject and organised an expert hearing
in Paris on 10 March 2009. I am grateful for the contributions by
the participants of this hearing: Mr Zsombor Fekete from the Hungarian
Association of Internet Content Providers, Professor Divina Frau-Meigs
from Paris University and Mrs Andrea Millwood Hargrave from Oxford
University.
2. Internet and online media services are expanding rapidly,
through mobile telephony, for example. Children and young people
tend to use these new media instead of traditional media such as
print media, radio and television. A development which began two
decades ago with the creation of the World Wide Web has reached
all sectors of our daily life, including information, communication,
education, entertainment, culture, business and social contacts.
The enormous individual and societal benefits are widely known and
recognised. It is no longer necessary to raise awareness in this
respect.
3. These benefits are, however, linked to a new and greater exposure
to risks which, due to the rapid technological progress, might not
be adequately addressed by existing regulation. Policy makers are compelled
to reflect on this phenomenon and seek new approaches. These risks
include illegal content and content which is legal but may be considered
to be inappropriate for minors. In the first case, such content should
be removed and those responsible should be pursued. The second case
is much more difficult to deal with. The definition of what is inappropriate
for minors is subjective and may vary from country to country. This report
shall provide guidance to parliaments, governments and industry
and initiate related work by the Council of Europe.
2. Council of Europe standards
4. The Council of Europe has developed a large number
of policy guidelines on this subject: Assembly Recommendation 1836 (2008) on realising the full potential of e-learning for education
and training, Assembly Recommendation
1543 (2001) on racism and xenophobia in cyberspace and Assembly Recommendation 1466 (2000) on media education, as well as the Committee of Ministers’
draft recommendation on measures to protect children against harmful
content and behaviour and to promote their active participation
in the new information and communications environment, Recommendation
CM/Rec(2008)6 on measures to promote the respect for freedom of
expression and information with regard to Internet filters, Declaration
on protecting the dignity, security and privacy of children on the
Internet of 20 February 2008, Recommendation CM/Rec(2007)16 on measures
to promote the public service value of the Internet, Recommendation
CM/Rec(2007)11 on promoting freedom of expression and information
in the new information and communications environment, Recommendation
CM/Rec(2007)3 on the remit of public service media in the information
society, Declaration on human rights and the rule of law in the
information society of 13 May 2005, Declaration on freedom of communication
on the Internet of 28 May 2003, Recommendation Rec(2001)8 on self-regulation concerning
cyber content and Recommendation No. R (99) 5 for the protection
of privacy on the Internet.
5. The Council of Europe also prepared the 2001 Convention on
Cybercrime (ETS No. 185), which has been signed by most member states,
as well as a number of non-member states. It constitutes the only international
treaty on this subject and should be ratified more rapidly by those
states that have signed it. In addition, it would be desirable to
have more non-member states accede to this convention in order to
avoid loopholes undermining this international effort against cybercrime.
6. In conformity with the decision taken by the heads of state
and government at the 3rd Summit of Heads of State and Government
of the Council of Europe (Warsaw Summit) in 2005, the Council of
Europe prepared a handbook on Internet literacy and a game for children
on the possible dangers of the Internet called Wild Web Woods.
3. International efforts
7. The European Commission administers the Safer Internet
Programme (2009-2013) of the European Union, which succeeded similar
programmes existing since 1999 and currently has a budget of 55
million euros. The programme recognises that children and young
people are almost expert users of online technologies. However,
this does not mean that they all have the maturity to identify the
potential risks they may be exposed to, let alone their possible
consequences. The programme therefore aims at informing young people,
parents and teachers of the potential risks that youngsters may
encounter online, as well as at fighting illegal and harmful content
and conduct online.
8. International organisations such as the Council of Europe
could take part in shared-cost actions under the Safer Internet
Programme of the European Union. It is worth exploring common synergies
in this field between the European Union and the Council of Europe.
9. The United Nations International Telecommunication Union organised
the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) in 2003 and 2005,
which addressed safety and security questions, in addition to access
issues aimed at overcoming the global digital divide.
4. Traditional media standards
10. The protection of minors has been an objective of
media policies and standards for many decades. Most, probably all,
European countries restrict the advertising, display and sale of
pornographic print media and videos in order to prevent minors from
accessing them. Violent films on television can only be shown free-to-air
after a certain hour or through restricted access systems such as
pay-per-view. Advertising for alcohol and tobacco products are typically
restricted in traditional media, either by being prohibited or requiring
a health warning.
11. The 1989 European Convention on Transfrontier Television (ETS
No. 132), revised in 1998, requires, in Article 7, for example,
that programme services of broadcasters shall not be indecent and
contain pornography, and shall not give undue prominence to violence
or be likely to incite racial hatred. All items of programme services
which are likely to impair the physical, mental or moral development
of children and adolescents shall not be scheduled when, because
of the time of transmission and reception, they are likely to watch
them. These provisions are in the process of being amended in accordance
with technological progress and the European Union directive on
audiovisual media services. The policy objectives should, however,
remain valid. Any limitation based on transmission and reception
time does not, of course, apply to the Internet or to on-demand media,
where everything is available all the time.
12. Twenty years ago, the Committee of Ministers’ Recommendation
No. R (89) 7 concerning principles on the distribution of videograms
having a violent, brutal or pornographic content also proposed a
range of measures including self-regulation, content classification,
control systems and bans. At that time, such videograms could be
bought or rented from commercial outlets. Today, minors can download
audiovisual content via the Internet and copy it. With the growth
of user-generated content on the so-called Web 2.0, individual persons
will increasingly be able to produce and make accessible audiovisual
content that does not necessarily respect traditional media standards.
5. New challenges
13. The technological progress in Internet and online
media poses a number of challenges to traditional media standards
for the protection of minors.
14. While, in the past, audiovisual content used to be of lower
picture quality on the Internet,,, such content can meanwhile be
accessed through infrastructures permitting the faster transmission
of more data. It is therefore not necessary to buy audiovisual content
recorded on a physical device. Content can be accessed on websites,
copied onto computers or sent via e-mails.
15. Given the worldwide reach of the Internet, national standards
may apply to national content providers, but they might not be applicable
to producers and distributors abroad.
16. With web cameras and cameras in mobile phones, audiovisual
content can easily be created by individual users, including minors.
17. Social contacts and networks are expanding in the online world.
Many of these are open to, and designed for, children and young
people. The problem of adults grooming minors in online networks
has been known about for some years. Cyber bullying and harassment
are phenomena that have been noted more recently. With a growing
part of their daily time spent on online networks, minors may also
lose touch with real life and may isolate themselves. This is sometimes
referred to as “cyber addiction”.
18. The growing exploitation of the Internet and online media
services for commercial purposes has also led to more aggressive
advertising and selling practices. Software is used to identify
users and their movements on the Internet, people’s Internet conduct
is profiled, and normally private information is searched for on
the Internet, collected and used for commercial or other purposes.
In the offline world, the privacy of minors requires a higher level
of protection. It is therefore also necessary to ensure more protection
online.
19. Child protection work has identified parents as the weak point
in many cases of child abuse or neglect. Children and young people
generally know more about the Internet and online media than their
parents. Parental control over their children’s use of the Internet
is therefore hardly possible without adequate information and training
for parents.
6. Policy responses
20. In order to better understand the challenges and
opportunities created by the Internet and online media, more research
and greater public awareness are necessary. Awareness needs to be
supported by training and education based on research. In Europe,
the so-called digital divide is more a generational problem than
a question of social status. The Standing Conference of European
Ministers of Education could assist national ministries by agreeing
on policy guidelines for education in this respect, both for education
of children in schools, as well as lifelong learning by parents.
21. Technological means exist to restrict both content and conduct
on the Internet. They may include content filters used by parents
or commercial providers of Internet services for children. Such
filters may block content deemed by parents as being potentially
harmful for their children, but they may also facilitate the search
for and access to content appropriate for minors. Lawful content
should obviously not be blocked by state authorities, which could
be tempted to use this possibility to suppress political opposition.
Filtering systems applied at state level could therefore be in violation
of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
At the level of parents, teachers, librarians or other persons in
charge of children, filtering content does not raise problems in
respect of Article 10 ECHR. On the contrary, parental control over
the online conduct of their children and the content they access
is part of the parental obligation towards their children.
22. Internet access providers in France, for example, signed an
agreement with the French Government to provide parental filtering
software free of charge. In 2006, the “family label” was also created
in France to indicate Internet content appropriate for minors. In
March 2009, the Steering Committee on the Media and New Communication
Services (CDMC) of the Council of Europe proposed that the Committee
of Ministers initiate a trust mark for Internet content.
23. On a voluntary basis, the ICRA (the Internet Content Rating
Association) has set up a rating system for content which may be
harmful for minors. It is typically used for the rating of pornographic
or violent content by the providers of such content. The effect
of such voluntary rating is not only that content can be restricted
by parents, but also that such content can be searched for more
easily by those adults who wish to see it.
24. Adult content can also be restricted by content providers
themselves through age-verification systems. The effectiveness of
these may, however, be questioned. For example, in Germany in 2007,
the highest federal court (Bundesgerichtshof) decided that providers
of pornographic Internet content must apply more adequate age control
systems in order to effectively prevent minors from accessing such
content.
25. Social networks may be created which adhere to strict codes
of conduct and which require the verifiable registration and identification
of its members. Such networks may be more appropriate for minors,
especially if membership is restricted to minors. For parents, social
networks with high ethical and security standards will have a competitive
advantage over totally unregulated social networks. For example,
in the United Kingdom in February 2009, a task force of representatives
from industry, charities, law enforcement agencies and government
developed and presented the “Good practice guidance for providers
of social networking and other user interactive services”, which
gives advice to industry, parents and children on how to stay safe
online. This example should be followed in other countries.
26. Easily identifiable, quality content for minors will have
the same competitive advantage for parents. Trusted content providers,
such as public cultural institutions or public service broadcasters,
should therefore be encouraged to make quality content for minors
available online.
27. Children have a natural curiosity for new things and a tendency
to test limits. Forbidden content may therefore have a particular
attraction. Such phenomena can best be coped with through education.
Minors should be made aware of potentially harmful consequences
and be able to control their own use of the Internet and online
media. This is often called Internet literacy.
28. Illegal content and conduct is obviously harmful for all,
not only for minors. States must therefore increase their efforts
to combat cybercrime. Signing and ratifying the Convention on Cybercrime
is a minimum requirement in this respect.
29. In addition, it is helpful to have Internet hotlines which
can be contacted by users having come across potentially illegal
or harmful content or conduct. The International Association of
Internet Hotlines (INHOPE) has been very successful in this respect.
In the United Kingdom, for example, the Internet Watch Foundation provides
a hotline for reporting child pornography and other Internet content
related to child abuse, as well as criminally obscene Internet content
and online incitement to racial hatred.
30. Internet hotlines may be provided by Internet service providers,
as well as by police authorities. For instance, the Virtual Global
Taskforce, which fights online child abuse, is made up of police
forces from Australia, Canada, Italy, the United Kingdom, the United
States and Interpol.
31. Self-regulation by the Internet industry may be useful in
areas where legislation does not exist. This is particularly relevant
with regard to the protection of the privacy of minors, as well
as commercial activities targeted at minors. The Internet industry
should therefore develop codes of conduct and ensure that they are applied.
Reporting committee: Committee on Culture, Science and Education
Reference to committee: Doc. 11254, Reference 3352 of 24 May 2007
Draft recommendation unanimously adopted by the committee on 30 April 2009
Members of the committee: Mrs Anne Brasseur, (Chairperson), Mr Detlef Dzembritzki (1st Vice-Chairperson), Mr Mehmet Tekelioğlu (2nd Vice-Chairperson), Mrs Miroslava Němcová (3rd Vice-Chairperson), Mr Vicenç Alay Ferrer, Mr Florin Serghei Anghel, Mrs Aneliya Atanasova, Mr Lokman Ayva, Mr Walter Bartoš (alternate: Mrs Alena Gajdůšková), Mrs Deborah Bergamini, Mrs Oksana Bilozir (alternate: Mrs Olha Herasym’yuk), Mrs Guðfinna S. Bjarnadóttir, Mrs Rossana Boldi, Mr Ivan Brajović, Mr Petru Călian, Mr Miklós Csapody, Mr Vlad Cubreacov, Mrs Lena Dąbkowska-Cichocka, Mr Joseph Debono Grech, Mr Ferdinand Devínsky, Mr Daniel Ducarme, Ms Åse Gunhild Woie Duesund, Mrs Anke Eymer, Mr Gianni Farina, Mr Relu Fenechiu, Mrs Blanca Fernández-Capel Baños, Mr Axel Fischer, Mr Gvozden Srećko Flego, Mr Dario Franceschini, Mr José Freire Antunes (alternate: Mr José Luis Arnaut), Mrs Gisèle Gautier, Mr Ioannis Giannellis-Theodosiadis, Mr Martin Graf, Mr Oliver Heald, Mr Rafael Huseynov, Mr Fazail İbrahimli, Mr Mogens Jensen, Mr Morgan Johansson, Mrs Francine John-Calame, Ms Flora Kadriu, Mrs Liana Kanelli, Mr Jan Kaźmierczak, Miss Cecilia Keaveney, Mrs Svetlana Khorkina (alternate: Mr Igor Chernyshenko), Mr Serhii Kivalov, Mr Anatoliy Korobeynikov, Ms Elvira Kovács, Mr József Kozma, Mr Jean-Pierre Kucheida, Mr Ertuğrul Kumcuoğlu, Ms Dalia Kuodytė, Mr Markku Laukkanen, Mr René van der Linden, Mrs Milica Marković, Mrs Muriel Marland-Militello, Mr Andrew McIntosh, Mrs Maria Manuela de Melo, Mrs Assunta Meloni (alternate: Mr Pier Marino Mularoni), Mr Paskal Milo, Ms Christine Muttonen (alternate: Mr Albrecht Konecny), Mr Tomislav Nikolić, Mr Edward O'Hara, Mr Kent Olsson, Mr Andrey Pantev, Mrs Antigoni Papadopoulos, Mrs Zatuhi Postanjyan, Mrs Adoración Quesada Bravo, Mr Frédéric Reiss, Mrs Mailis Reps, Mrs Andreja Rihter, Mr Nicolae Robu, Mr Paul Rowen, Mrs Anta Rugāte, Mrs Ana Sánchez Hernández, Mr Leander Schädler, Mr Yury Solonin, Mr Christophe Steiner, Mrs Doris Stump, Mr Valeriy Sudarenkov, Mr Petro Symonenko, Mr Guiorgui Targamadzé, Mr Hugo Vandenberghe, Mr Klaas De Vries, Mr Piotr Wach, Mr Wolfgang Wodarg
NB: The names of the members who took part in the meeting are printed in bold
Secretariat of the committee: Mr Ary, Mr Dossow