The communication spread by Facebook on the probable implementation of a ‘panic button’ was more than confusing. Official statements of the social networking site announced opposite actions within four hours.
The discussion regarding a ‘panic button’ to report suspected paedophiles flared up in October 2009, after the first Facebook-killing. Asleigh Hall, a 17-year-old British girl, was abducted, raped and killed by her brand new Facebook-friend and sex offender Peter Chapman (33). The latter pretended to be 19 years old and gained the trust of Asleigh, who finally agreed to meet up with her online buddy in real life. Whereas Chapman was jailed for life, Facebook didn’t proclaim any measures.
Until March 18th, when the organisation Child Exploitation and Online Protection (Ceop) presented a effective solution in terms of a police-run panic button on the main page of Facebook. In the early afternoon, Facebook representatives told UK Home Secretary Alan Johnson that the company had “no objection” to installing the software on the website.
The deal seemed to be sealed, but less than four hours later Richard Allen, director of policy for Facebook Europe, suddenly refused to install the ‘panic button’. Instead the social networking site remained vague and stated that it would “develop its existing system”. The big shot at Zuckerberg’s company claimed that the Ceop button might be effective in principle but only “for other sites”, and hence not on Facebook. Another spokesman of the website suddenly came up with the evolution of “Facebooks innovative system”, which had been developed by analysing millions of reports submitted over the years. Yet, the communication used by Facebook raises questions of reliability…
Sources
http://news.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/hi/technology/
newsid_10060000/newsid_10063100/10063190.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8574727.stm
