(This is the Tantrum, in which Dadwagon’s writers debate one question over the course of a week. For previous Tantrums, click here.)
We were approached yesterday by an editor at a parenting magazine. She apparently reads our blog, despite strong data showing that reading DadWagon will actually make you a worse parent, as evidenced here, here and here.
So they’ve written a piece about DadBlogging (represent!) that will mention us, among other bloggers. To this end, they want a small picture of one of us four DadWagoners, with their kid.
Well, perfect. I’ve got a great picture of me and Dalia that my kicking fotog friend Shane took last year. We look totally functional: not stressed, reasonably put-together, just about as impossibly happy as everyone looks in those glossy parenting magazines. The only problem: the wife doesn’t want our kids’ pictures on the Internet or, by extension, in magazines. And I, uh, well, I follow orders.
But my wife is not alone. In fact, only Matt has actually ever put his kids’ pics on this blog. The rest of us haven’t. So feel free to call bullshit if any of the rest of us defend putting our children’s faces online. Like I’m about to do.
Basically, even though I am abiding by the familial fatwah against posting pictures of our children, I don’t think it’s a big deal. My rule is that as long as the kid is wearing pants, you’re good to go.
Here’s why: a couple months ago I called a friend in South Carolina because she had told me some awful story about a local blogging family (that used real names and real pictures) that got stalked online. Threats were made, cops were called, restraining orders were issued: the stuff of fear. So I wanted her to tell me that story again, but when she did, I realized I had misremembered an important detail. Yes, the family was stalked, and some of the threats and harassment came online. But actually, they were stalked off-line first. The dude was just a nut in their neighborhood. He didn’t come across their website randomly. He just followed them onto the Internet after he was already threatening them. So Matt is essentially right: ignore the technopanic and beware the creeps in your real life more than the ones online.
The other reason why I’m not that against putting our kids’ pictures online is because they are just more gorgeous than your kids. Just kidding! Actually, though, commenter Mike Johnson of Playground Dad had a good point in response to Matt’s post: the most common crime around this issue is committed by dads who bludgeon their acquaintances and Facebook friends with too many unsolicited cute-baby pictures.
The real reason I don’t mind putting our kids’ pictures online is because, well, they’re already there. In the murky antediluvian past, like in 2007, I was putting some pictures of the kids on Flickr, and some videos on YouTube, so that far-flung family members could see how nice and fat our babies are. They weren’t private sites, but they weren’t advertised, so I thought the pictures might just hide in some unbothered corner of the Internet.
I am an idiot.
When I googled my daughter’s first and middle name just now, I not only got results from Flickr and YouTube. I also got them from an Arabic video site called Abusora and, naturally, portaldefotos.com and WiseVid and the Turkish site WebLoader.
And while I may dumber than your average bear, I would bet that it would be quite difficult for most people to share photos and video online without at least some risk that the content would end up in global aggregator purgatory. Or if there were a way to make it completely secure, it would be a lot less convenient, and for what? I am still unclear on what nightmare scenario will ensue if our kids have their faces on this blog from time to time. But I am very clear about what a pain in the ass it is to have my 85-year-old grandparents try to watch a video online that has been password protected. It requires way too much tech support from me.
So I’m saying game is over. We already live online. Might as well get comfortable there.
I can’t get behind the argument of succumbing to living in the digital age. We do still maintain a level of control in our lives. Convenience does not necessarily equate to an appropriate decision. Ease of use is certainly alluring, but at what price?
Good post Nathan. I have put pictures of my daughter on my website. I understand the risks and such, but I’m just not the kind of person who lives in fear of things which probably won’t ever happen.
I also ran into the same issue when I tried to just keep them on facebook and such. My mother couldn’t figure out facebook at all and then got pissed because she wasn’t getting any pictures. I don’t have the patience to try and teach her over the phone either. To each his own, I guess.
So one story of online stalking that occurred off line first is enough to put to bed any concerns about putting your kids photos online? This reasoning is as good as what I usually hear when I tell people I am not putting my kids pics online: “Everybody does it.” Need I type the entire rebuttal about if your friends jumped off the bridge?
This last response coupled with your reasoning make wonder if parents are not actually becoming dumber and more juvenile the more they use the internet. With GPS tracking in photos and other privacy issues every day how are we this stupid? Further, when did it become so hard to send photos in an email? Really, are we that lazy AND stupid?