
Introducing Messenger Kids - adidash
https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2017/12/introducing-messenger-kids-a-new-app-for-families-to-connect/
======
mlevental
fuck this. i'm sorry i know this isn't language appropriate to hn but fuck
this.

does anyone believe this is really for the betterment of any child's life? say
anything you want about how children use messenger apps now and this just
improves that experience for them but accommodations aside that's basically
the same excuse that drug dealers use - "they're going to get it from
somewhere so they might as well get it from me". we all know this is just
another vehicle for ads (their promises notwithstanding) and we all know that
fb/social media has pernicious effects on psychology, let alone child
psychology.

i don't live in a cabin in the woods and i'm not amish and i'm not a luddite
(i consume technology more or less like everyone else) but yet still i
challenge someone to show me the intrinsic value (as opposed to circumstantial
to the fact that fb/social media inundates us).

~~~
BenchRouter
I actually agree with you that this is "drug dealer" tactics but for totally
different reasons. I think this is a classic "the first hit is free" move.

It's a long-term play. I believe FB when they say they won't show ads to kids,
or use their chats for ad scraping. What they really want is for those kids to
become so familiar and dependent on the system (FB), that they naturally
transition to being active FB users as adults.

It's not a secret that FB has a perceived "uncool with kids" problem - hence
the rise of things like Snapchat. If you hook them when they're really young,
though, then FB just becomes an unquestioned part of life.

As far as the tool itself, i dunno - I mean messenger tools have been a fact
of life for quite some time now. AIM, ICQ, etc. I don't think FB messenger is
particularly different other than the fact that it's attached to, well, FB.

~~~
mlevental
>I believe FB when they say they won't show ads to kids, or use their chats
for ad scraping.

why do you believe this? i have no reason to believe it (since their entire
business model is targeted ads) except the "first hit is free" alternate
hypothesis.

does fb have a single "loss leader" feature?

~~~
BenchRouter
> why do you believe this?

Because why say it otherwise? Facebook could've easily left all of that out
and just said "Introducing messenger for kids! We're making sure it's
carefully curated and safe for your children" etc. etc.

People would've speculated that it was being used for ads, sure, but it
wouldn't have caused a major outrage. I'd bet significant sums of money that
most (not all, obviously) parents don't really care about their children being
advertised to or used for market research - I mean hell, TV was doing that way
before FB was a thing. Most parents probably worry about more obvious things
w.r.t. children chatting online: Bullying, talking to strangers, etc.

Saying "we're not scraping childrens' messages" and then turning around and
doing exactly that would be such a monumental PR disaster if it ever came out.
I don't think FB is quite that stupid. They're clearly focused on the long-
term.

Another possibility is that they're actually just legally barred from scraping
messages sent by children, and this is them putting a PR spin on "we're
complying with the law!"

So basically, I just don't see a lot of benefit to promising not to scrape
messages if they really want to do that.

------
sethjgore
TLDR, Facebook wants your children to connect to you via a chat app.

I'm more than saddened to see that among the tech giants, they are encouraging
_children_ to just use face filters and video chatting, rather than
encouraging them to go outside and interact with friends in person. Why does
an app made specifically for children and families need filters at all? It
doesn't really matter that they are not putting in ads in this app. It is
still an app and it is still imprinting children to accept artificial, screen-
based relationships as equal to real, in-person conversations with your
family.

Facebook is transforming the most important relationships in your life to a
product. Commericalized.

~~~
ng-user
Going to play devil's advocate and ask, did you really expect a tech company
to encourage children to avoid all of their products and go play outside like
they did 30 years ago when these companies never even existed? Of course they
want children and people of all ages on their services. It's in their best
interest to get the majority of folks using their platform.

I seriously have no idea why this is so hard to understand.

~~~
malchow
Niantic doesn't seem to have a problem with this.

~~~
ng-user
Their situation is not an either/or, it's both. It's an awesome model and I
think eventually a lot of companies will replicate something similar using AR.

Thanks for pointing that out though!

~~~
malchow
Sure. I am thinking of the classic "How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World,"
in which there is a discussion of natures. It strikes me that Niantic produced
a product which resonated with the nature of kids. Apple in the Jobs days
strove to produce technology that was consonant with human nature, which meant
they sometimes seemed slow but built things that made sense, and made obvious
decisions quickly (no ad tracking in iMessage, for instance). Even Google in
its early days built a search product that was quite more human than
competitors. Products that irritate human nature can succeed, but perhaps not
for too long.

------
supermdguy
Wow. Just like tobacco companies targeting kids[0] Facebook is making sure
their targets get hooked even younger.

> After talking to thousands of parents, associations like National PTA, and
> parenting experts in the US

Which "parenting experts" are in favor of giving kids more time on
electronics?

[0]: [https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/tobacco-
companies...](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/tobacco-companies-
still-target-youth/)

~~~
Cthulhu_
It's not about giving kids more time on electronics, it's about giving kids
access to a more sheltered and moderated environment. As mentioned earlier, a
lot of "us" were on completely open and unmoderated IRC and ICQ networks back
when we were the age this app is aimed at. So many underage people have gotten
their share of perverts and abuse and whatnot on those. I'm not saying this
app is good or Facebook saves the children or whatever, I'm saying that the
alternative is unfiltered chat.

~~~
supermdguy
Ok, that makes sense. So, it's essentially a necessary evil. In the end,
though, facebook wins.

------
tzahola
>your child’s information isn’t used for ads

I’ll translate: Your child’s information will be used, but not for ads.

~~~
vnchr
The seed planted in youth need not yield fruit. At maturity, it will provide a
lifetime of advertising revenue.

------
Tepix
Whenever Facebook talks about trust, privacy and confidentiality they imply
that they are to be trusted.

That's simply not true.

> _Facebook is opening up to children under age 13 with a privacy-focused app_

I feel like I want to throw up.

------
christilut
Another brick in the walled garden of the Facebook internet of the future.

Now even kids below the age of 13 will have a Facebook account, setup by their
parents who are already on Facebook anyway and enticed by exactly what they
want to hear ("More Fun For Kids, More Control For Parents") thanks to the
marketing team.

~~~
Freak_NL
> Now even kids below the age of 13 will have a Facebook account

They already had, they were just lying about their age. Anecdata: all of my
colleagues with children let their child create a Facebook and Whatsapp
account (that one is really big here in the Netherlands) at age 10, because
not doing so means having your kid be the one child in class without it (with
all the bullying and ostracization that implies).

~~~
Cthulhu_
This comment needs to be higher; kids will get on messenger apps regardless.
The previous generation used MSN Messenger and such.

------
pythonaut_16
I'm shocked by the overwhelmingly negative response here. Honestly I expect
better when I come to Hackernews.

Facebook announces a novel app trying to solve common problems with kids using
and communicating on the internet and everyone in the comments just comes out
with their personal ax to grind with Facebook.

I get it. You hate Facebook, Facebook is a drug, Facebook kicked your dog. All
of those might be valid criticisms, and if this was an article titled
'Facebook is destroying everything' I would be very interested in reading
those opinions.

But as it is, all I see are shallow criticisms of Facebook as a whole rather
than any kind of nuanced discussion of the Messenger for Kids app.

Personally I'm intrigued by the idea. Kids want to communicate using the
internet (and before the internet it was phone numbers and texting), but this
is the first time I've seen an approach that really helps parents to monitor
who their kids are connecting to on the app.

Maybe Facebook is the wrong company to present this app; maybe the connection
to Facebook is concerning. But the app itself I think represents the right
direction to go in designing apps that minors can use to communicate and
helping parents to keep their kids safe online.

~~~
j605
I would use Signal instead to communicate with my kid if necessary.

~~~
pythonaut_16
That works if you need to communicate with them one-to-one. But does Signal
let you easily add any other Signal user as a contact? What about when your
kid wants to talk to their friends on the app?

To me the appeal of what Facebook is doing here is that it lets you give your
kids freedom to use the app while letting you as a parent create the whitelist
of who they're able to talk to.

~~~
j605
Signal works with phone numbers, so you can talk to any contact that is also
on the app. There is no parental control but how do you assume kids can't text
random people. Blocking/banning makes users highly creative.

------
beager
> There are no ads in Messenger Kids and your child’s information isn’t used
> for ads.

I do wonder what quantity of data Facebook will collect on child users of this
service though, and how that could be used. I’m not too well versed in COPPA
outside of account creation restrictions, but I would hope that it has
provisions for data collection on children.

~~~
edf13
There you go... data shared with pretty much who they like (Within the mighty
Fb group):

"Our vendors and service providers. We may transfer information we collect to
third party service providers that support our business, such as companies
that provide technical infrastructure or support (like a content delivery
network), provide customer service, or analyze how Messenger Kids is being
used to help us improve the service. These partners must adhere to strict data
confidentiality and security obligations set out in the agreements we enter
with them (such as compliance with data privacy and protection laws and
maintenance of administrative, physical and technical safeguards to prevent
unauthorized access or disclosure of data) that are consistent with this
Privacy Policy, including obligations that they only use the information we
provide for performance of the services we specify.

Facebook Family of Companies. Messenger Kids is part of Facebook, and we may
share the information we collect in Messenger Kids within the family of
companies that are part of Facebook to support the uses described above, and
to improve the services provided by the FB family of companies. For example,
parents use Facebook Messenger to communicate with their children on Messenger
Kids, and Facebook uses information from Messenger Kids to support seamless
cross-service communication."

[https://www.facebook.com/help/118909212153483](https://www.facebook.com/help/118909212153483)

(Edit for typo)

------
have_faith
The current situation is that if you leave Facebook you risk missing out on
friends or family's various events, updates and so on but that is mostly just
annoying. This moves the needle slightly. If Facebook can convince families to
organise themselves through Facebook, not being on Facebook becomes much more
stigmatising than before. Very powerful stuff.

------
zecg
There is already a secure app for kids, it's called Signal. I'd say secure
channels are what kids need and not constant parental surveillance. In my
opinion, when you decide that kids are old enough to use a smartphone, you
should teach them how to use it responsibly and not censor / snoop around
unless they have a problem and ask for help.

------
chrisper
Just a question of time until Europe starts having issues with this.
Rightfully so.

~~~
Cthulhu_
Does Europe have an issue with Youtube Kids? With kids using Facebook /
Messenger / Whatsapp / etc without being the age they are supposed to be
according to the T&C?

~~~
chrisper
Well, I was thinking of this case (from a German Newspaper, but I am sure
there are English sources somewhere as well.)

[https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=y&prev...](https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=de&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.zeit.de%2Fdigital%2Fdatenschutz%2F2017-11%2Fkinderuhr-
ueberwachung-monitorfunktion-verboten-bundesnetzagentur&edit-text=)

------
tcd
Doesn't this contradict FB's terms and conditions [1]

I quote:

> You will not use Facebook if you are under 13.

[1]: [https://www.facebook.com/terms.php](https://www.facebook.com/terms.php)

~~~
Cthulhu_
This isn't Facebook, it's Facebook Messenger for Kids. It's linked to a
parents' account (who usually are above 13), so they are legally responsible
in the end.

------
jops
What can we do to protect our world from the the mega-corps degrading society
and eating our souls with their moral compass lacking commercialisation of our
very existence? Serious question.

~~~
christilut
I'd hate to go all political but it seems pretty obvious lately: go out and
vote

Don't vote Republican. In the EU it's much less of an issue thankfully but
still, vote for the right party and not the popular or nationalistic party.

------
manishsharan
And this is why we must force our kids to watch "Enemy of The State" and
perhaps "Person of Interest " (episodes where Samaritan is up) every holiday.
I think its a good introduction to the value of privacy for kids.

------
manmal
I think about 95% of posts in this thread are currently negative (IMO a great
thing!). I’d be interested what the reception will be like in the broader
population. If this sentiment is universal, Facebook has a big problem - it
would mean trust has eroded to the point that most people only grudgingly use
it, and to me that cries for disruption.

------
nyxtom
This is messed up

------
sidcool
Get them hooked early. Revenue for the future.

~~~
jasonkostempski
It might also get at least 1 additional adult that may not have had an account
otherwise :/

------
bluedino
>> This preview is available on the App Store for iPad, iPod touch, and
iPhone.

Does FB typically not include Android on betas?

------
dovdovdov
See Pied Piper? This is how you legally surveil underage users.

for the lazy:
[https://www.facebook.com/help/118909212153483](https://www.facebook.com/help/118909212153483)

------
miguelrochefort
What a great move by Facebook.

Understanding how kids engage with software is the perfect way to figure out
what the future of software will be.

