Children who watch excessive amounts of television are more likely to have criminal convictions and show aggressive personality traits as adults, a New Zealand study has found.The University of Otago study tracked the viewing habits of about 1,000 children born in the early 1970s from when they were aged five to 15, then followed up when the subjects were 26 years old to assess potential impacts.The research, published in the US journal "Pediatrics" this week, found a strong correlation between childhood exposure to television and anti-social behavior in young adults.RELATED: BETTER, NOT LESS, TV MIGHT IMPROVE KIDS' BEHAVIOR: STUDY"The risk of having a criminal conviction by early adulthood increased by about 30 percent with every hour that children spent watching television on an average weeknight," co-author Bob Hancox said.The study also found excessive TV viewing was linked to aggressive personality traits and an increased tendency to experience negative emotions.It said the links remained statistically significant even when issues such as intelligence, social status and parental control were factored in."While we're not saying that television causes all anti-social behaviour, our findings do suggest that reducing television viewing could go some way towards reducing rates of anti-social behaviour in society," Hancox said.He said the findings supported the American Academy of Pediatrics' recommendation that children should watch no more than one to two hours of quality television programming a day.The study said it was possible that children learned anti-social behaviour by watching it on TV, leading to emotional desensitisation and the development of aggressive behaviour.But it said the content of what children were viewing was not the only factor, highlighting the social isolation experienced by those who spent hours watching the box.It shows justice Criminal law cases and sensitive television shows should be offered but monitered. I believe that exposure to these types of programs does not cause bad things inherently, but they provide learning opportunities if parents use them. It is still on the responsibility of the parent to always monitor and approve of what kids watch.Television Shows About Crime- Not For Children In my opinion, there are several things that children should not be exposed to. Television programs regarding law cases such as CSI, Cold Case Files, as well as other law programs should not be exposed to children under the age of 12.. Often times in these law television shows, murders and other graphic information is depicted. This can increase violence in children's tendencies.No not really. A television show about real criminal law cases are not very suitable for children under the age of 12. I think that children that young should not be exposed to some of the harsher realities of the world so soon. It is important to provide a balance of shelter, yet reasonable exposure.It Can Be As a parent, I don't care to gloss over or hide the real world from my child. For that reason I think a show about real criminal law cases can be suitable for children under the age of 12 to watch. The same can be said of the news. Good things are rarely the center of attention, but that doesn't mean children should be protected from it.CORRUPTION IN INDONESIACorruption in IndonesiaThe abbreviation 'KKN' is a familiar one to Indonesians. Whenever there are anti-government protests this abbreviation can be heard shouted by the protesters or seen written on banners. The abbreviation stands for corruption (korupsi), collusion (kolusi) and nepotism (nepotisme) and - much to the dismay of the majority of the Indonesian population - has been an intrinsic part of Indonesian governments, probably culminating during president Suharto's New Order regime (1965-1998). The issue of political corruption in Indonesia continues to make daily headlines in the Indonesian media and generates much heated debate and fierce discussion. In academic circles scholars have continuously searched for answers to the question whether this corruption has its roots in traditional precolonial societies, the Dutch colonial era, the relatively short Japanese occupation (1942-1945) or the subsequent independent Indonesian governments. However, an unequivocal answer is yet to be found. For the foreseeable future it just has to be accepted that corruption in Indonesia's political, judicial and corporate domains s (although there are some signs - which are discussed below - that point towards an improvement of the situation).Historical Framework of corruption in IndonesiaAlthough there are great examples of corruption in Indonesia's earlier history, we take as our starting point president Suharto's authoritarian New Order regime (1965-1998) that was characterized by impressive rapid and sustained economic growth (with Gross National Product averaging 6.7 percent annually between 1965 and 1996) but also well-known for its corrupt nature. Suharto utilized a system of patronage to ensure loyalty of his subordinates, leading members of the national elite and critics. In exchange for business opportunities or political positions Suharto could count on their support. With the Armed Forces (including its intelligence apparatus) and huge resources (stemming from the oil booms in the 1970s) at his disposal, he became the apex of the national political and economic system, resembling the patrimonial power of traditional rulers in the pre-colonial past.Regarding economic policy-making Suharto relied on the advice and support from a narrow group of confidants around him. This group consisted of three categories: USA-trained technocrats, economic nationalist (who supported the idea of a large role for the government in the economy) and capitalist cronies (consisting of his family members and some rich ethnic Chinese conglomerates). At times all these categories were accused of being corrupt but most emphasis went to the small circle of capitalist cronies (particularly Suharto's children) who were - much to the dislike of national businesses and society at large - the major beneficiaries of state privatization schemes and often ran large business monopolies that operated with little oversight or monitoring.One important characteristic of corruption during Suharto's New Order was that is was rather centralized and predictable. Investors and businessmen could more-or-less predict the amount of money they had to put aside for these 'extra' costs and knew which people they were expected to bribe. But there was also the tactic of including a Suharto crony in business activities in order to reduce uncertainties caused by bureaucratic red tape. This same pattern existed on a local level where governors and local army commanders enjoyed the same privileges but were always aware of repercussions from higher up if they would push it too far. With the new era of Reformasi, that started after the fall of Suharto in 1998, this situation was about to change.

Decentralization of Indonesian CorruptionThe situation changed drastically when after the fall of Suharto in 1998 an ambitious regional decentralization program was started in 2001 which foresaw the transfer of administrative autonomy away from Jakarta to the districts (not to the provinces). This new course was in line with demand of the people but had negative side effects on the distributional pattern of corruption. Bribe-taking was no longer 'coordinated' as it had been in the past but became fragmented and unclear. Decentralization meant that local governments started to produce new local regulations (often not tightly designed) which made it possible for more officials from multiple levels of the government and other agencies to mingle and request for financial extras.Realizing the urgent need to tackle corruption (as it harms investments and generally fosters the existence of continued injustice in society), a new government agency was established in 2003. This government agency, the Corruption Eradication Commission (Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi, abbreviated KPK), is envisaged to free Indonesia from corruption by investigating and prosecuting cases of corruption as well as monitoring the governance of the state (for which it received extensive powers). However, opinions regarding its achievements are divided. Critics point out that the KPK is more focused on tackling lower profile figures, although recently some high profile cases such as high-ranked police officials, judges and the party treasurer of president Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono's Democratic Party have been covered. This partial success and courage of the KPK has triggered counteracts - mostly from persons that have been prosecuted or interrogated - claiming that the KPK itself is a corrupt agency. In recent years a number of scandals have emerged in which members of the KPK were - reputedly - framed by senior police officers and arrested in order to undermine the KPK's authority.During the past two elections president Yudhoyono has profiled himself as being devoted and determined to tackle corruption in Indonesia, in particular regarding corruption within government circles. This made him very popular around the time of the elections of 2009. However, the ongoing persistence of political corruption and several high-profile graft cases within the government have caused his approval ratings to free fall after 2010. Another blow to Yudhoyono's prestige was the departure of Sri Mulyani Indrawati, Indonesia's Finance Minister from 2005 to 2010. Sri Mulyani, who enjoys a reputation of integrity (although slightly sullied by the Bank Century scandal), was tasked to reform Indonesia's corrupt tax and customs office. She had considerable success and could count on the support of many Indonesians. But her performance also created enemies. In May 2010 she left Indonesian politics to become a managing director at the World Bank Group. Widespread speculation, however, was that her resignation was due to political pressure from businesses with high political connections. In particular, the Bakrie Group was often mentioned in Indonesian media in connection herewith (Aburizal Bakrie being chairman of the Golkar party; a coalition member of Yudhoyono's government). Critics say that Yudhoyono should have supported her.Moreover, several corruption cases - involving members of Yudhoyono's party - have emerged in recent years and have seriously damaged the allure of both his Democratic Party and Yudhoyono himself (who is regarded by some as being a weak leader because of the emergence of these corruption scandals in his party).Positive Developments in Indonesia's Fight against CorruptionDespite this mostly negative overview, there are some positive signs. First of all it needs to be mentioned that there is a big urge from the Indonesian people to eradicate corruption in Indonesia and the free media provide ample room to deliver their voices on a national scale (although some media institutions - owned by politicians or businessmen - have their own agenda for doing this). But the popular urge to tackle corruption means that being anti-corrupt is actually an important vote-gainer for aspiring politicians. Being involved or mentioned in a graft case can seriously damage a career as popular support declines. A negative side effect (for the country's economy) of this public scrutiny is that government officials are currently very prudent and hesitant to disburse their government budget allocation, being afraid to become a victim in a graft scandal. This careful behaviour can be called the success of the influence of the KPK that is watching the money flow, but also causes slow government spending.Berlin based politically non-partisan Transparency International publishes an annual Corruption Perceptions Index (based on polls) which assesses "the degree to which corruption is perceived to exist among public officials and politicians" in all countries around the world. It uses a scale from one up to ten. The higher the outcome, the less (perceived) corruption there is. In their latest list (2013) Indonesia occupied the 114th place (out of a total of 177 countries). However, it needs to be stressed that there is not a 100 percent accurate method to measure corruption because of the nature of corruption (often hidden to the public). The numbers below, therefore, only show the perceived degree of corruption by the participating voters in the poll of that particular country. But because a population usually has a good sense of what is happening in the country, these numbers do indicate something interesting.

Corruption Perceptions Index 2013:

1. Denmark 9.1 - New Zealand 9.1 - Finland 8.9 4. Sweden 8.9 5. Norway 8.6 - Singapore 8.6 114. Indonesia 3.2Source: Transparency InternationalThese numbers indicate that - in accordance with the text above - there is a rather negative public view of the degree of political corruption in Indonesia. However, when we take previous results in account the index shows a more positive trend:

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Indonesia 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.3 2.6 2.8 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.2Source: Transparency International

Indonesia is actually one of the few countries in the Corruption Perceptions Index that shows a steady and marked improvement, coinciding with the Yudhoyono administration which started in 2004. But it needs to be stressed that - although representing an actual development - these numbers should be handled carefully as the methodology used in the polls changes from year to year.Regarding corruption there is still a long reform road ahead for Indonesia. Corruption hinders the country from realizing its economic potential and causes significant injustice in Indonesia's society as some people are disproportionally benefiting from a corrupt society. But credit have to be given to Indonesia's free media and the KPK as both play a vital role in the reduction of corruption.Beauty pageants are a plague on our society.From infancy on, beauty pageants teach women that all you need to succeed in life is beauty. The pressures and expectations of pageants can lead to plastic surgery and eating disorders as young girls strive to achieve perfection that doesnt exist.Both my cousin and I were pageant children, though I got out of pageantry at a young age before it took its dreadful toll on me. My cousin, on the other hand, stayed in pageants until she was in high school.Every time she lost a pageant, her self-esteem shot to an all-time low. For as pretty she was on the outside, she didnt feel like it. She told me on multiple occasions how she didnt feel good enough to win and how she wished her mother hadnt put her in the pageants when she was younger. She has struggled with both anorexia and bulimia at one point in her pageant career, and that was after the 500-calorie diet she was put on when she was 9.Nicole Hunter, a former child beauty contestant and writer of Effects of Beauty Pageants, wrote about how she doesnt know how to feel attractive without make up on.Beauty pageants teach children worth of a person is almost solely based on appearance. Beauty pageants not only have physical consequences for these women and girls, but they also objectify women in a way that is straight out of the 1950s.Pageants are everywhere in society, from small towns to movies to colleges. These pageants are open to young women who have been brought up to believe that as long as you have looks, youll succeed. These girls in pageants often have layers of make up, fake nails, fake hair and fake breasts. They are paraded in bikinis in front of audiences, asked silly questions, told to perform a highly superficial talent, and judged on it.

Though pageants, like the D-Queen pageant, try to stray away from the stereotypical beauty-first image, they still fall short. Girls either stay away from the pageant because they think they will not win or the judges still take into account how good a contestant looks in a dress. Amanda Angelotti, author of Confessions of a Beauty Pageant Drop-Out, talks about how even the beauty pageants that focus less on looks still have the ability to turn smart, talented women into life-sized dolls. If a woman wants to look good and get dressed up, shes entitled to. However, that does not mean she should be subject to judgment based on how she looks. This objectification of women based on archaic beliefs needs to stop. Women are so much more than looks; they have brains and personalities. They deserve to be treated like people and not cattle to be poked and proddedon stage.So, students of DSU, educate yourselves. Embrace a modernized sense of decency, one that doesnt objectify women. Dont be a sucker for the glamor of beauty pageants and contests designed to make women feel as if they arent good enough.When the newly crowned Miss World 2013 Megan Lynne Young arrived in the Philippines last Thursday, she was given a glorious homecoming and even summoned by the Congress to recognize her achievement. Megan wore a dazzling Filipiniana gown, her hair neatly tied in a bun, a turquoise-blue crown resting on her head. During the post World War II era, international beauty pageants received immense popularity as demonstrated by the participation of various countries worldwide. Despite the prominence, beauty pageants had not eluded criticism, mainly spawned by feminists, for relegating women into mere objects. Notably, the Miss Thailand 1973 beauty pageant was suspended when conservatives denounced the pageant as a form of selling women in an eccentric meat market. But at the onset of postmodern age, beauty pageants not only transformed contenders into icons of hegemonic imagery of beauty but also constructed new roles both for countries in the sphere of international relations, and women in the realm of public diplomacy and cultural governance. Interest to pageantries and economic freedomSince 1968, the year when the historic womens liberation protest was staged in the United States, protests against beauty pageants have become a frequent occurrence. Nonetheless, beauty contests, international and otherwise, continue to gain interest among nations.A study proposes that one primary factor which accounts for a countrys pageantry interest is its level of economic freedom. Lawson & Ross used the number of semi-finalist representations to the Miss Universe pageant as a measure for pageantry interest and success across countries while they employed economic freedom as a determinant. The results show that countries where level of economic freedom is high are more likely to be underrepresented in the pageants semi-finalist round. These findings imply two things: (1) These countries offer more opportunities for women, discouraging them in the process to join in competitions for social and economic status as well as international recognition; and (2) Feminists who are unreceptive of pageantries could consider market liberalism as a potent cultural force in reducing womens interest in pageants.

The crown and the queen

The interest of nations in joining beauty pageants may go beyond the forces of market liberalism. International beauty pageants create a venue where a State can confirm its sovereignty by vying for the coveted title along with other contenders. In this case, beauty pageants are viewed as a typology of an international society where sending a representative warrants acceptance of the country to that society and winning the title places her to a higher pedestal. Furthermore, hosting an international beauty pageant is as illustrious as winning the crown itself since it connotes that a country is prosperous, wealthy and, thus amodel world citizen. It is for this reason that China became the host of Miss World 2003 pageant, lifting in the process its 54-year ban on beauty pageants.The beauty queen is therefore akin to a diplomat who assumes the responsibility of showing to the international audience what her country has to offer or what she can contribute to the advancement of an advocacy. For instance, when Megan was chosen to perform in Dances of the Worldsegment of Miss World 2013, she became a cultural diplomat. Megan gave a piece of Filipino culture to an audience who may not have seen a performance of Singkil, a traditional dance among Muslims in the Southern Philippines. Miss Earth 2008 Karla Henry became an environmental diplomat when she committed a year of service to promote environmental projects and raise awareness to various environmental issues around the world.Regarded as a national symbol, the beauty queen can also become a passive agent if not recipient of an ideology. When Miss Thailand 1994 Areeya Chumsai enlisted herself on a nine-week basic military training course in the Thai Army, she was unaware that she created an ideal image of the Thai woman: strong and heroic but at the same time docile and submissive. During that time where militarized nationalism was highly valued, Areeya became a positive image of the militarization of Thai society. Hence, a beauty queen may not only be a source of national pride but also a reflection of her countrys national identity.Beauty and the beholderAny culture has its own conception of beauty. Albeit some cultures adapt the dominant one, some challenge it. The Miss Arab World, the equivalent of Miss Universe pageant in Southwest Asia, veers away from the framework of Western beauty contests. What brings uniqueness to Miss Arab World is its establishment of a progressive brand of beauty. The candidates neither compete for a swimsuit competition nor dress scanty clothing. Instead, they wear their homelands national costume and traditional Islamic veils.As one scholar claims, it is common to view beauty pageants as evidence of Euro-American cultural imperialism. The construction of a Western standard of beauty, let alone the hegemonic imagery of beauty, can be seen as a result of the Wests commanding gaze on which is beautiful and which is not. Thus, an apparent deviance to this predominant worldview is seen as a departure from the standard; the deviant is then rendered the opposite of the prevailing norm.Beauty is truly in the eye of the beholder but this depends much on who the beholder is, where he is from, how he makes sense of things, etc. Though the concept of beauty in beauty pageants leans toward the Western idea and emphasizes the external rather than the internal, history tells us that countries hitherto have become willing participants in this game of glory. More than just a spectacle of glamor and wit, a beauty pageant is a battle for recognition and respect among countries. Truth is, States can be much competitive than Olympic athletes and reality show contestants. It is for this reason that beauty pageants thrive and flourish.Image source: Money.plTelevision has a number of uses. First of all, it makes it possible for us to see what is happening far away. In our homes we watch on television, films or events taking place in other cities, countries and other continents. The artificial satellites have made it possible to watch events in other countries directly. Television is a very fine medium of entertainment. It brings musician and the music, singer and his singing and actor and his acting close to us. Whether it is rain or sunshine, hot or cold, we can enjoy television programmes within four walls of our homes.Television can be used to teach uneducated people. Through it we can improve knowledge of our students and educated people.we can present on TV educational programmes of different categories.We can telecast other programmes of general information. For example there can be science programmes about modern inventions. Special economic television programmes can be very useful for general public.through them market rates of different articles can be quoted and explained. Political television programmes are of great importance.they bring political leaders and their views close to people.We should present such TV programmes which entertain the people in the right way as well as improve their knowledge and character. We should avoid the presentation of programmes that may spoil the taste , character and morale of people.i am strongly agree that the Internet has caused more harm than good. This is because there have been many negative impacts caused by the Internet's facilities.The negative impacts are the large number of cases on cyberbullying which have led to deaths,game addiction and online predators.Report this ArgumentPicciniConI will defend that the internet has brought vastly more benefits than losses. Attributing these negative impacts to the internet is the same as saying that the advent of the alphabet allowed people to write insults, and therefore is a bad thing. In the same fashion, the revolution of possibilities brought by the internet introduced a wide variety of benefits which far exceeds the harm it may have caused. This very debate we are having is possible only because the internet exists to connect us, otherwise we would most likely never even acknowledge each other existences. Internet brings people all over the world together, contributing to a deepest understanding and collaboration which is accounting for enormous innovative leaps in every area of human knowledge. From curing diseases to dealing with house bugs, every area of expertise can now be accessed and improved in the comfort of your own house. And that is a wonderful thing.Report this ArgumentDebate Round No. 14he11yProI would like to bring your attention to the case of online sexual predators. Many of us make use of the Internet's facilities to visit websites such as Facebook and Twitter. These websites have allowed us to communicate and get to know people who we are not know of. But have we ever considered if these websites on the Internet are reliable enough to be trusted. For example, many of us have thought that pictures being posted on facebook can be deleted permanently. however,no one knows that albeit though the pictures have been deleted on facebook but the pictures on another websites which supports facebook are not deleted. Can we still trust the internet with our personal information and chat with strangers online? According to a newspaper article,"In a recent survey of young Internet users aged 10 to 17, one in five reported they had received unwanted sexual solicitations online, ranging from sexually suggestive comments to strangers asking them to meet them in the real world for sex." The internet is supposed to be safe for the users. Putting ourselves in the victims' shoes,they have to through medical care by psychologists because the online predators have caused a long-term scars in both their hearts and brains which known as trauma. The positive impacts of the internet are short-term. Everyone could be a victim! so,is the internet still safe and does good for us? Therefore, i am strongly agree that the internet does more harm than good.ConInternet is not 100% safe. No one ever said that it was. Neither is fire. But people everywhere still use it for cooking, to generate electricity, to heat themselves, etc. Expecting anything, anything at all, to be always 100% safe is naivety, if not foolishness.But still, PRO talks about the lives that are scarred because of the internet. But what about the lives that are saved? Reference one [1] lists 10 stunning examples of people whose lives were saved by the internet, from a man who used his smartphone to help himself during an earthquake, to a woman whose webcam viewers rescued her after a horse attack.This kind of benefit is easily observable in natural disasters. More than 2.5 billion dollars were donated to Haiti to aid victims of the 2010 earthquake [2]. Countless lives were saved. This is observable in many other disasters, like the 2004 tsunami and 2005 Katrina hurricane. And this is observable even on a daily basis. Non-profit organizations get a lot of their money from online donations. An estimated 22 billion dollars were donated in 2010, only in the US[3]. And this figure is growing fast.Also, there are support groups online which are way more accessible than their offline counterparts. Particularly for special cases of problems, be it for its rarity or because the afflicted person is ashamed of the condition, online support groups can offer the aid that community would never be able to.I believe these argument shall suffice for showing that the internet can be a fountain of good deeds. I still believe the main benefit of the internet is the universal availability of knowledge, but as PRO insisted on arguing over its harm on people in need, I believe the arguments I showed in this round have better deconstructed this false line of thought.4he11yProIt is true that the Internet has not completely brought harm to the society. It is true that the Internet has improved the lives of others and even saved people from disaster. but, we can not just overlook the harm and trust the Internet completely.Con talked about the good that the online support groups can offer the aid that community would never be able too. but have we ever thought if the websites are actually reliable? I assume that the con refers online support groups as the place where people can share their experiences, feelings and wisdom.A comfort zone for people dealing with the same health challenges. But can we really trust those websites completely and make use of the information there?the Internet is freedom of information[1]. we can publish whatever we want. we create a group and ask for donations because we make others think that we are reliable,trustable but what others do not know is that we have just published a whole chunk of unreliable facts to aid people. and we just receive the donations from them happily and put inside our pockets. example of unreliable health website can be found here[2]. i'm saying this because people do not know how the Internet has turned from good to bad. the Internet has unreliable websites. students learn and do research through the internet. thanks to the internet many things can be done easily. but not all the things online can be accepted. humans are ignorant. we may not know if the website's we are reading now is reliable.other than unreliable websites,there have also been many cases of online addiction. we often find games as a way to escape from reality. we find games as fun and thrill. as we rise to a new level,the more tempted we are to continue discover the games till it ends. but we may have never thought that game addiction could actually cause death. according to a newspaper article,a korean high school student was found dead in front of the computer for playing a popular games without sleeping and balance diet [3] and [4]for more same cases. Therefore,i believe that internet has brought more harm than good.ConAs I said in the second round, internet is not 100% safe. When human kind discovered fire, we learned how to handle it, and created mechanisms to contain its dangers (firefighters, hydrants, fire extinguishers). Same with cars, people are taught how to handle them, and we have mechanisms to avoid their risks (seat belts, air-bags, traffic laws).The same thing is happening with the internet. It seems scarier, because transformations are happening too fast, and our culture is not keeping up with it. But laws and habits are, slowly, changing, and will eventually catch up. We will get used to explain to our children how to verify the credibility of information found online, and why they shouldn't trust everybody in the internet, the same way our parents told us not to get in a car with strangers or take drinks from someone we don't know.In regard of the addiction argument, addictions have always existed, and will most likely continue to exist for a long, long time. Anything that is exciting or pleasurable can develop into an addiction, not only substances[1]. Everybody has heard of someone with a gambling problem, or someone who is an workaholic, but there are also people addicted to sex[2], porn[3], buying[4], eating[5], exercising[6], almost every behavior can become addictive. Any of this activities can be healthily enjoyed by most people, but some will inevitably get addicted to them. This does not mean that the behavior by itself is inherently harmful.In conclusion, I believe the internet have brought enormous benefits for the mankind, and will continue to bring progressively more as we get adapted to this new reality. I would like to thank PRO for the healthy debate we had, and thank the voters who took the time to read it all.Does using the Internet affect children's development? Do children become socially isolated or connected when they use the Internet? Do they become depressed or elated? Does school performance suffer or improve? A wealth of opinion, anecdotal evidence and media hype has attempted to answer these questions. At one extreme are the Internet enthusiasts who view Internet use as the panacea for all that plagues society, including inadequacies in the educational system. At the other extreme are the Internet alarmists who view Internet use as undermining the very fabric of society, including the healthy development of its children. Most people fall somewhere between these extremes. Most are waiting for research to answer these questions (NSF Report, 2001). HomeNetToo is a longitudinal field study designed to examine the antecedents and consequences of home Internet use in low-income families. Funded by an Information Technology Research grant from the National Science Foundation, the project began in the fall of 2000, when 90 families were recruited to participate in the 18-month study. Families agreed to have their Internet use automatically and continuously recorded, to complete surveys at multiple points during the project, and to participate in home visits during which basic instruction on how to use the Internet was provided. In exchange, each family received a new home computer, Internet access and in-home technical support.Participants in the HomeNetToo project were 117 adults and 140 children residing in a low-income, medium-sized urban community in the mid-western United States. Adults were primarily African American (67%), female (80%), never married (42%) and earning less than $15,000 per year (49%). Most of the children were African American (83%), male (58%), and living in single-parent households (75%). Average age of child participants was 13 years old. This report focuses on the children in the project - how using the Internet influenced their social, psychological and academic outcomes, and the implications of these findings for future research and public policy regarding the digital divide (Jackson, in press). How frequently do children use the Internet? Numerous surveys have attempted to measure how frequently children use the Internet at home. Estimates vary from as high as several hours a day to as low as 3 hours a week, depending on how Internet use is measured (e.g., self-report, automatically recorded), age of children sampled, and the year data were collected (Kraut, Scherlis, Mukhopadhyay, Manning & Kiesler, 1996; Pew Internet and American Life Project, 2002; UCLA Internet Report, 2000, 2001, 2003). Despite high variability in empirical estimates, public perception is that children spend a great deal of time online (Tapscott, 1998). In the HomeNetToo project we recorded multiple measures of Internet use to permit a more fine-grained analysis of how children are spending their time online. Our findings indicated that HomeNetToo children spent about 30 minutes per day online, logging in only once, and visiting about ten unique domains. However, much to our initial surprise, use of the Internet for communication was rare. HomeNetToo children sent less than 1 e-mail a week. Medians for all communication activities (e.g., instant messaging) were zero. Indeed by the end of the project only 16% of the children were using e-mail, 25% were instant messaging and 16% were participating in chat activities (Jackson, von Eye, Biocca, Barbatsis, Yong, & Fitzgerald, 2003a). Why did HomeNetToo children make so little use of the Internet's communication tools, a finding we also observed in HomeNetToo adults (Jackson, von Eye, Barbatsis, Biocca, Fitzgerald, & Zhao, in press)? In hindsight, the answer is so obvious as to be easily overlooked. They simply had no one to communicate with! HomeNetToo children were poor. It is likely that their friends and extended family members were poor. Poor people do not typically have home Internet access (e.g., US Department of Commerce, 2000, 2002)Does Internet use affect children's social outcomes? Few studies and inconsistent findings render uncertain whether using the Internet has any influence on children's social outcomes. On the one hand, time spent online is time not spent elsewhere, including participating in social activities and communicating with family and friends. On the other hand, the Internet facilitates communication with geographically distant family and friends, and makes it easier to communicate frequently with those nearby. Two independent reviews of this research (Becker, 2000; Subrahmanyam, Kraut, Greenfield & Gross, 2000) have concluded that there are few documented social effects, either positive or negative (Kraut, Patterson, Lundmark, Kiesler, Mukopadhyay, & Scherlis, 1998; Kraut, Kiesler, Boneva, Cummings, Helgeson, & Crawford, 2002).

In the HomeNetToo project we examined two types of social outcomes that may be influenced by children's Internet use: number of close friends and changes in the amount of time spent with family, friends and activities (e.g., extra-curricular school activities, sleeping). On average, children reported having seven close friends. This number remained the same over time and was uninfluenced by Internet use. How children allocated their time did change over time but these changes were unrelated to Internet use. . Findings discussed earlier may explain why Internet use had no social impact. HomeNetToo children, like the adults in the project, made little use of the Internet's communication tools (e.g., e-mail). The Internet's social impact may depend on using these tools to build new relationships and/or strengthen existing ones. Social impact may also depend on personal and situational factors, some of which have been examined in previous research with adults (e.g., personality traits; Jackson, von Eye, Biocca, Barbatsis, Fitzgerald, & Zhao, 2003b; Kraut et al., 2002) and others of which have yet to be identified. Alternatively, it may be that Internet use has no social impact. Like media that have preceded it (e.g., books), the Internet may be seamlessly integrated into people's ongoing lives. Does Internet use affect children's psychological outcomes? As was the case for social outcomes, few studies have examined the relationship between children's Internet use and psychological outcomes. In fact we could locate only two studies that directly addressed this relationship. One found adverse psychological effects of Internet use for teens (i.e., greater loneliness and depression with greater Internet use; Kraut et al., 1998) but a follow-up study suggested that these effects disappeared with Internet experience (Kraut et al., 2002). The only available review of this research concluded that there is no evidence that computer use is directly related to any psychological outcomes (Shields & Behrman, 2000). In the HomeNetToo project we focused on two types of psychological outcomes: general affect and feelings of self-worth. More time online was associated with less negative affect, but only during the first three months when home Internet access was still a novelty. More logins were associated with more negative affect throughout the trial, possibly because they indicate interruptions in Internet activities. Feelings of self-worth began high and remained high. Using the Internet had no effect on these feelings. Does Internet use affect children's academic outcomes? A considerable body of research has examined the effects of computer use on academic outcomes. However, reviews of this literature typically conclude that the results are inconclusive (e.g., NSF Report, 2001; Roschelle, Pea, Hoadley, Gordon, & Means, 2000; Subrahmanyam et al., 2000). Although benefits of computer use have been observed, they typically depend on a variety of factors (e.g., subject matter). The only cognitive outcome for which benefits have been consistently observed is visual-spatial skills. Computer gaming contributes to visual-spatial skills, at least when these skills are assessed immediately following the computer activity (Subrahmanyam, Greenfield, Kraut, & Gross, 2001). in the HomeNetToo project we obtained children's grade point averages (GPAs) and scores on standardized tests of reading and math. We then examined whether Internet use during the preceding time period predicted these academic outcomes. It did. Children who used the Internet more showed greater gains in GPA and reading test scores -- but not math test scores -- than did children who used it less (Jackson, von Eye, Biocca, Barbatsis, Zhao, & Fitzgerald, 2003a). Latent linear growth curve analysis supported the conclusion that Internet use leads to improvements in academic performance. There are important caveats in interpreting these findings. First, HomeNetToo children were performing below average at the start of the project. Mean GPA was about 2.0, and mean percentile ranks on standardized tests of reading and math were about 30%. Whether similar benefits of Internet use will obtain for children performing at or above average is a question for future research. Second, the gains we observed, though statistically significant, were modest in magnitude. Mean GPAs and standardized test scores were still below average at the end of the project. However, even modest gains are encouraging, particularly in light of the fact that HomeNetToo children were not required to use the Internet in order for their families to participate in the project. Why might using the Internet lead to improvements in GPAs and reading test scores? One explanation lies in how HomeNetToo children used the Internet. Recall that Internet use was primarily Web use, not e-mail use or use of other communication tools. The Web is primarily text. Thus, more time on the Web means more time spent reading, which may explain the increase in GPAs, which depend heavily on reading skills, and in standardized tests scores in reading. Summary Overall, findings from the HomeNetToo project indicate that home Internet use has no adverse effects on children's social or psychological outcomes, and has positive effects on their academic outcomes. More research is needed to examine the generalizibility of these findings, to identify mediating mechanisms by which Internet use influences academic outcomes, and to develop and evaluate interventions designed to maximize the benefits of Internet use for children. The public policy implications of our findings are clear. Children who may stand to benefit most from home Internet access are the very children least likely to have it. The vision of the Internet as the technology that levels the playing field in education will remain just that - a vision, unless visionary leaders launch a concerted effort to make the Internet available to all (Jackson, Barbatsis, von Eye, Biocca, Fitzgerald, & Zhao, 2003c).