Skip to main content

Universal Design and Child Online Protection

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Designing for Inclusion (CWUAAT 2020)

Included in the following conference series:

  • 1089 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter explores the landscape of universal design and child online protection. The United Nations (UN) conceptualises child online protection as efforts to create a safe and empowering online experience for children through legal measures, technical and procedural measures, organisational structures, capacity building, and international cooperation. This chapter uses universal design as a point of departure for examining child online protection using a review of key literature and a critical analysis of select policy documents from the UN. This chapter approaches child online protection from a universal design perspective so that policymakers, information and communication technology (ICT) developers, advocates, and researchers can reframe their efforts. A universal design perspective suggests that ICT service providers must ensure that children have equal access to and use of ICT. This includes identifying and removing barriers that children experience accessing and using ICT due to, for example, their age or disability. Age-related barriers include the risks and vulnerabilities that children experience online such as exposure to harmful or dangerous content. Disability-related barriers could include, for example, the design of technical and procedural measures, such as content rating systems, that are inaccessible or unusable for children with physical, sensory, cognitive, or psychosocial disabilities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Alhaboby ZA, al-Khateeb HM, Barnes J, Short E (2016) The language is disgusting and they refer to my disability: the cyberharassment of disabled people. Disabil Soc 31(8):1138–1143

    Google Scholar 

  • Banks J (2010) Regulating hate speech online. Int Rev Law Comput Technol 24(3):233–239

    Google Scholar 

  • Blanck P (2015) eQuality: web accessibility by people with cognitive disabilities. J Inf 3(2):75–91

    Google Scholar 

  • Bleich E (2011) The rise of hate speech and hate crime laws in liberal democracies. J Ethn Migr Stud 37(6):917–934

    Google Scholar 

  • Brewer J (2004) Web accessibility highlights and trends. In: Proceedings of the 2004 international cross-disciplinary workshop on web accessibility (W4A), New York, NY, US, 17–22 May 2004

    Google Scholar 

  • Burch L (2018) You are a parasite on the productive classes: online disablist hate speech in austere times. Disabil Soc 33(3):392–415

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Burnap P, Williams ML (2015) Cyber hate speech on Twitter: an application of machine classification and statistical modeling for policy and decision making. Policy Internet 7(2):223–242

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnap P, Williams ML (2016) Us and them: identifying cyber hate on Twitter across multiple protected characteristics. EPJ Data Sci 5(1):11

    Google Scholar 

  • Del Vigna F, Cimino A, Dell’Orletta F, Petrocchi M, Tesconi M (2017) Hate me, hate me not: hate speech detection on facebook. In: Paper presented at the proceedings of the first Italian conference on cybersecurity (ITASEC 2017), Venice, Italy, 17–20 January 2017

    Google Scholar 

  • Dell’Orletta F, Venturi G, Cimino A, Montemagni S (2014) T2k2: a system for automatically extracting and organizing knowledge from texts. In: Proceedings of the 9th international conference on language resources and evaluation (LREC 2014), Reykjavik, Iceland, 26–31 May 2014

    Google Scholar 

  • Emerson E (2014) Disability, hate crime and violence. Disabil Soc 29(3):495–496

    Google Scholar 

  • Giannoumis GA, Stein M (2019) Conceptualizing universal design for the information society through a universal human rights lens. Int Hum Rights Law Rev 8(1):38–66

    Google Scholar 

  • Hershkowitz I, Lamb ME, Horowitz D (2007) Victimization of children with disabilities. Am J Orthopsychiatry 77(4):629–635

    Google Scholar 

  • ITU (2016) Guidelines. www.itu.int/en/cop/Pages/guidelines.aspx. Accessed 16 Jan 2020

  • ITU (2018) Presentations from the ITU Regional Workshop for Europe and CIS on Cybersecurity and Child Online Protection. www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Regional-Presence/CIS/Pages/EVENTS/2018/04_Odessa/04_Odessa_Presentations.aspx. Accessed 16 Jan 2020

  • ITU (2019) About the child online protection initiative. www.itu.int/en/cop/Pages/about_cop.aspx. Accessed 16 Jan 2020

  • ITU and UNICEF (2015) Guidelines for industry on child online protection. The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) and UNICE. www.unicef.org/csr/files/COP_Guidelines_English.pdf. Accessed 16 Jan 2020

  • Kvam MH (2000) Is sexual abuse of children with disabilities disclosed? A retrospective analysis of child disability and the likelihood of sexual abuse among those attending Norwegian hospitals. Child Abuse Negl 24(8):1073–1084

    Google Scholar 

  • Lazar J, Goldstein DF, Taylor A (2015) Ensuring digital accessibility through process and policy. Morgan Kaufmann/Elsevier Publishers, Waltham

    Google Scholar 

  • Lid IM (2013) Developing the theoretical content in universal design. Scand J Disabil Res 15(3):203–215

    Google Scholar 

  • Olsen T, Vedeler J, Eriksen J, ElvegÃ¥rd K (2016) Hatytringer. Resultater fra en studie av funksjonshemmedes erfaringer. Nordlandsforskning 6/16, Bodø, Norway

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostroff E (2011) Universal design: an evolving paradigm. In: Smith KH, Preiser WFE (eds) Universal design handbook. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrigo B (2020) Facebook says it’s removing more hate speech than ever before. But there’s a catch. time.com/5739688/facebook-hate-speech-languages/. Accessed 15 Jan 2020

  • Quarmby K (2012) Media reporting and disability hate crime. In: Roulstone A, Mason-Bish H (eds) Disability, hate crime and violence. Routledge, Abingdon

    Google Scholar 

  • Quarmby K (2015) Disability hate crime motivation survey–results. katharinequarmby.wordpress.com/. Accessed 16 Jan 2020

  • Shelton MW (1993) Hateful help – a practical look at the issue of hate speech. In: Paper presented at the annual meeting of the speech communication association, Miami, FL, US. files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED367041.pdf. Accessed 16 Jan 2020

  • Skjerve R, Giannoumis GA, Naseem S (2016) An intersectional perspective on web accessibility. In: Langdon PM et al (eds) Designing around people. Springer, Cham

    Google Scholar 

  • Soral W, Bilewicz M, Winiewski M (2018) Exposure to hate speech increases prejudice through desensitization. Aggressive Behav 44(2):136–146

    Google Scholar 

  • Story MF (2011) The principles of universal design. In: Smith KH, Preiser WFE (eds) Universal design handbook. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • UN (1988) The International Bill of Human Rights: Universal Declaration of Human Rights: International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Optional Protocol. United Nations, New York, NY, US

    Google Scholar 

  • UN (2006) Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and Optional Protocol (97892113026159211302617). https://www.un.org/development/desa/disabilities/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities.html. Accessed 16 Jan 2020

  • UN (2019) United Nations disability inclusion strategy. www.un.org/en/events/disabilitiesday/assets/pdf/UN-Disability-Inclusion-Strategy.pdf. Accessed 16 Jan 2020

  • UNICEF (2011) Child safety online. Global challenges and strategies. Unisef Innocenti Research Centre. www.unicef-irc.org/publications/pdf/ict_eng.pdf. Accessed 16 Jan 2020

  • Vanderheiden G (1995) Design of HTML (mosaic) pages to increase their accessibility to users with disabilities strategies for today and tomorrow version 1.0. Trace R& D Center, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, US. https://perma.cc/7ME-QUNC. Accessed 16 Jan 2020

  • Warner W, Hirschberg J (2012) Detecting hate speech on the world wide web. In: Proceedings of the 2nd workshop on language in social media, Montréal, Canada, 7 June 2012

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells M, Mitchell KJ (2014) Patterns of internet use and risk of online victimization for youth with and without disabilities. J Spec Educ 48(3):204–213

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to G. A. Giannoumis .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Giannoumis, G.A., Paupini, C. (2020). Universal Design and Child Online Protection. In: Langdon, P., Lazar, J., Heylighen, A., Dong, H. (eds) Designing for Inclusion. CWUAAT 2020. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43865-4_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43865-4_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-43864-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-43865-4

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics