Public Awareness Research
Prepared for the Public Safety Canada
Supplier name: Ipsos Public Affairs
Contract number: D-160-201019/001/CY
Contract value: $130,429.18 – phase 2/2
Award delivery: February 2020
Delivery date: March 2020
Registration Number: POR 018-19
Catalogue Number: PS4-268/2020E-PDF
International Standard Book Number (ISBN): 978-0-660-35463-7
Related publications:
© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, as represented by the Minister of Public Works and Government Services, 2017
I hereby certify as Senior Officer of Ipsos that the deliverables fully comply with the Government of Canada political neutrality requirements outlined in the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada and Procedures for Planning and Contracting Public Opinion Research. Specifically, the deliverables do not include information on electoral voting intentions, political party preferences, standings with the electorate or ratings of the performance of a political party or its leaders.
Mike Colledge
President
Ipsos Public Affairs
Child sexual exploitation (CSE) online is one of the most pressing and severe public safety issues in Canada, and internationally. This crime is on the rise and continues to increase significantly because of new technological advances. These technological advances—combined with low cost and anonymity—are contributing factors to this growing problem, allowing child sex offenders to easily recruit (luring and grooming) and coerce (sextortion) children.
There is an urgent need to focus on effective prevention and awareness of CSE online, given the alarming rate at which this crime is growing, and a need for improved data collection, increased research efforts, and enhanced information exchange at the national level, to better understand the underpinnings and contributing factors surrounding online CSE.
PSC has led the National Strategy for the Protection of Children from Sexual Exploitation on the Internet since 2004. The National Strategy was launched to provide a focal point for federal efforts to combat this crime. The focus was put on law enforcement capacity, research, prevention and education activities, as well as support for Cybertip.ca, Canada’s national tip line for reporting online CSE and abuse of children. Since the National Strategy’s renewal in 2009, the technological landscape has changed considerably and because of this, the National Strategy has been enhanced to ensure it reflects today’s reality.
Qualitative research was required to inform the development of a social marketing campaign to support the National Strategy. Specifically, the research explored:
Ten focus groups were conducted across Canada between March 5th and 12th, 2020. Given that parenting experience varies by the age of their children, half of the focus groups were conducted with parents of children aged 13 years old or younger and the other half of the focus groups were conducted with parents of children aged 14 to 17 years old. The table below shows a breakdown of the number of participants that took part in the study by key variable.
| Variable | Number of participants |
|---|---|
| Location | |
| Charlottetown, PEI | 16 |
| Quebec City, QC | 11 |
| Mississauga, ON | 13 |
| Lethbridge, AB | 12 |
| Vancouver, BC | 12 |
| Age of child | |
| 13 years old or younger | 31 |
| 14 – 17 years old | 33 |
| Age of parent | |
| 34 years and younger | 8 |
| 35-44 years old | 32 |
| 45-54 years old | 22 |
| 55 years old or older | 2 |
| Household income | |
| $39,999 or less | 9 |
| Between $40,000 and $59,999 | 15 |
| Between $60,00 and $79,999 | 17 |
| $80,000 or more | 23 |
| Language | |
| English-speakers | 53 |
| French-speakers | 11 |
Focus groups were held in the evenings at focus group facilities or hotels. Groups lasted approximately 2 hours and participants were offered $125 in exchange for their time. A copy of the recruitment screener and discussion guide have been appended for reference.
The following chapters present the key themes- notably the findings were consistent across the different demographic groups. The few notable sub-group differences have been called out where relevant.
The findings presented in this report are qualitative in nature. The value of qualitative research is that it allows for the in-depth exploration of factors that shape public attitudes and behaviours on certain issues. When interpreting the findings, it should be borne in mind that at no point is the intention to produce results that are statistically representative of the population at large. A separate quantitative survey was conducted and the report from that survey should be consulted for a representative picture of attitudes and perceptions on the topic among parents and the broader Canadian public.
Quotes have been used throughout the report to illustrate key points in the voice of parents; where quotes have been pulled from the French language groups these have been presented in French.
Social media sites Instagram and TikTok, along with the closed messaging sites Snapchat and YouTube, were the main platforms mentioned by parents of children in both age groups in relation to challenges they faced with their children and technology. Gaming sites – Roblox, Fortnite and Minecraft specifically – also tended to come up in the groups with parents of children aged 13 or younger. Meanwhile, there were a couple of mentions of porn sites in the discussions with parents of children aged 14 to 17.
It was evident that parents are grappling with the fact that their children are very tech savvy from a very young age, yet at the same time they are naïve, making them susceptible to being taken advantage of. There was a high degree of consistency across both ‘age of child’ groupings of parents, and in urban and less urban communities on the main concerns and perceived impact on their children. These are listed in the figure overleaf.
I just have to stay on top of it, really stay on top of it because even our youngest who is four, she’s in pre-school she can't read but she already knows her way around YouTube. [Parent of 13-year-old or younger, Lethbridge]
Concerns around who their children are interacting with online – whether via social media or gaming sites – came up in all groups, though the prospect of their children falling prey to an online sex predator and grooming was highlighted less frequently. This suggests that there is an opportunity to draw a stronger and more explicit link for online child sexual exploitation to be more top of mind among parents. Sexualised behaviours tended to come up as a concern in relation to young girls and older teenage boys, suggesting that there is an opportunity raise awareness of potentially risky behaviours such as sexting and grooming.
| CONCERN | PERCEIVED IMPACT |
|---|---|
| Amount of time spent online |
|
| Social media content and habits |
|
| Exposure to adult content |
|
| Interactions with strangers |
|
I think for my younger son, it’s very hard. I mean he’s grown up with a device, and we try to limit it to, I don’t know, maybe half an hour when they get home from school. Either like when they get home from school or before bed. But it’s like an addiction, it’s hard to get them to shut off. [Parent of 13-year-old or younger, Mississauga]
My eight-year-old, from watching YouTube, when she is in public, she dances like she’s a stripper and I can't get her to stop. [Parent of 13-year-old or younger, Charlottetown]
Conversations I have seen in early stages of […] [the] internet or social media was, where one guy was trying to get so much information, but they do it so subtly […]. They talk about, “What are you into?” [then the child says] “I’m going to basketball.” [the predator replies] “What school do you go to? Do you play for the school?” And then they get all this information. [The kids] are so naïve, they don’t even realize [the predators are] piling up a database on them. Eventually they’ll know your address, eventually they’ll know your school. They watch you. “What do you look like? Send me a picture.” And then, this predator [goes] to the school, looks for you based on the picture that they have in their hand, and tracks you down. And I had to explain that, “You’re too open to people online. Just giving so much information, hold the brakes.” [Parent of 14 to 17-year-old, Mississauga]
What scares me is […] stories of sexual predators […] people manipulating children who are still developing and learning, letting them think that some behaviours are appropriate, […] doing something inappropriate sexually or acting out in a certain behaviour. […] they're going to try and groom your child […]. [Parent of 13-year-old or younger, Lethbridge]
We never know what could happen. I don’t know what she’s up to online because I’m not very good with technology. I do that there are some things that worry me such as I don’t know who she is talking to online. [Parent of 14 to 17-year-old, Quebec City]
Concerns led to a host of rules and measures taken by parents to attempt to limit, or at least monitor, what their children are doing online. It was evident that control was easier when children are younger and parents can have complete lock-downs with no personal devices, no social media accounts, and strict parental control settings. There was a clear sense of confidence among parents of children in the younger age brackets that the risk of harm from online is low.
Control and monitoring becomes harder as children become increasingly digitally curious and connected; it was acknowledged that this can happen at different speeds for different children spurred on by what their peers have access to and what other caregivers in their lives deem as acceptable. On the latter point, several parents gave examples of other parents or other members in their extended family allowing for greater adoption of digital than they would have personally preferred. YouTube was a platform that some parents found challenging to set parental controls on.
He’s starting to get to that age where if I don’t start letting him listen to other content he feels as though he’s behind his friends. […] I'm trying to tell him that there's lots of other stuff out there that does not [… contain] swear [words]. [Parent of 13-year-old or younger, Lethbridge]
As children grow older, parents have to strike the delicate balance of respecting their teens privacy while monitoring their online activities. This can be a point of tension in their discussions with their tweens and teens. Measures that parents have taken include: no passwords or at least sharing of passwords, no headsets when playing video games, no devices in bedrooms, following their children on their social media accounts, checking phones and having ‘what if’ conversations.
Despite these measures, parents were fully conscious of the fact that it is simply unrealistic to monitor everything their children do online – it is impossible to control what is happening when children are at their friends’ houses, or even in their own home at times as they cannot sit over their children’s shoulders every time they are online. Parents know their children are more tech savvy than parents themselves, so keeping up with all the trends is difficult in and of itself. Some of the technological platforms, like Snapchat, that delete posts make monitoring harder. Parents are also aware that their children curate certain social media accounts for parents and have other accounts they use to interact with their peers. Moreover, parents were generally of the mindset that if children want something very badly, they will find a way to get it. They reflect on their own experiences of being children.
With my kids, I try to make sure they’re in the living room, and the area where I’m cooking. But I find that sometimes when I’m in the kitchen preoccupied or busy with something, like working out, they will end up in their room, or […] before sleeping time, they’ll just seem to find themselves on the bed going through their phone. And then, […] when I realize they’re on their phones, then I’ll stop it. But they’ll find ways to sneak it in there. [Parent of 14 to 17-year-old, Mississauga]
[It is] not Tik Tok or Snapchat it's a different one and I know that it has green lettering and I'm not familiar with it but it's a platform that he communicates with his friends [on] but I don't know how many other people have access to [it], [or] what they talk about. So I mean, I look in on it and I check on him but is he deleting something before I see it? How much of a history am I really getting? Is it accurate? And I need to know that he’s […], making good choices, that he’s safe so, you try and monitor it but when they're smart [it’s difficult]. [Parent of 13-year-old or younger, Lethbridge]
Last week, my daughter and I were in a discussion about that same subject we’re discussing here. I said, “How do you feel about Mom and Dad taking a peek at your phone once in a while?” And she was just like, “Well, that’s a privacy thing, Dad.” And I was like, “Why? What if […] some guy is trying to talk to you, he’s 40 years old, you're 17, and he’s pretending to be a 16-year-old, or an 18-year-old? How would you be able to detect? What if I question you, take a look at the text messaging? With my experience, I know the pattern.” So, she’s trying to go playing devil's advocate with me, trying to see how she can worm her way out of it. It’s the privacy thing. [Parent of 14 to 17-year-old, Mississauga]
I was very intrigued to learn that most kids have two of any social media account. They have the one that they allow their parents and, you know, larger community groups like coaches, church community to connect to. Then they have their ones, which is just their [peers], and that’s where, you know, I saw a video of my kid doing a bong hit in the forest at lunch one day. [Parent of 14 to 17-year-old, Vancouver]
Furthermore, instances where a small number of parents have uncovered risky online sexual behaviours have been after the fact and by accident, thereby validating the view that it is impossible to control digital behaviours:
My daughter, she lives with her father […] and when she came home she had a brand new iPad and I let her use it. I mean I figured he was monitoring what she was doing […] she had a lock on it, no big deal, she’s 11 years old, so I didn't think she was hiding anything, I didn't know what she was doing. And my younger daughter wanted to use it one day, she was home sick from school so I put the password in and the Snapchat came up. She was talking to men in their 40s. They were sending her nude photos. […] she gave them the school she went to, she gave them our address. It took me a few days before I even said anything to her. I just kind of took away her iPad and waited for her to ask for it. I didn't know what else to do. And then I pulled her iPad out and when she asked why, I said I think you know why. She was really embarrassed more than anything and then she was really angry but with me. She still holds a grudge for that. [Parent of 13-year-old or younger, Charlottetown]
My son signed into his Snapchat account on my wife’s phone and didn’t clear the passcode. So for like 18 months, we’ve been able to login to his account and see what’s going on. [Parent of 14 to 17-year-old, Vancouver]
As children reach their teens and late teens, parents resort to having conversations and building trusted relationships so that their children will turn to them should anything go awry.
It’s more about trust, you know, so I think it’s really up to us as parents to build that trust with kids. I know that I cannot always know what they’re doing, but to me it’s good to build a relationship so they trust me enough to share: […] if you’re in trouble I’m not going to judge you, I’m here to help you and to listen. [Parent of 14 to 17-year-old, Vancouver]
But it's actually happened when they were like whoa, whoa, Dad come here quick. And so even though they […] kind of like brush […the conversations] off, they actually listened and they know. So it has worked. [Parent of 13-year-old or younger, Lethbridge]
As noted above, online child sexual exploitation specifically was raised by a small number of participants as a concern in relation to their child and their online behaviours. When the topic was prompted, there was higher levels of familiarity with the terms ‘online child sexual exploitation’ and ‘online predators’, whereas ‘grooming’ and ‘sextortion’ were not terms that all had come across before.
For grooming, I put taking care of yourself. [Parent of 13-year-old or younger, Lethbridge]
Personal hygiene? Like what do you mean by that? [Parent of 13-year-old or younger, Mississauga]
Top-of-mind associations with ‘online child sexual exploitation’ and ‘online predators’ tended to include “child pornography”, “child sex trafficking” and elicited feelings of “disgust”, discomfort and “sickening”. On one level, there was a general belief that this is an issue that can affect anyone and everyone, including their own children, and something that appears to be in the news a lot – the case of Amanda Todd was brought up in the Vancouver and Lethbridge groups. Compounding this concern was the realisation of some parents how naïve their children can be, even those that are older, when parents try to ‘test’ them on what they would do in different situations.
And I just tested her […] over the past […several] weeks, and I realized, wow, this kid is really naïve. […] I got more on them, and I’m like, “No, you guys can’t be this naïve. […] You have to learn how to navigate through this world.” [Parent of 14 to 17-year-old, Mississauga]
As the discussions ensued however, the level of concern about the issue tended to vary. This was evident when some participants tended to lapse into comments about concerns about their children being caught up in financial scams and cyberbullying. In other cases, some parents admitted outright to not seeing online child sexual exploitation as a pressing issue for their child. For a subset of these parents, taking part in this research was a somewhat of a ‘wake-up’ call for them.
The research found directionally a number of factors that may influence perceived risk of online child sexual exploitation in relation to their own children:
Parents of boys – While a couple of participants shared instances of their older teenage boys being involved in sexting, parents of boys, especially younger boys, either admitted to feeling less concerned about online child sexual exploitation in relation to their own children or expressed relief that they did not have girls.
Parents of children that are younger or older – Parents of children aged 10 or younger felt less concerned as their children had very limited access to the internet for now. It is an issue that will become relevant with increased access to the internet and conversations on the topic will likely depend on when their children reach a certain level of maturity for this to happen. Some parents with children aged 16 to 17 also appeared to be less concerned and their reasoning was that their children are more mature and they trust them to be able to handle situations accordingly. The pre-teen phase was therefore, the age group when parents had a more heightened concern.
Girls are softer, so they might get lured into somebody saying something nice to them. Guys don’t really care. They’re like, “Get off my back. Why are you talking to me? Why are you trying to be nice to me?” [Parent of 14 to 17-year-old, Mississauga]
[…] I think that differs for each child. Each child develops differently at different speeds. Our oldest is aware of some of the dangers not the terms but some of the dangers out there and it goes down by [how] young they are, like our four year-old who's turning five next month, she naïve. At that age, you can't teach them and you don’t want to either because they're just too young. There is a certain age where you want them to be kids, right? [Parent of 13-year-old or younger, Lethbridge]
It was a concern in the early ages, like 13 to about 15 for my daughter. But now, I’m feeling a little bit more comfortable knowing what stage she’s at in life. I think her mind is a little bit more solidified to take charge and to know what’s right. She would know if there was something that didn’t feel right. She would definitely shut it down or let me know. She’s in high school, and she’s got a good head on her shoulder[s]. [Parent of 14 to 17-year-old, Mississauga]
There’s a lot of damage they can do online […] to somebody. [a few agree] Like sexploitation, like if they could get… like not maybe so much, I don’t know, maybe not when they’re eight, but when they get a little bit older, pre-teenage, you know, like “send me a picture of yourself”, you know what I mean? Like you don’t know what could happen with that necessarily. [Parent of 13-year-old or younger, Mississauga]
Participants were shown four groupings of messages. In the table below they are shown and ranked by resonance.
The research found that from an awareness raising and call-to-action perspective, the messages with statistics on prevalence resonated the most. These messages offer simple, factual and hard-hitting information and were aligned with what parents expect. There was unanimous agreement that the Government of Canada had license to use a gut punch type approach to create urgency and follow-up action on the part of parents. The remainder of the message groupings were unified in terms of none were off-putting or objectionable, and all were equally lacking in prompting a sense of urgency on the issue on a personal level. It was indeed suggested that the statistics could be used as a hook-in and paired with any of the remaining messages.
INCREASED LEVEL OF RESONANCE
Figure 3: The Messages Tested Ranked by Resonance
Prevalence & Facts Messages
Stranger Danger Messages
Learn the Signs Messages
Help is Available Messages
The Gut Punch Messages: Prevalence & Facts Messages
“Wow”, “shocking”, “crazy high”, and “hits home” were some of the common reactions participants had to the prevalence messages. This reaction was shared even by those parents who earlier in the conversations stated that they believed that online child sexual exploitation is “everywhere” and displayed a more heightened concern on the issue. Encouragingly, these messages (along with participating in the focus group as a whole) served as a “wake-up call” for those who were more complacent on the issue and ignited a similar sense of urgency among those who reported being more proactive on this front. The statistics themselves could be used as a conversation starter with a spouse or, even with older children.
While participants generally took the statistics at face value, they did lead to questions on whether the statistics pertain to Canada specifically, and a desire for more clarity on what constitutes online child sexual abuse. Moreover, there were calls for tailoring statistics to be relevant to specific locations and child age range to increase the personal resonance of these messages.
Wow, maybe we’re too lax on some things, maybe we really should take a different look at, […] a different perspective and say well, maybe we do need to have more protection. Whether we do or not I guess might be a whole other story but I certainly [think we need to] start the conversation. [Parent of 13-year-old or younger, Lethbridge]
I would actually show this to my kids. […] I start the conversation about anything with them really, but this, because it would be official and from the government, […] it would be like “well see, it’s not just me talking about something, it’s actually really happening, it’s there”, right. [Parent of 14 to 17-year-old, Vancouver]
It’s concrete, it’s a fact. You could not be any more clear, or precise. You can see it, you understand it, it’s calculable, verifiable. It speaks to you. The words are not ambiguous. [Parent of 13-year-old or younger, Quebec City]
Good Reminders: Stranger Danger Messages
These messages felt familiar in that participants have been exposed to the same ones or similar variations of them before, but still appreciated as “good reminders”. Seeing the word “online predators” in the same sentence as “your child” created a level of discomfort that could potentially nudge parents into action.
That said, the messages were more flat and did not create the same sense of urgency as the statistics. Familiarity was seen as potentially detracting from the attention-grab potential of the messages. This in turn led to the view that a stronger call to action may result from injecting more urgency and personalisation e.g., ““Online predators MAY BE building trusted relationships with YOUR kids.” instead of “Online predators are adept at building trusted relationships with kids.”
The word ‘adept’ drew some criticism in terms of seen as bureaucratic jargon, not easily understood and not strong enough.
Well it's a refresher yes but you can only refresh so much and you have to change the message up a little bit in some way or another otherwise […you look] straight past it. [Parent of 13-year-old or younger, Lethbridge]
I think a lot of parents are just too busy. Too busy, preoccupied in their life from work. Yeah, they just assume, my kid is home, my kid is safe. There’s a lot more than just being home. [Parent of 14 to 17-year-old, Mississauga]
New Information but Speak to a Specific Audience: Help is Available Messages
Participants inferred that online child sexual abuse is illegal based on the “report it” message, they appreciated being directed to resources available. Though self-evident for some participants (Vancouver and Quebec City specifically) these were messages they had not come across previously in relation to online child sexual abuse specifically. The potential social stigma barrier to reporting was seen as addressed partly through language such as “Don’t suffer in silence”. These messages were not personally relevant at this stage for participants as they speak to families affected by the issue.
In terms of more negative reactions, in Quebec City some participants felt they were being accused as parents with “Don’t avoid the problem”. A small number of participants have had negative experiences of trying to report issues in the past and stressed the importance of action being taken after a report is filed and access to supports for those affected by the issues.
Online child sexual abuse – a lot of people may not know that that's considered child abuse. Just because it's online it doesn't mean that it isn’t actual abuse. [Parent of 13-year-old or younger, Charlottetown]
“Don’t suffer in silence”. Well, it’s not, you know, when people say depression or… okay, I understand don’t suffer in silence. But this is criminal activity, so if my child was, God forbid, you know, in this situation, why would any parent suffer in silence? [Parent of 14 to 17-year-old, Vancouver]
We need to know we have the support following [an incident of online CSE]. I've gone to the police about somebody who was taking advantage of children and they said. They’ll file it. We need proof and then after there was proof they're like, well, they can go to addictions counselling. [Parent of 13-year-old or younger, Lethbridge]
I was struck by the first one “ressources are available, don’t suffer in silence”. I didn’t even know there were resources. [Parent of 14 to 17-year-old, Quebec City]
Empowering but too vague: Learn the Signs Messages
The learn the signs messages appealed most to those with a strong appetite for education and empowering themselves to take as much control as possible of the situation, slightly skewing towards female participants.
The lack of references to online child sexual exploitation/abuse or online predators meant that these messages felt somewhat vague and lacked that emotional reaction that other messages elicited from participants.
You could know what to look for from not being naïve, but then you don’t know how things change, like in the tech world, you don’t know how things change. There might be some new app that’s really meant for something else, so being kept up to date on those kind of things, on how the technology is changing. [Parent of 14 to 17-year-old, Mississauga]
We’re all thinking it but we hear about it so much anyway so why be soft about it? Just be direct. [Parent of 13-year-old or younger, Lethbridge]
Three creative applications were tested (see below) and for each application, participants were shown a poster, flyer and 3 digital banners. Obscured emerged as the strongest performer across all the groups due to its effectiveness in generating feelings of personal resonance and its “straight to the point” approach. Illuminate was appreciated by a few for its “cleverness”, but others missed the visual double entendres used or admitted that the concept is unlikely to grab their attention in their day-to-day lives. Sketchy was unanimously dismissed outright as a result of its lighter tone and confusing graphics.
Figure 4: The Three Creative Applications Tested in Poster Format
The Strongest Performing Concept: Obscured
The main strength of Obscured was its ability to create feelings of personal resonance through the imagery of real children looking normal and comfortable; participants time and time again said that they could “picture their kids in the same situation”. The concept thus complements the top performing prevalence/statistics messages in driving home the point that online child sexual exploitation is an issue that parents should be concerned about in relation to their own children.
The fact that the approach did not require any effort in understanding the subject matter also worked to the benefit of Obscured. This was especially true among participants who were more literal and/or did not fully appreciate Illuminate. The added benefit of a direct approach was that they are more likely to pay attention to the concept when many things are competing for their attention.
The suggestions for how to optimise the concept centered around amplifying the existing key strengths of the concept:
In terms of negatives, some parents in Quebec City and Charlottetown felt that the visuals used in the concept reminded them of smoking cessation ads.
The choice of colours for the text boxes and text font drew some mixed comments. Those in Quebec City highlighted that the choice of yellow reminded them of Vidéotron ads which they would likely dismiss – i.e. ‘what are they trying to sell me now’. In other communities, this was less of an issue and indeed black on yellow was seen as effective in drawing attention to the key messages. A couple felt that the use of an outline for certain words made them hard to read.
Figure 5: Obscured Concept
They weren’t as real. […] these ones I can actually see a kid in these things and that made it a little more real. [Parent of 13-year-old or younger, Lethbridge]
They look comfortable, relaxed. That’s when the predator has his biggest bite, when you're comfortable. [Parent of 14 to 17-year-old, Mississauga]
I think if you could see her phone a little bit better, I think it would be more real because right now it just is like […] it’s a little bit blurry. […] Add a cute phone cover. Something that makes it look like it's so attractive to hold. [Parent of 13-year-old or younger, Lethbridge]
The two on the back, the 1 and 5 and the 4k one, the only things are missing personally is the actual Canadian government logo on the bottom. Because if I ever see that pop up on my screen, if there's nothing to actually verify where it goes to. Right? I would usually chalk it up to click bait myself and ignore it. [Parent of 13-year-old or younger, Lethbridge]
That is what I like the best, because we can see the real characters. We see real people, real kids. We see them in their activities. The first one has a phone, the second on a computer, and the third on a phone in their room, a tablet. These are real people. [Parent of 14 to 17-year-old, Quebec City]
The Distant Runner-Up: Illuminate
Illuminate was seen as a “dark”, “spooky”, “horror film” approach to dealing with a dark subject matter. This resulted in a more visceral reaction in a few participants and there were no objections to this tonal approach as a whole.
A few gravitated to Illuminate because of the “clever” graphics used to put the message across. The graphic on the poster as well as the smartphone/doorway worked best. The more thought required to work out the graphics resulted in the concept staying with them longer.
Other positive feedback received included:
Those more literal, however, did not notice all the visual double entendres throughout and sometimes struggled to fully decipher them – the banner ad showing a smartphone and a staircase was the most confounding one. These participants showed little patience in trying to figure out the various meanings. This can partly be attributed to the fact that participants tended to agree, on an abstract level at least, that their children may fall prey to strangers who are trying to manipulate them. Thus, they do not need a clever way to validate what they already know to be true.
Moreover, the colour scheme combined with a quick glance of the graphics led several to note that the concept may be mistaken for an ad for commercial or industrial businesses, and in Quebec City, there were references to Vidéotron again. The danger of this finding is that the concept will fail to grab the attention of its target audience, with a few participants admitting that this is likely to be the case.
Figure 6: Illuminate Concept
I love that graphic. I mean that graphic makes your kid look like a gerbil in a terrarium that someone’s toying with. [Parent of 14-year-old of older, Vancouver]
We don’t have time to mess around and time to be clever, we just need, we’ve got to get through this quickly, this is important. With all the information that we get during the day, get right to the point. [Parent of 13-year-old or younger, Lethbridge]
The Concept that was Unanimously Voted Down: Sketchy
Sketchy was dismissed out of hand in all groups. It was seen as tonally out of line with the subject: it came across as “cheerful” for a subject that is serious and where they feel that the Government of Canada has license to use a hard-hitting approach as discussed previously. The choice of colours and graphics contributed to this view. The graphics in particular led to questions and some confusion: the graphic of someone typing looks more like an adult than a teen or child; “Why are there love hearts and sunshine in the graphics?”; and “Why is the flyer showing two people kissing?”. More broadly, the consensus was using pictures of real children is more effective than graphics of children in capturing their attention and making them think about their own children specifically.
In one of the Lethbridge groups, participants felt that the more light-hearted approach may be more relevant for children than themselves.
Figure 7: Sketchy Concept
It’s cheerful, it’s almost like a birthday invitation, happy colours, a little sunshine in the background. [Parent of 14 to 17-year-old, Mississauga]
For teenagers I'd give this to them because it's not as harsh and I don’t want to scare you from ever getting on the internet again. But for me as a parent I want to be jolted. [Parent of 13-year-old or younger, Lethbridge]
Almost no one had accessed information on the topic of online child sexual exploitation specifically – one participant in Lethbridge recalled attending an in-person seminar on social media when the topic was discussed – and there was zero awareness of cybertip.ca.
Going online to look for information was a common response of where they might go if they wished to access information on the topic, resulting in a positive reaction to being informed that more information would be provided via the internet. The assumption was that this would be available on an official government site which they could search via Google or access via other high traffic Government of Canada websites e.g., the CRA site was highlighted in Charlottetown.
Suggestions of other places information could be placed centered around locations that they or their children frequent:
Those with older teens (16+) noted that they are less likely to accompany their children to doctors appointments or recreational facilities. Broader general public locations – door-to-door mail drops, movie theatres and grocery stores – were suggested instead.
The kinds of information parents wish to access on an online website can be grouped into three categories: general education on the topic, preventative measures they can take, and how they can take follow-up action.
Table 8: Information Needs
EDUCATION
Definition of online child sexual exploitation & other terminology
More statistics
PREVENTION MEASURES
The signs to look for
Conversation starters and talking points with their children
What other measures that parents can take
Helping parents stay current & ahead of trends
TAKE ACTION
Assurances of confidentiality and anonymity
Access to local supports and resources
Finally, there were some suggestions for the format by which information could be provided:
Some parents would need to know what is exactly entailed in child sexual exploitation. What exactly, so they know when it needs to be reported. Where can I access more information in my region? Because sometimes it’s just a general number for Ontario, and it’s like, okay, where can I go to access more information to talk to somebody to get them to speak to my child, or whatever. [Parent of 14 to 17-year-old, Mississauga]
I’d want to know how you can, if they have information, on how you can advise another parent who has these suspicions, but they’re afraid to go the legal route and report something. How can you advise them? Is there a way that you can call this parent if I give you their information, and just say you anonymously heard, just to see if it’ll spark something, and maybe they’ll talk. [Parent of 14 to 17-year-old, Mississauga]
Support reporting with access to resources for prosecution and counselling. And information on different approaches that parents can use to approach their kids to talk to them to find out if you know, they have been victimized in any way. [Parent of 13-year-old or younger, Lethbridge]
INTERVIEWER: _______________ DATE: _____________ INTERVIEW TIME: ______ minutes
Good morning/afternoon/evening (Bonjour), my name is __________________________ and I am calling from Ipsos, a national marketing research organization. First off, let me assure you that we are not trying to sell you anything. We are a professional public opinion research firm that gathers opinions from people. From time to time, we solicit opinions by talking with people in a group discussion setting with up to 8 participants.
We are preparing to conduct a series of these discussions on behalf of the Government of Canada about issues that are important to parents and would like to know if you would be willing to participate.
As part of these discussions you will be asked to review and provide feedback on communication materials in a group setting. Do you feel comfortable doing this?
Please be assured, your participation is voluntary and should you agree to participate your identity will remain confidential. The information collected will be used for research purposes only and handled according to the Privacy Act of Canada.*
1. Do you currently reside in [INSERT CITY FROM BELOW]?
2. Would you be interested in participating in this discussion which will be held at a location in ____________ on ______________?
*IF ASKED:
The personal information you provide is protected in accordance with the Privacy Act. The information you provide will not be linked with your name on any document including the consent form or the discussion form. In addition to protecting your personal information, the Privacy Act gives you the right to request access to and correction of your personal information. You also have the right to file a complaint with the Office of the Privacy Commissioner if you feel your personal information has been handled improperly.
| Location | Audience | Time | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
Charlottetown, PEI Delta Prince Edward, 18 Queen Street |
Parents of children 13 and younger | 5:30pm | March 5 |
| Parents of children 14 to 18 | 7:30pm | March 5 | |
Vancouver, BC Vancouver Focus, 1080 Howe Street, Suite 503 |
Parents of children 13 and younger | 5:30pm | March 9 |
| Parents of children 14 to 18 | 7:30pm | March 9 | |
Québec City, QC (FRENCH) Leger, 580 Grande Allee E |
Parents of children 13 and younger | 5:30pm | March 10 |
| Parents of children 14 to 18 | 7:30pm | March 10 | |
Lethbridge, AB Sandman Lethbridge Lodge, 320 Scenic Drive South |
Parents of children 13 and younger | 5:30pm | March 11 |
| Parents of children 14 to 18 | 7:30pm | March 11 | |
Mississauga, ON Infoquest Research, 6655 Kitimat Road #12 |
Parents of children 13 and younger | 5:30pm | March 12 |
| Parents of children 14 to 18 | 7:30pm | March 12 |
Now, I would like to ask you a few questions to see if you qualify to attend. This will take about 5 minutes.
1. We are looking to speak to parents with children 18 or younger. May I check that that this applies to you?
(INTERVIEWER RECORD GENDER, DO NOT ASK) (AIM FOR GOOD MIX)
Male (Continue for possible recruit)
Female (Continue for possible recruit)
Other (Continue for possible recruit)
Now, I would like to ask you a few questions to see if you qualify to attend. This will take about 5 minutes.
2. Do you or does anyone in your household work in any of the following industries? (READ LIST) IF "YES" TO ANY - THANK AND TERMINATE
3. Have you ever attended a consumer group discussion, completed an interview or a survey which was arranged in advance and for which you received a sum of money?
[NO MORE THAN THREE RECRUITS WITHIN EACH GROUP MAY SAY YES]
IF Q4= YES, ASK Q5-7, ELSE SKIP TO Q8
4. How many focus groups have you attended in the past five years?
TERMINATE IF MORE THAN 4
5. What were the main topics of these discussions? Answer: ___________________________
IF RELATED TO CHILD SAFETY OR CHILD ONLINE BEHAVIOURS, THANK AND TERMINATE
6. Have you attended a discussion group or a market research focus group in the past six months? IF "YES" - THANK AND TERMINATE
7. What is/are the age/s of the child/children in your household?
(Max of 1 per eligible group)
Good mix per eligible group
Good mix per eligible group
Prefer not to say (THANK AND TERMINATE)
MULTIPLE CHILDREN IN HOUSEHOLD FINE AND CAN BE ELIGIBLE FOR WHICEVER GROUP THEIR CHILDREN FALL IN.
8. For each child in the household, could you please tell me their gender?
CODE FOR ALL CHILDREN IN THE HOUSEHOLD, AIM FOR GOOD MIX OF GENDERS ACROSS ALL THE AGE CATEGORIES
PARENTS OF KIDS 8-18 ASK Q9 IN RELATION TO THE CHILD THAT MAKES THEM ELIGIBLE FOR THE GROUP THEY ARE BEING RECRUITED FOR, OTHERS SKIP TO Q13.
9. Does your child go online…
FOR PARENTS OF 13 AND YOUNGER, MAX OF 4 WHO SAY NO OR DON’T KNOW TO ALL ITEMS // FOR PARENTS OF 14-18, MAX OF 2 WHO SAY NO OR DON’T KNOW TO ALL ITEMS. FINE IS ALL SAY YES.
ASK Q10-Q12 IF CHILD GOES ONLINE, OTHERS SKIP TO Q13.
10. When your child is online, to what extent would you say you are monitoring their activity?
RECRUIT GOOD MIX
11. Does your child interact with others through social media, gaming or other internet sites?
RECRUIT GOOD MIX
12. And, as far as you know, who does your child interact with online? READ OUT
RECRUIT GOOD MIX
13. Do you personally have a social media account that you use on a regular basis?
RECRUIT GOOD MIX
14. I am going to read you a series of age categories, please stop me when I get to the one that applies to you.
RECRUIT GOOD MIX
15. What was your household’s income for 2019? Was it…?
RECRUIT GOOD MIX
16. What is the highest level of education you have attained? (Do not read list).
RECRUIT GOOD MIX
17. Current employment status?
RECRUIT GOOD MIX
18. Participants in discussion groups are asked to voice their opinions and thoughts. How comfortable are you in voicing your opinions in front of others? Are you… (READ LIST)
19. Sometimes participants are asked to read text and/or review images during the discussion. Is there any reason why you could not participate?
TERMINATE IF RESPONDENT OFFERS ANY REASON FOR NOT BEING ABLE TO COMMUNICATE EFFECTIVELY OR TAKE PART IN THE DISCUSSION IN ANY WAY, SUCH AS SIGHT OR HEARING PROBLEM, A WRITTEN OR VERBAL LANGUAGE PROBLEM.
ALSO TERMINATE IF YOU HAVE ANY CONCERNS ABOUT PARTICIPANTS ABILITY TO BE UNDERSTOOD IN THE LANGUAGE TO BE USED DURING SESSION.
****(IN EACH LOCATION, PLEASE ENSURE 8 PARTICIPANTS ARE RECRUITED FOR 6-8 TO SHOW)****
[Read to Stand-by Respondents]
Thank you for answering my questions. Unfortunately, at this time, the group you qualify for is full. We would like to place you on our stand-by list. This means that if there is an opening in the group, we would then call you back and see if you are available to attend the group. May I please have a daytime contact number, an evening contact number an email address, if you have one, so that we can contact you as soon as possible if an opening become available? [RECORD CONTACT INFO]
[Read to Screened in Respondents]
Wonderful, you qualify to participate in one of these group discussions which will take place on, (DATE) @ (TIME) for no more than 2 hours. The Government of Canada is sponsoring this research. All those who participate will receive an $125 honorarium as a thank you for their time.
Do you have a pen handy so that I can give you the address where the group will be held?
We ask that you arrive at least 15 minutes early to be sure you locate the facility and have time to check-in with the hosts. Prior to being admitted into the focus group room you will be required to sign a non-disclosure agreement, failure to do so will result in you being denied participation in the focus group session for which you have been selected, payment of the incentive is contingent on participation in the focus group sessions.
In addition, we will be checking your identification prior to the group, so please be sure to bring two pieces of government issued photo identification with you (i.e. driver’s license, health card or other). Also, if you require glasses for reading, please bring them with you.
At the discussion you will be audio- and videotaped. This taping is being done to assist us with our report writing. Also, in this room there is a one-way mirror. Sitting behind the mirror may be Government of Canada staff, including members of the staff from the departments that sponsored this research, and by staff members from Ipsos. Other Government of Canada staff may stream the session live online. This is standard focus group procedure to get a first-hand look at the research process and to hear first-hand your impressions and views on the research topic.
Do you agree to be observed for research purposes only?
As we are only inviting a small number of people, your participation is very important to us. As we have invited you to participate based on the questions we went through a moment ago, we ask that you do not send a representative on your behalf should you be unable to participate. IF FOR SOME REASON YOU ARE UNABLE TO ATTEND, PLEASE CALL SO THAT WE MAY GET SOMEONE TO REPLACE YOU. You can reach us at 1-xxx-xxx-xxxx at our office. Someone will call you the day before to remind you about the discussion.
Thank you for very much for your help!
As I mentioned at the start, the topic for today is “What is it like to be a parent in the age of the internet and smartphones”.
KEY MESSAGES // 40 MINS
HELP IS AVAILABLE MESSAGES TAGGED AS Q
PREVALANCE & FACTS MESSAGES TAGGED AS Y
STRANGER DANGER MESSAGES TAGGED AS L
LEARN THE SIGNS MESSAGES TAGGED AS F
CREATIVE APPLICATIONS // 30 MINS