Thank you.
I'd like to go back to Valerie Steeves, please, because as I mentioned, I find your research fascinating.
With regard to the social sites, I understand you weren't ready to describe them as dangerous, and I understand that as an academic you have to be objective and dispassionate, etc. But you also mentioned you're a mother. You mentioned that the sites create pressure to conform, and there was the term “a new environment”. To me it sounds as if it's almost like a parallel universe, where things aren't real, but we're meant to believe they are real, with doctored photos, photoshopped pictures of women, and this pressure. And the Google ads allow corporations to target young girls by their age, their demographic group, to sell them diet products, plastic surgery, and other things that also have their own risks.
You didn't say this, but I know from my own research that they're getting them when their commercial guard is down, if they're mature enough to even have a commercial guard, if their parents have had some training, as you have, or if they have parents who are wise to this and say, listen, don't believe everything you see, and they lecture them. But I would suggest most children don't have that training. Maybe you can comment on that. You also mentioned deceptive and unfair trade practices.
Would you feel comfortable describing these social sites as risky or inappropriate for girls at—and I'm going to give you four different ages, because you mention age too—six years old—because I know a six-year-old who uses social websites—12 years old, 13 years old, and 15 years old?
What advice do you have for parents of girls in those age groups?