The danger of these relationships increases when they target a young person at a stage where they are seeking appreciation and belonging, and trying to form their image of themselves and the world around them. Individuals or groups may exploit these needs, starting the grooming process with praise or shared interests, then progressing to requests for secrecy, attempts to isolate the child from their family, and fueling hostility toward others, eventually leading in some cases to the justification of extremism and violence. The internet does not inevitably lead to this outcome, but the digital relationship can turn into a tool for psychological and intellectual manipulation.
Through interactive workshops I conducted with young people, two observations worthy of attention emerged: the need to enhance knowledge of digital risks, and the need for a space for dialogue that allows the young person to express their questions and fears without preconceived judgments or ready-made answers. It also appeared that appreciation, interest, and motivation are not marginal details in a young person's life; they are basic human needs, and they can turn into a gateway for exploitation when they find someone giving them attention behind the screen, while they do not find enough space to discuss what occupies them in their immediate surroundings. The space for dialogue within the family or school may narrow under the pressure of daily busyness, or the relationship may turn into repeated directives that do not give the young person a chance to explain their thoughts and understand what they are being exposed to. Here, the importance of listening emerges as a means to understand their needs and enhance their ability to distinguish between sincere interest and attempts to exploit their trust.
The national study on violence against children in Jordan, conducted in cooperation with UNICEF, indicates that 13.2% of children in the 8-17 age group have been exposed to at least one form of online violence. This indicator addresses digital violence in general and does not specifically measure recruitment for extremism, but it clarifies that digital risks are part of a reality that calls for a practical response.
Therefore, protecting children should not be reduced to limiting phone usage hours or banning certain applications. It is more important for parents to know what occupies their children, who they are communicating with, and to pay attention to requests for secrecy or pressures that push the child to hide their conversations. Protection does not mean turning the home into a space of constant inspection; a child who fears reprimand may hide the problem instead of asking for help.
The school has a role that goes beyond warning about internet risks to practically training students to detect misinformation, grooming, and incitement to hatred, verifying information sources, and acting safely when exposed to exploitation. Practical activities based on hypothetical situations can help them discover danger signals and make the appropriate decision; knowledge becomes more effective when it turns into an applicable skill. Protection requires a partnership between the family, the school, the competent authorities, and digital platforms, starting with dialogue and trust, developing critical thinking, and giving the young person the security to ask for help and distinguish between sincere interest and exploitation.
