Besides demonstrating that cyberporn is a topic that will never disappear, the Kids and the Net summit has highlighted the tensions between the different types of Net-advocacy groups here in Washington. The civil liberties groups (ACLU, EPIC, EFF, CPSR), and journalism, publishers, and media groups have lined up on one side [http://www.ifea.org/] saying the government shouldn't pressure the Internet to self-censor (or be censored by the Feds). They held a counter-summit press conference yesterday. Even the libertarian Cato Institute is in this corner. On the other side, the Center for Democracy and Technology [http://www.cdt.org/] is participating in the summit along with antiporn groups, high tech firms, and "censorware" vendors. CDT says that the Net needs to self-regulate or face the wrath of the U.S. Congress. (Folks at CDT generally take pro-industry positions and have been involved in many compromises in the past: wiretapping, "harmful to minors," and jail time for use of encryption in a crime.) CDT, however, has called for the development of multiple rating systems. You could easily tell the difference between the two outlooks today. ACLU associate director Barry Steinhardt and CDT director Jerry Berman debated this afternoon. "If we sit back and we offer nothing... that's not a solution for the American public," Berman said. He said that CDT is "looking to balance free speech rights" with other values. -Declan At 11:04 -0400 12/2/97, Michael Sims wrote:
What "they" are saying:
SF Chronicle:
"Internet Self-Regulation Draws Wide Praise But advocates for free speech call for extreme caution
Jon Swartz, Chronicle Staff Writer
Civil libertarians and porn peddlers yesterday praised the Internet industry's attempt at sweeping self-regulation to keep smut out of the hands of children and the government at arms' length. ..."
Civil libertarians praised sweeping self-regulation, eh? I hope everyone realizes this is CDT that is doing this. They continue to claim they are a civil liberties group, and continue to push for restrictions on civil liberties. Has the ACLU considered setting up a group which describes itself as "conservative and pro-family" in its press releases and pushes continually for the elimination of censorware and ratings? Such a trojan horse group could hardly do as much damage to the censor crowd as CDT continues to do to the free-speech crowd, but perhaps it would achieve some measure of compensation.
"Pros: [of "filtering"] Filtering does block out almost all inappropriate material."
I sure am glad our message is getting out.
"Education. A series of TV spots and school-sponsored programs touting filtering software will debut next fall."
What a treat. Bennett? Know anything about this one?
Plenty more to come on this subject, I'm sure.
-- Michael Sims