Censorship and Indecency in Cyberspace
When President Clinton signed the Communications Decency Act earlier this month, many Internet web sites temporarily put up blank sign-on pages protesting terms in the law that would ban the transmission of indecent material by online computer services.
The American Civil Liberties Union immediately filed a lawsuit, saying the term “indecent” was unconstitutionally vague. Opponents argue that anyone could be prosecuted--and fined $250,000--for posting material about any subject that touches on sex, including AIDS, abortion, politics and science, or even works such as “The Catcher in the Rye.”
Should indecent material be banned in cyberspace, and how?
Los Angeles County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky:
“I am outraged by indecent material as much as anyone else, but my vision of indecency may differ from Pat Buchanan’s vision of indecency, or Bill Clinton’s. . . . The government has no more business censoring what goes over the Internet than what is put in the mail or the L.A. Times. It has to be the sender or the parent who must take advantage of the technology to block certain material. That’s the responsibility of the parent. . . . The price we pay in America for having a 1st Amendment is putting up with a lot of offensive or indecent material.”
Carol Jago, director of the California Literature Project at UCLA:
“I do not think government should waste time censoring a medium that cannot be controlled. Savvy programmers can route themselves around any barrier bureaucrats might attempt to erect. I also believe that indecent material will always be with us. . . . I worry that some groups believe they have the right to decide what is and isn’t indecent for all of us.”
Mike Russell, spokesman for The Christian Coalition:
“We supported the telecommunications bill that would prevent the transmission of indecent material to children. We felt a strong message had to be made, that this kind of threat to families needed to be stopped. . . . It would be foolish to think that merely passing the law would stop [obscenity], but we think it’s an important first step. Some parents just don’t have that ability when their kid is using a computer. It’s not like unplugging a TV set. These kids are a lot more computer literate than their parents.”
Julie Lubbering, strategic alliances coordinator at the Sherman Oaks office for the International Network of Women in Technology:
“The reality of the situation is that we live in an extremely diverse society in which reaching a consensus on defining words such as ‘indecent’ is impossible. . . . There are a number of programs readily available for people to block the topics and sites on the Internet.”
Dr. Avrum Bluming, founder of Los Angeles Free-Net:
“The most important issue is that censorship doesn’t work, that in fact it is counterproductive. . . . When our freedom to have something is limited, we experience an increased desire for it. . . . Trying to control indecent material on the Internet can’t possibly succeed and can create much more harm than benefit . . . because it’s impossible to say where indecency leaves off and what might be called literature starts.”
