Congress explores ways to guard children from cyber pornography, violence

June 15, 1995|By Karen Hosler | Karen Hosler,Washington Bureau of The Sun

WASHINGTON -- Hide the remote control. Disarm the mouse. The United States Senate is on a crusade for decency on the new frontier of technology.

Whether it's on television or in cyberspace, pornography and violence could soon be off-limits -- at least for children.

During the past few days, the Senate has voted to force cable companies to block signals from adult channels unless customers request them. A proposal to require that television sets be equipped with "choice chips" so that parents can ensure programs can't be tuned in behind their backs has also been approved.

"Our lives are being changed daily by the new technology," said Sen. Kent Conrad, a North Dakota Democrat who sponsored the "choice chip" amendment. "People want to be able to control the technology as it affects their kids."

Yesterday, the Senate decided -- 84-16 -- to put roadblocks on the information superhighway. The proposal would prohibit the purveyors of smut from putting their material within easy reach of any young person with a laptop.

The measure, part of a major overhaul of laws governing the telecommunications industry, would impose criminal penalties on anyone who makes indecent or obscene material available to minors.

"It is not an exaggeration to say that the worst, most vile, most perverse pornography is only a few click-click-clicks away from any child on the Internet," warned Sen. Jim Exon, a Nebraska Democrat. For days, he carried around a blue, three-ring binder full of computer-produced examples to show colleagues who doubted him.

Not everyone is enthusiastic about Congress assuming this role.

The television, video and computer industries; the American Civil Liberties Union; the Clinton administration; even Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole -- who recently attacked the entertainment industry for contributing to moral decay in America -- have raised concerns about adding more government regulation and possibly abridging the First Amendment right of free speech.

"When I made my statement about the entertainment industry a couple of weeks ago, it did get the attention of a lot of people," Mr. Dole said in a floor speech. "But I noticed in all the surveys that followed that speech there were about as many people concerned about government censorship as there were about the . . . mindless violence and casual sex in movies and TV."

"I never suggested censorship," the Kansas Republican said. "I did not suggest the government do anything. . . . We have more to lose than to gain from putting Washington in charge of our culture."

The censorship concerns arise because almost any government-backed attempt to shield children from objectionable material ultimately requires some government agency to determine what is objectionable.

Mr. Dole complained, for example, that the "choice chip" proposal calls for a five-member presidential commission to create a " 'violence rating system' that takes us one step closer to government control over what we see and hear on television."

"We think a lot of this stuff is unconstitutional, but that's not going to stop Congress from passing it, anyway," said Barry Steinhardt, associate director of the ACLU. "That's the tenor of [the] times."

This crusade to impose new standards on the telecommunications industry was prompted in part because the Congress is now in the midst of a major update of the 60-year-old law governing use of this technology.

The update is primarily a deregulation effort, designed to break up monopolies of local telephone and cable companies and to break down barriers to other forms of communication in order to allow competition.

Many senators argue that the measure provides the perfect opportunity for Congress to try to gain some control over a sophisticated technology that's running wild.

The computer porn proposal offered by Mr. Exon was described by its supporters as simply an attempt by Congress to apply the same anti-obscenity standards already imposed on telephone and postal services to more modern technology.

"The Internet is a wonderful thing . . . but it's like putting a porn shop in your children's bedroom," said Sen. Daniel R. Coats, an Indiana Republican. "Sometimes our technology races beyond our ability to stop and reflect."

Other senators contend that cyperspace is such a dramatically different concept from more traditional communications, such as phone calls or letters, that attempts to impose limits with criminal sanctions are not only unconstitutional, but impractical and potentially hurtful to the industry.

"It just goes too far," Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, a Vermont Democrat, said of the Exon proposal. "If you tell an off-color joke to a friend over the Internet, that's illegal."

Other senators warned that some books and pictures that might be found in public libraries would be prohibited materials if transmitted by electronic communication.

Baltimore Sun Articles
|
|
|
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.