From: "Peters, Robert" robert@moralityinmedia.org To: cipa-study@ntia.doc.gov Date: Wed, Aug 14, 2002 11:13 AM Subject: NTIA Comments August 2002 [Comments also being sent today in U.S. mails--paper & floppy disk] COMMENTS OF MORALITY IN MEDIA, INC. In response to Section 1703 of the Children's Internet Protection Act Submitted to the U.S. Department of Commerce, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, Docket No. 020514121-2121-01 The U.S. Department of Commerce's National Telecommunications and Information Administration has initiated a notice and comment proceeding to "evaluate whether currently available Internet blocking or filtering measures adequately address the needs of educational institutions and to evaluate the effectiveness of children's Internet safety policies." Opinion polls indicate that a large majority of adults think children should be shielded from pornography on the Internet. The question here is whether use of screening technology and other Internet safety policies in public schools and libraries provide adequate protection? Clearly, if every public school and library would utilize screening technology, children's exposure to pornography on the Internet would be reduced significantly. But some schools-and many if not most public libraries-refuse to use screening technology; and librarians now have two federal court decisions to support their defiance. Librarians speak out of both sides of their mouths. Librarians say they can protect children from pornography without screening technology. But they also say it is not the job of librarians to act "in loco parentis." The American Library Association's "Bill of Rights" also states in part: "A person's right to use a library should not be denied or abridged because of ...AGE." This has been interpreted to mean that all materials available to adults should also be available to children. To address this problem, Congress should enact legislation that would make libraries (and schools) responsible for knowingly permitting children to have access to material that is obscene for minors. But while screening technology, is in my opinion, a necessary part of the solution, it is clear that screening technology isn't the whole solution. No filter blocks every porn site. Some children also know how to circumvent the blocks, and they tell friends. Children also bring hand-held or laptop computers to school that provide unimpeded access to Internet pornography. Clearly, safeguards other than filters are needed. Computers should be positioned so that adults can easily monitor screens. Rules should be posted and enforced. Counseling should be provided. But many schools and libraries are inadequately staffed. And if youth are smart enough to evade filters, they will also evade supervision. It will also do little good to protect kids from pornography at school if, after school, they access porn at home, a friend's house, a job, internet caf‚ or library. Nor are schools and libraries immune from adult predators who purposefully expose children to Internet pornography in order to molest them. Clearly, the job of responsible teachers and librarians would be easier if harmful-to-minors laws were vigorously enforced on the Internet. In 1998, Congress enacted the Children's Online Protection Act (COPA), which would restrict children's access to at least some pornography on the Internet. The ACLU, however, filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Philadelphia challenging the constitutionality of COPA. Meanwhile, COPA remains unenforceable. At least one state's harmful-to-minors law has also been found unconstitutional as applied to the Internet. But even if harmful-to-minors laws were enforceable and every school and library used filters and other means to protect children from Internet pornography, common sense should inform us that no society can expect to effectively protect children from pornography on the Internet when the legal and cultural barriers intended to protect all of society from pornography are near collapse. For one thing, as pornography becomes more and more accessible to adults, there will be more and more opportunities for children to access it-by stumbling across it, by hacking into it, by using fake identification, or by persuading or conning adults into accessing it for them. So-called "teen porn" is all over the place on the Internet. Presumably, most of the "girls" and "boys" who perform in "teen porn" are 18 and over, but many look years younger; and that is what appeals to the adults who view it. Fantasies do contribute to real life crimes against kids. Adult sexual predators also use "adult" pornography to desensitize and instruct their child victims. A prosperous "adult entertainment" industry also sends a message that is inimical to children. If "adult entertainment" is what adult life is all about, why bother with marriage and family? Why not indulge in a life of selfish promiscuity, infidelity and unspeakable perversity? Furthermore, pornography doesn't just harm children. It harms parents, and what harms parents and their marriages harms children. What harms children shows up in statistics on bad behavior, including sexual assault and disobeying computer use rules, at schools and libraries. The above is not meant to say or imply that special measures to protect children from pornography at schools and libraries aren't needed. It is to say that such measures will prove ineffective unless something is also done to protect the society, in which children are raised, from pornography. Internet obscenity laws are intended to protect society. Enforcing these laws won't protect children from all pornography on the Internet, but it will help protect them against hardcore pornography. A spokesperson for a nationally recognized filtering company recently estimated that over 90% of the commercial pornography sites blocked by his company provide "hardcore pornography." Adults who genuinely care about the well being of children should be at the forefront of efforts to promote vigorous enforcement of federal and state Internet obscenity laws. Robert Peters, President August 14, 2002 Morality in Media, Inc. 475 Riverside Drive, New York, NY 10115 (212) 870-3222 fax (212) 870-2 Web sites: www.moralityinmedia.org www.obscenitycrimes.org