Let parents control access to internet

Web decency is back in the news. Reason: Internet industries and public-policy groups met in Washington last week to discuss ways and means to make cyberspace safe for children without new government regulations.

Internet decency is a big issue. Parents are rightfully concerned about the cyber smut, pornography, pedophilia and other bad stuff their kids can encounter when they go to a chat room or check their e-mail on the Internet.

But decency on the Internet is not just a concern of parents. It is also a concern of on-line industries -- computer and software businesses and information utilities such as America On-Line. Reason: If people lose confidence in their ability to control what comes into their home via the Internet, Internet growth will be stymied -- along with the industries that serve it. A stalled Internet would also be a loss for our society because the Internet is a strong force for democracy, enhances personal freedom, empowers small and mid-sized businesses, increases our competitiveness and goes far to eliminate the tyranny of distance for cities, towns and rural areas that are otherwise off the beaten path in remotely located regions.

Internet smut is a concern of government because there are people out there clamoring for elected officials to "do something." Congress and most state legislatures are only too ready to extend their already onerous regulation of voice communications networks up the line to data networks, such as the Internet. But that would be a mistake.

Congress moved in that direction when it tried to use the 1996 Telecommunications Act to regulate Internet content by mandating Internet decency guidelines. Fortunately, the Supreme Court struck down these legislative good intentions with an opinion that extended to the Internet the higher First Amendment protections enjoyed only by print media -- as compared to the lesser protections afforded broadcast media.

Other groups also have an interest here, forming odd coalitions of "left" and "right." Civil libertarians, such as the American Civil Liberties Union, and many think tanks, such as the Progress & Freedom Foundation and the Center for Democracy and Technology, want to make sure the Internet is a regulation-free zone -- both to prevent government censorship and to help nurture Internet growth and development.

Some faith-based groups, such as the Family Research Council, want more sunshine on decency problems to increase parental and community awareness -- and they want movie or TV-type rating systems for Web sites coupled with blocking software that can be used by parents (not by government) to keep certain material from coming into the home. These blocking routines, supported as well by many Internet industries, can also be used by private, non-governmental groups -- from the faith-based Family Research Council to New Age spiritualists and incense-burners -- to create a menu that blocks out or excludes Web sites with content that offends the values of the blocker. Everything not blocked then gets through, providing a sort of Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval by a process of elimination.

When a government says you can't see something or read something, that is censorship and should not be tolerated. But the same exercise by a parent is called parental responsibility and should be encouraged -- by public policy, social norms, business practices and new technology. That goal is achieved by public education supplemented by Web site ratings combined with blocking technology. It gives choice and control to parents, and that is where it belongs.

The role of government? Enforce existing obscenity and child pornography laws and keep hands off the Internet.