The Chinese Solar Machine Layer by Layer Fire in the Library The Mystery Behind Anesthesia
Social networking sites like MySpace and Facebook will be off-limits from schools and libraries if a bill in Congress to limit online sexual predators is enacted. (Credit: istockphoto.com/ariusz)
Critics call the Deleting Online Predators Act an election-year stunt that could do lasting damage to youth culture and education.
The social-networking site MySpace has 95 million registered users. If it were a country, it would be the 12th largest in the world (ranking between Mexico and the Philippines). But under a bill designed to combat sexual predators on the Internet, MySpace and similar sites would become countries that young people can't visit -- at least not using computers at schools or libraries.
The Deleting Online Predators Act (DOPA), introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives in May by Michael Fitzpatrick (R-PA), was passed by a vote of 410 to 15 on July 26. It requires, with few exemptions, that facilities receiving federal aid block minors from accessing commercial social-networking sites and chat rooms, where they might encounter adults seeking sexual contact.
The bill has now moved on to the Senate. Critics from the worlds of educational technology and media studies say they're alarmed that the legislation has advanced this far. They warn that it would do little to stop sexual predators, but would deprive youth from poor areas of their only access to the online communities that are an increasingly critical part of teen culture. To these critics, the act is an election-year stunt designed to make any member of Congress who opposes it look "soft" on sexual predators.
It's a "monumentally ill-considered piece of legislation" that "by any rational measure" should never have left the House, says Henry Jenkins, professor of literature and director of the Comparative Media Studies Program at MIT. Jenkins believes the act plays on parents' lack of understanding, and their resulting fears, about their kids' activities on the Internet. "But the price of standing up to that fear may be too high for liberal Democrats," he says.
If the Senate approves a similar bill and the legislation reaches President Bush's desk, the price to young people will be even higher, say Jenkins and other critics. "If it would actually prevent predation, I would be fine with it," says Danah Boyd, a PhD candidate in the School of Information Management Sciences at the University of California, Berkeley, who is considered one of the leading scholarly authorities on social-networking sites. "But it's not going to help at all. Out of 300,000 child abductions every year, only 12 are by strangers. This is just going to stifle the social-networking industry and completely segment youth around economic status."
The impact on youth from economically disadvantaged families is what Jenkins worries about most. "Already, you have a gap between kids who have 10 minutes of Internet access a day at the public library and kids who have 24-hour-a-day access at home," he says. "Already, we have filters in libraries [required under the Child Internet Protection Act of 2001] blocking access to much of the Internet. Now we're talking about adding even more restrictions. It exaggerates the 'participation gap' -- not a technology gap, but a difference in access to the defining cultural experiences that take place around technology today."
Guest (Peter)
I thought schools were for learning...
and libraries for study! Now they are supposed to be unsupervised e-social portals?! There was a reason we had teachers and principals at the school dance.
Guest (Katrina)
Are very different today than they might have been in your day. I am a public librarian, and part of my mission is to promote the library as a community space. Offering free internet access is now the norm, and the people who use the Internet at the library are the people who are already technologically diasadvantaged - poor, or otherwise underprivileged. They cannot afford to have computers with Internet access in their homes. Why should they be denied the opportunity to use the technology that is a part of every day life? And why should the federal government have the option of restricting their access to Constitutionally protected language and ideas?
Guest (Steve)
Article is obviously biased. Specious arguments
Moral panic? How about common sense? Stifle education by blocking MySpace during school hours? Defending the poor downtrodden who only get 10 minutes of computer time and can't use it to chat? People attacking restrictions on sexual predation have a hidden agenda. How could they argue their true motive?
Guest (Ulysses Everett McGill)
I couldn't agree with this article more
This bill does ABSOLUTLEY NOTHING to protect anyone. Honestly, how many of the kids being solicited online are those that only have access through a public portal? The ones most at risk for any kind of harm are those that spend hours at home couped up in the corner of their own rooms with their own computers. What we need is better awareness and education...mostly for parents.
Guest (Rudy Gaskins)
This article shows no proof that the legislation will not have a positive impact. On the contrary, it highlights an excellent policy with great potential for success and, for reasons unexplained, attempts to bury the policy’s merit in a subterfuge of negative rhetoric. You’d almost have to be some form of a sexual predator to buy into this ridiculous argument. I say protect our kids at all cost, even if it threatens a few people in the tech industry.
Guest (Jeff Martin)
This comment shows no proof that the legislation will not have a negative impact. The author would almost have to be a sexual predator trying to hide under the umbrella of this useless legislation.
Guest (Jessey)
Social interaction is an educational process...
It is easier to learn from others that are already knowledgeable. Social networking is a legitimate way to get research tips and direction. The proponents of this bill are really afraid that their kids will see through their own narrow views. Point made, I ask who here in refutation lets their kids on social networking sites? More importantly which ones?
Guest (Sandy)
Seems to me this is like burning books to prevent children from reading "bad" things. Why not start a program to educate the kids and make them smart surferes.
Guest (ddb)
The knee jerk reaction to anything that differs from the "accepted norm" is the book burning phenomena. If Senator Ted Stevens' description of how internet packets work is anything like an example of the level of undestanding we have in our government today it's no wonder they're trying to burn it down! Sigh.
As the article points out, if the rules get too stupid it'll just go underground. The next generation is already guaranteed to be better programmers/hackers than this one so it won't be that hard for them.
Guest (Anonymous)
Techno Idiots Populate Our Government
I researched the level of technical understanding in the US governement for a column in a trade mag last year. I talked to a half-dozen trade associations to find out if there were any knowledgeable government people (elected or appointed) on tech. Result: Ed Markey (MA)
These stupid laws are either written by lobbyists or Karl Rove-directed zombies in the Republican party pandering to ignorant voters.
If you think this is bad, read the eight or so "telecom deregulation" bills floating aroung.
Deregulation, in this vein, means handcuffing your competitors (if it was written by a telco or CATV company) or deregulating to the original telecom bill of 1934.
Remember the joke used to be "miliatry intelligence" is an oxymoron? Now it's "government intelligence."
Guest (Anonymous)
Techno Idiots Populate Our Government
I researched the level of technical understanding in the US governement for a column in a trade mag last year. I talked to a half-dozen trade associations to find out if there were any knowledgeable government people (elected or appointed) on tech. Result: Ed Markey (MA)
These stupid laws are either written by lobbyists or Karl Rove-directed zombies in the Republican party pandering to ignorant voters.
If you think this is bad, read the eight or so "telecom deregulation" bills floating aroung.
Deregulation, in this vein, means handcuffing your competitors (if it was written by a telco or CATV company) or deregulating to the original telecom bill of 1934.
Remember the joke used to be "miliatry intelligence" is an oxymoron? Now it's "government intelligence."
Guest
I have read every liberal cliche trotted out here except this one. Is there no mention of the perverts that cause this kind of restriction to be necessary. No, they are alright, it's the restrictors fault. I guess somewhere down the line George Bush and Dick Cheney are responsible for all this in the first place. You people could be called pathetic, if you weren't just plain sick yourselves.
Guest
Let's see - "Critics call" and then there's "Experts say" and then again " Studies indicate". Let's see which one of these you can use in your next article to denigrate conservatives.
Guest (Frederick Ghahramani)
"Let's see which one of these you can use in your next article to denigrate conservatives."
Don't worry - conservatives do a fine job denigrating themselves with the fire and brimstone talk.
This legislation is nothing more than a band aid solution, baked in reactionary rhetoric, drafted and supported by people (democrat and republican) who don't understand how the internet works - the less you know about something, the scarier it becomes, and the easier it is to demonize it and look like you're doing the 'right thing' by making it illegal.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3uuJh4bv-fg
Stellar Phoenix Windows data recovere is the foremost solution to meet all Windows based data recovery software needs. The software contains several advanced features as RAW File Recovery, Create Image, Advanced Search, File Filter, File Mask etc. This Data Recovery Software is compatible with FAT16, FAT32, vFAT, NTFS5 and NTFS file systems. It supports Windows Vista, XP, 2003 and 2000.
Manufacturing in the United States is in trouble. That's bad news not just for the country's economy but for the future of innovation.
Guest (Joe Beckmann)
The Super Majority
This bill passed because we were stupid and Congress in a rush to go home. It is no one's fault but our own. It's also a case of an anti-tax reactionary Republican rejection of the E-Rate that subsidizes all school-library internet, and a very, very lazy lobbying effort on the part of progressives.
Reply