And then they banned the blogs - the DOPA
Fri Jul 28, 2006 at 09:52:34 AM PDT
L'enfer est pavé de bonnes intentions.
-French Proverb
The "Deleting Online Predators Act" or DOPA for short was passed yesterday by the House by a vote of 410-15. The purpose of this bill is to protect children from the scourge of online predators. On its face, it is an admirable goal - but as they say, "the devil is in the details." To understand why, follow me over the flip.
(Note: this issue was diaried by Felix and waitfortheword on Wednesday, but received little fanfare; both diaries are excellent.)
Idiomatic translation: The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.
According to Thomas, this act amends the Communications Act of 1934 to
require recipients of universal service support for schools and libraries to protect minors from commercial social networking websites and chat rooms.
The DOPA also doesn't define what "chat rooms" or "social networking websites" are, but provides vague guidelines for the FCC.
[C|Net news (sidebar)] Those guidelines are:
"In determining the definition of a social networking Web site, the Commission shall take into consideration the extent to which a Web site--
(i) is offered by a commercial entity;
(ii) permits registered users to create an online profile that includes detailed personal information;
(iii) permits registered users to create an online journal and share such a journal with other users;
(iv) elicits highly personalized information from users; and
(v) enables communication among users."
[ibid.]
Let's think about that for a minute... what could be an example of a "social networking website"? MySpace? Of course, they are the intended target of the legislation.
But why MySpace? And what does this have to do with the blogs? Plus, how effective would the law be at protecting children from online predators? waitfortheword's diary links to an enlightening discussion with MySpace experts Henry Jenkins and Danah Boyd.
What is MySpace and what is the controversy over it?
Boyd: Structurally, social network sites are a cross between a yearbook and a community web site. MySpace is a social network site where individuals create digital profiles and link to others ("friends") within the system -- similar to sharing home pages.
While MySpace allows 14- and 15-year-old users to restrict who can see their page and contact them, most users opt to make their profiles public. The primary concern is that this openness puts youth at risk, making them particularly vulnerable to predators.
...
What would be the effect of the proposed legislation on youth?
Boyd: This legislation is targeting MySpace, but it would also block blogging tools, mailing lists, video and podcast sites, photo-sharing sites and educational sites like NeoPets. So it would extend current regulations -- such as the Deleting Online Predators Act -- that require all federally funded schools and libraries to deploy Internet filters. The law is so broadly defined that it would limit access to any commercial site that allows users to create a profile and communicate with strangers.
...
What about the deterrent effect on predators?
Boyd: Unfortunately, predators lurk wherever youth hang out. Since youth are on MySpace, there are bound to be predators on MySpace. Yet, fewer than .01 percent of all youth abductions nationwide are stranger abductions: Youth are at far greater risk of abuse in their own homes and in the homes of their friends than they ever are in digital or physical publics. Also, police currently patrol MySpace, just as they patrol other areas where youth hang out. Many are thankful to know where youth go online because it helps them do their job.
But what about disadvantaged youth whose primary means of on-line activity are through the schools and libraries?
How might the new legislation relate to the "digital divide"?
Jenkins: The early discussion of the digital divide assumed that the most important concern was ensuring access to information, as if the web were simply a data bank. But the web's power comes through participation within its social networks. What a kid can do at home with unlimited access is very different from what a kid can do in a public library with 10 or 15 minutes of access at a time and with no capacity to store and upload information.
In the case of the web, restricting access to "social networking sites" is tantamount to disenfranchisement. This applies most for those who have no means of "unlimited access from home", whether it is because of a lack of broadband or for want of a PC. By denying disadvantaged youth access to these sites, we are delaying their entry into the participatory social networking of the internet, and by extension participatory democracy.
Could you offer a political framework for considering MySpace and laws to limit access to it?
Jenkins: Right now, MySpace and the other social network tools are being read as threats to the civic order, as encouraging antisocial behaviors. But we can easily turn this around and see them as the training ground for future citizens and political leaders. Young people are assuming public roles at earlier and earlier ages. They are interacting with larger communities of their peers and beginning to develop their own styles of leadership.
We further exaggerate this participation gap when we restrict the ability of these youth to use social networks via school and library computers.
Because I'm running out of time, I'm going to borrow waitfortheword's five reasons to oppose the DOPA:
1) While the threat of sexual predators is real, it is being blown out of proportion to frighten and mobilize suburban voters. Less than 1% of incidents of child sexual abuse are perpetrated by strangers. In other words, your kid is at greater risk at a church picnic or little league game than on MySpace.
2) Blocking access to social networking sites at school or in the library won't help kids navigate the web wisely, or teach them how to protect themselves and identify actual threats.
3) While DOPA is clearly aimed at MySpace, the language is so broad that it would probably be applied to restrict access to sites like Daily Kos!
4) This bill would only further the "digital divide" by restricting use of certain sites to those who don't have a computer at home, and rely on the school or library for access to an important social and educational tool.
5) From the American Library Association: "It is manifestly the purview of the local school districts and libraries to determine what content should flow into schools and libraries. Federal mandate over content control is very problematic."
(Update) I was going to mention earlier that we should keep this bill on our radar because of the grave implications it can have on many people's ability to stay informed. At the dawn information age (and the dusk of the industrial age), we must not allow Congress to place additional burdens on the internet that will hamper our ability to remain economically competitive against emerging infotech powerhouses like India and China. I can't seem to find when this piece of
shit legislation is up for debate. If anyone else knows where to find it, please go ahead.
Permalink | 22 comments