 |
 |
 |
Mass media: Internet
|
|||
|
Mass media: Internet
|
My intention in this section is to give you a reasonably full overview of the debate over Internet pornography in the US and the UK so that you may form your own view of the desirability of censorship. I do not consider that pornography on the Internet, however objectionable some of it may be to me personally, is the central issue in the debate over censorship, as you will see from the section on the connexion between 'communications decency' and the Telecommunications Reform Act, but pornography serves as emblematic of the issues at stake, as well as serving as a diversion from what I consider more fundamental matters. Thus the issue of pornography is at once both central and irrelevant.
As with any other medium before it, from cave-painting through printing to video , one of the foremost functions of the internet has been, and continues to be, the exploration of human sexuality, to a large extent through what might by many people be classified as pornography. It is the pornography on the Internet which seems most to have attracted the attention of the regulators as well as the general public. In Great Britain concern was especially keen in the wake of the horrific revelations which followed the arrest in the summer of 1996 of Belgian paedophile and murderer, Marc Dutroux, who is suspected of being member of a ring of paedophiles across Europe who circulated materials across the internet. As a result, Scotland Yard intimated to certain Internet Service Providers (ISPs) in the UK that they could be in breach of the law if they continued to allow access to certain internet newsgroups. Such concern has also been shown in other countries: in Germany, criminal proceedings were begun against the local representative of Compuserve for allowing the distribution of allegedly illegal materials, including pornography and instructions for sabotage [in June 1998, if I have understood correctly, this case was dropped amid some embarrassment for the prosecution - it begins to appear that the Germans are retreating from their initially hard-line approach and looking to develop a more consensual approach]; in Austria, on March 20 1997, an ISP was taken off-line without warning by the Austrian police, who confiscated a number of computers vital to the ISP's business - again the concern was access to pornography, in this case arising out of a prosecution conducted a year before.
The arguments for and against pornography on the internet are not essentially any different from those about pornography in any other medium. They boil down to two views:
Catharine Mackinnon, Professor of Law at Michigan University, is one of the most vigorous proponents of this latter view. Setting herself firmly against the First Amendment defence of pornography, she argues that pornography is not speech at all, it is action; it does not encourage the oppression of women, it is the oppression of women. (Readers who are interested in following the arguments should refer to the section on pornography).
However, pornography is defended by many, some simply arguing that there is no proof that it is in the least harmful and should therefore benefit from the same rights of free speech accorded to other modes of expression (especially in the USA, where First Amendment rights are vehemently defended), others arguing that pornography can be both liberating and informative.
In the sections which follow we shall be considering:
Media violence
Pornography
Regulation of the media in the UK
annoy.com (note that you need to be broad-minded and have a sense of humour for this; given those, an excellent site)
The Centre for Democracy and Technology
Free! - Freedom Forum Online
American Civil Liberties Union
The Internet Censorship FAQ
National Coalition Against Censorship Website
The Regulation of Pornography and Child Pornography on the Internet - downloadable paper by Yaman Akdeniz of the Centre for Criminal Justice Studies, University of Leeds
Electronic Frontier Foundation website
|