roundtable: National Journal Exon Amendment Article
roundtable: National Journal Exon Amendment Article
National Journal Exon Amendment Article
W. Curtiss Priest (BMSLIB@mitvma.mit.edu)
Mon, 05 Jun 95 16:02:29 EDT
Message-Id: <9506052005.AA23317@a.cni.org>
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 95 16:02:29 EDT
From: "W. Curtiss Priest" <BMSLIB@mitvma.mit.edu>
Subject: National Journal Exon Amendment Article
To: Telecommunications Policy Roundtable <ROUNDTABLE@CNI.ORG>
National Journal Article on Exon Amendment
CITS Observations
W. Curtiss Priest
Ms. Browning is a dedicated writer who covers Washington politics
and specializes in communications and government data.
She kindly shared the article with me and it may be reposted freely
as long as the copyright remains included.
The article is an excellent documentation of how the new information
age tools are being used to affect Washington politics as
the by-line, below, describes.
***********************************************************************
Graeme Browning Voice: 202-739-8418
National Journal Fax: 202-833-8069
1501 M Street, N.W. e-mail:
Washington, DC 20005 brow@clark.net
Copyright 1995, National Journal Inc.
***********************************************************************
Opponents of legislation that would bar ``lewd or indecent''
material from an international computer network have orchestrated an
avalanche of protests--most of them delivered by computer. The campaign
may be a preview of things to come.
*************************************************************************
BY GRAEME BROWNING
A few months ago, G. Scott Aikens, a 28-year-old graduate student,
began looking into a bill recently introduced by Sen. J.J. Exon, D-Neb.,
that would prohibit pornography on the worldwide system of computer
networks called the Internet.
First, Aikens read the text of the legislation and studied analyses of
the measure that had been prepared by advocacy groups. Then, convinced
that the bill would undermine computer users' rights of free speech,
he signed a petition opposing it being circulated by Voters
Telecommunications Watch (VTW), an advocacy group. Several weeks later,
he made protesting telephone calls to Exon's office, as well as to the
offices of Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee
chairman Larry Pressler, R-SD., and Senate Commerce Communications
Subcommittee chairman Bob Packwood, R-Ore., who have jurisdiction over
the bill.
Aikens is hardly a pioneer; Americans have been involving themselves
in the federal legislative process since the founding of the Republic.
But his case is a little different. At the time, he was living in a
dormitory at Oxford University, in England, where he was completing
work on a doctorate--and he voiced his opposition to the Exon bill
almost entirely electronically, via the Internet. Aikens studied the
legislation by downloading a copy from the Internet through a computer
modem. He read about the history of similar legislation in analyses
posted by a coalition of on-line advocacy groups to several electronic
mailing lists to which he is a subscriber.
He phoned Senate offices in response to ``emergency alerts'' that the
coalition circulated on the Internet. And he even ``signed'' the
petition with his computer, sending an electronic mail message to
VTW's New York City office giving permission to add his name and
address to an electronically generated list of other computer users
who also oppose Exon's bill.
As the Information Age dawns on Capitol Hill, special interests'
lobbying campaigns will be dramatically transformed, analysts predict.
The Internet-based drive against Exon's bill--the most sophisticated
and ambitious such computerized effort to date--has been a preview of
the interactive communications that could be the hallmark of politics
in the future.
GRANDFATHER WAS SHOCKED
Ironically, the story of this burgeoning use of computer networks starts
with two Americans who, at age 8, are older than most of the Internet's
state-of-the-art technology.
At a family reunion last Christmas, Exon watched in amazement as his
two granddaughters, both third-graders, operated their families' new
computers with a skill the adults couldn't match. ``Each time the
parents had trouble, the kids were able to get them out of it,'' he
recalled in a recent interview. ``I realized they know more about
computers than I do.'' (See box, p. 1339.)
When he returned to Washington, however, Exon says he began to hear
reports of a growing number of pornographic images available on the
Internet and a proliferation of computer-based discussion groups for
aficionados of such sexual practices as bondage and sadomasochism.
On Feb. 1, he and Sen. Slade Gorton, R-Wash., introduced an amendment
to the 1934 Communications Act that would prohibit ``lewd or
indecent'' materi al on the Internet and impose criminal penalties on
network providers who a llowed such material to be carried on or
through their systems. The bill, popularly known as the Exon decency
amendment, was later rewritten to exempt commercial on-line services
such as America Online, Prodigy and CompuServe from liability on the
ground that they shouldn't be forced to act as government censors.
Rep. Timothy P. Johnson, D-S.D., introduced the measure in the House
on Feb. 21.
Exon says that his bill simply takes the same legal protections against
harassing, obscene and indecent communications that already exist for
teleph ones and extends them to computer networks, which operate over
telephone lines.
``The whole concept of the information superhighway provides such an
exciting possibility for information, education and broadening the
scope of understanding,'' he said. ``I feel that we have an obligation
to make this wonderful new system as safe as possible for young people
to travel on.''
Regulating pornography on the Internet is becoming a popular issue in
state legislatures and among conservative groups as well. In mid-May,
for example, the Washington state Legislature passed a bill prohibiting
the electronic transmission of sexual material considered ``patently
offensive'' according to ``prevailing standards in the adult community
with respect to what is suitable for minors.'' Demo cratic Gov. Mike
Lowry vetoed the bill, but at least 13 other states are co nsidering
similar measures.
In its 10-point Contract With the American Family, released on May 17,
the Christian Coalition also charged that the Internet includes
``numerous sites . . . where hardcore pornography depicting a variety
of explicit sexual acts, even rape scenes and bestiality, are available
free and can be accessed with a few clicks of a computer button.''
Even parents who monitor their children's use of computer networks
are powerless to protect them from seeing pornography by accident,
Christian Coalition spokesman Mike Russell said. ``We believe there
ought to be some kind of controls which would limit this kind of
service going to nonsubscribers,'' he added.
Exon, who says he didn't consult with the Christian Coalition in
drafting his bill, says he agrees with the group's perspective. ``If
a kid walks in to a 7-Eleven, we don't let him see the girlie
magazines on the back rack,' ' he said. ``Why would we let him see the
same thing on the Internet that we protect him from in the store?''
Opponents of these efforts call them the worst kind of overkill. Groups
who lobby for laws regulating the Internet fail to understand that the
technology on which computer networks is based gives Net surfers the
power to fi lter out material they don't wish to see, opponents say.
``Even though many laud cyberspace as the new electronic Gutenberg
printing press, accessible to all, the Exon bill treats the
Internet . . . as if [it] were one big radio station whose broadcasts
are constantly assaulting unwilling listeners. Those who use these
new technologies know that this is not the case,'' the Center for
Democracy and Technology, a Washington-based on-line advocacy group,
wrote in an analysis posted to the Internet in late March.
More important, prohibitions such as those that Exon proposes would be
an assault on computer users' 1st Amendment rights, opponents say.
Exon's bill in particular prohibits the transmission on the Internet
of the sort of material federal law allows on radio and in print.
``One of the most important aspects of the Net is free speech and
people's access to information. Once you limit that, you start down
a slippery slope,'' said Rebecca M.J. Gould, director of policy for
the Washington-based Business Software Alliance, which represents
three-fourths of the leading computer software publishers in the
world.
Some opponents of the Exon bill and of the state measures that mirror
it consider such legislation merely a cynical--even politically
motivated--att empt to capitalize on voters' fears of things they
don't comprehend.
``Face it,'' a Senate aide familiar with the issue said, ``the
Internet is a whole new technology. The immediate reaction when people
are confronted with a new technology is `Let's censor it somehow.'
And the catchphrase to start down that road is always `Let's
protect kids.' ''
BE WIRED OR BEWARE
Congress hasn't had much experience making laws that apply to the
nebulous world the new technology has created, however. Telephones
have been around since the early part of this century. Radio has been
a fixture in U.S. homes since the days when the Communications Act
was drafted. Television developed soon after the end of World War II.
But personal computers, which sparked the on-line revolution, were
invented in the 1970s, and as late as 1987 only a few million people
in the world knew how to gain access to the Internet.
Today those figures are vastly different. Americans bought more
personal computers than televisions last year, and estimates of the
size of the Internet range from 15 million-25 million users worldwide.
Congress is still st ruggling to embrace computerized communications,
however. Despite the pro-Internet exhortations of House Speaker Newt
Gingrich, R-Ga., only 108 House Members currently have access to it.
Exon was one of the last Senators to establish an E-mail address, as
opponents of his bill are fond of pointing out.
Older lawmakers in particular find the prospect of immediate,
one-on-one computer-based dialogues with their constituents alarming,
House Science Committee chairman Robert S. Walker, R-Pa., said in a
recent speech.
``These are people who have been out practicing politics, and they
just haven't had the time to learn about technology,'' Walker said
on May 12 at a seminar on Capitol Hill sponsored by the Progress &
Freedom Foundation, a conservative think tank. ``But the growth of
technology means that politicians now have to react to our culture
instantaneously. How we're going to handle that is something I'm not
real sure of.''
On-line activists recognized that inexperience when they began
mounting their campaign against the Exon bill in late February.
``Remember, the best and most effective means of influencing a
Member of Congress is to write a letter in your own words,'' a
coalition that included the American Civil Liberties Union and two
Washington-based groups, the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the
Electronic Privacy Information Center, as well as VTW and the Center
for Democracy and Technology, cautioned in one of the first
legislative alerts on the issue to make the rounds of the Internet.
In many ways, the electronic rallying against the Exon measure
reflects the tactics honed by direct mail. Since late February, VTW
has regularly dis tributed alerts that include a brief overview of
the bill and its impact on the on-line community; a list of steps
to take to register opposition; the names, phone numbers and fax
numbers for Senate Commerce Committee members; and updates on the
status of the bill in the Senate. Directions to sites on the World
Wide Web (a graph ics-based network within the Internet), where
computer users can download copies of the bill and analyses by
advocacy groups, and a list of organizations opposed to the bill are
also included.
Some alerts offer sample letters and pointers on how to lobby Members
in person. ``Always be polite. Never threaten. Never lose your cool.
Remember we're all taxpayers, so the phrase `I'm a taxpayer' is
meaningless,'' a VTW alert for coordinators of state-by-state efforts
advised.
Electronic organizing takes effect much faster than direct mail,
however, because of an Internet phenomenon known as forwarding. The
computer programs that drive electronic mail include a re-addressing
component. To automatically pass a copy of a message on, even to
hundreds of other people, the original recipient of the message needs
only to press a button and type in the additional E-mail addresses.
Because forwarding key information is considered good manners in the
club by world of cyberspace, messages can reach astounding numbers of
people within a very short time.
VTW has been posting its alerts on the Exon measure, for example, to
the 20-30 Internet discussion groups that focus on politics and civil
liberties issues and to dozens of private Net-based mailing lists.
The advocacy grou ps that have joined the anti-Exon coalition also
send the electronic alerts to their members.
With forwarding spreading the alerts across the Internet like ripples
on a pond, 65,000-100,000 people read each message within three to
four days o f its posting, Shabbir Safdar, a New York City-based on-line
activist who h as coordinated VTW's anti-Exon campaign, said in an
interview. ``The Internet is a really good way to get the word out.
You just couldn't copy this stuff, or fax it to people, fast
enough,'' he said.
ANYONE SEEN SHABBIR?
Amassing signatures on an electronic petition works much the same
way. An alert directs computer users to send E-mail messages
containing their Internet addresses and their full names to the
group coordinating the petition. As groups such as the Center for
Democracy and Technology have established World Wide Web sites devoted
to the Exon measure, Web users can also sign a petition by filling in
the blanks on an electronic form that appears on their computer
screens. Automated computer programs then acknowledge the messages
and verify that the addresses actually exist.
Last summer, VTW, the Electronic Privacy Information Center and the
Elect ronic Frontier Foundation collected 55,000 electronic signatures
on a petit ion opposing legislation that would have required a
``Clipper'' chip--a dev ice that would give law enforcement agencies
access to computer information--in every new computer manufa ctured
in the United States. On March 22, the anti-Exon coalition presented
Pressler, the Senate Commerce panel chairman, with a petition
containing m ore than 108,000 names.
To the dismay of many in the on-line community, however, the committee
voted unanimously the next day to add the Exon decency amendment to
the massive telecommunications reform legislation now making its way
through Congress. Some on-line activists blame the vote on lobbyists
for the large commercial on-line service providers, who favor
telecommunications reform and who stopped opposing the Exon bill
after their clients were exempted from liability.
The on-line services ``successfully swung themselves a sweetheart
deal: Their lawyers rewrote huge chunks of the amendment,'' Brock N.
Meeks, an activist and Washington bureau chief for Interactive Week,
a weekly for the electronic media industry, wrote recently in Wired
magazine. ``Now they've become lapdogs.'' Representatives of the
on-line services industry declined comment.
Does the Senate Commerce Committee's action mean that the Internet
campaign against the Exon measure has been a waste of time? Not
surprisingly, coalition members say no.
``Because the whole campaign has been organized on the Internet,
we've learned that you really don't have to have a physical presence
in Washington to make your voice heard on the issues,'' said Jerry
Berman, executive director of the Center for Democracy and
Technology. ``I've been working closely with VTW for months, and
I've never even seen Shabbir Safdar.''
``Part of good lobbying is trying to persuade Members of Congress,
but in equal measure a good lobbyist tries to educate his or her
constituents. It could well be said that we've probably done a
better job educating our constituents than persuading Members of
Congress,'' said Marc Rotenberg, director of the Electronic Privacy
Information Center. ``But the reason for that is obvious: Members of
Congress don't read their electronic mail.''
An alternative to the Exon bill introduced in April by Sen. Patrick
J. Leahy, D-Vt., has also given the Internet campaign its second
wind. Leahy's bill directs the Commerce and Justice Departments to
undertake a study of the issues concerning free speech, privacy
rights and the protection of minors that the Exon bill has raised
and report to Congress within five months.
``We are all concerned about children getting access to obscenity
and other information, such as bomb-making instructions, that could
harm them. It doesn't matter whether those materials are distributed
in print or online or over TV,'' Leahy said in an interview. ``But
strong concerns quickly acted upon can lead to bad legislation.''
The Center for Democracy and Technology has begun collecting
signatures at its Web site for a new petition that backs Leahy's
proposal. Some 6,000 computer users signed the petition electronically
in the first two days it appeared, and signatures continue to arrive
``at the rate of one per minute,'' a center representative said.
Several on-line advocacy groups are using the anti-Exon campaign to
experiment with ways to push the Internet's technical envelope for
future lobbying efforts.
The Center for Democracy and Technology has added computer programs
called ``autobots'' to its Web site that automatically send
interested computer users updated status reports on the Exon and
Leahy bills. The Electronic Privacy Information Center is tinkering
with interactive programs that Rotenberg said ``will increase our
visibility on Capitol Hill.''
Rep. Ron Klink, D-Pa., substituted the Leahy study for the Exon
decency amendment when the House Commerce Telecommunications and
Finance Subcommittee voted out its version of a telecommunications
reform bill. The full committee approved the measure at a May 24
markup. Opponents of the Exon bill predict that the Leahy approach
will have similar success on the Senate floor.
Computer-based lobbying will also move beyond the privacy and
free-speech issues on which it has concentrated in the past,
Rotenberg said.
``I don't think it's going to be very long before health care
reform, tax cuts and foreign policy are debated on the Internet,''
he added. ``The 1996 presidential campaign will be an enormous
catalyst for that process.''
Browning pornography sidebar
Hed: click, click. and Suddenly you're in pornland
How easy is it to find pornography on the Internet? Not very . . .
until recently, that is.
Less than a year ago, you had to be reasonably sophisticated about
technology to, say, download dirty pictures onto your home computer
screen or read someone's passionate recounting of his affair with a
German shepherd. But now, thanks to the booming popularity of the
World Wide Web--a graphics-based network within a network-- many of
those X-rated delights are accessible, as the Christian Coalition
recently charged, ``with a few clicks of a computer button.''
I discovered this fact late one night as I was researching the
accompanying story on the World Wide Web, which is itself part of
the Internet. In the past two months, several on-line advocacy groups
have established Web sites to provide computer users with information
on their fight to stop the so-called decency amendment that J.J. Exon,
D-Neb., has introduced in the Senate. Exon would ban ``lewd or
indecent'' material from the Internet and impose criminal liabilities
on ce rtain network providers who allow such material to be carried
on their systems and have not been specific ally exempted.
The technology that drives the Web became available to the public
only about 18 months ago, but it's already revolutionizing electronic
communications. Not only is the Web vastly easier to use than any
other program for acc essing information on the Internet, but it can
also deliver full-color pictures or video, sound and data
simultaneously, in a manner much like television. (See NJ, 4/1/95,
p. 794.)
Best of all, the Web uses the sort of point-and-click mouse-based
technology that has made Apple Computer Inc.'s graphical computer
programs so popular. In other words, you don't have to remember a
string of complicated computer commands to use the Web.
On-line activists who oppose Exon's bill argue that pornography on
the Internet doesn't pose a threat to children because they aren't
technically advanced enough to access it. ``You have to download
pornographic pictures and decode them. You have to understand
graphics formats and graphics software,'' said Shabbir Safdar, an
activist who is coordinating an on-line lobbying campaign against
the Exon bill.
Wondering if that line of reasoning held true for the World Wide Web,
I went on an Internet fishing expedition. First I called up the
comprehensive index of Web sites maintained by Yahoo Inc., a
California firm (http://www. yahoo.com). Under ``Society and
Culture'' I clicked on ``Sex.'' A list of more than 40 categories
and sub categories appeared. I clicked, purely by random, on
``Bianca's Sex Toys'' (http://bianca.com/shack/goodvibe/toys/index.html).
The result wasn't anything I hadn't seen as an adult, but I wouldn't want
my computer-literate 6-year-old daughter to discover it.
A few more clicks on the list brought up--at no cost--a Web site
full of X-rated Japanese cartoons, a discussion group called
``Transgender Forum'' and a string of postings on bestiality. A Web
site entitled ``Hotel Noir'' demanded a $2 fee for pictures that
depict ``the darker side of sex.'' I complied with the rules for
opening an Internet credit card account, got a credit password--and
chickened out.
How much technical ingenuity would it take to follow my steps? You've
got to have a fairly powerful computer and some up-to-date programs
to reach the Web. But as Web sites proliferate, more and more homes
are gearing up. Finding Yahoo and applying for a credit account takes
more sophistication than my kid could manage right now. In four or
five more years, it would be a different story.
On May 15, Surfwatch Software Inc., a California firm, unveiled a
computer program called ``Surfwatch,'' which allows parents to
automatically block what the firm calls ``unwanted sexually explicit
material on the Internet.'' Other software firms are working on
similar programs, on-line advocates say.
Exon applauds Surfwatch but adds that it's only the first step toward
making the Internet safe for young users. ``I get so disgusted with
some of these people who say monitoring the Internet is Mom and Dad's
responsibility, '' he said in an interview. ``
If these people think parents should stand over their kids' shoulders
all the time, they must never have had children.''
_______________________________________________________________________________
| W. Curtiss Priest, Ph.D., Director *********************** |
| Center for Information, Technology, & Society * Improving humanity * |
| * through technology * |
| 466 Pleasant Street *********************** |
| Melrose, MA 02176-4522 BMSLIB@MITVMA.MIT.EDU |
| Voice: 617-662-4044 Gopher or WWW to our publications: |
| Fax: 617-662-6882 gopher.eff.org (under similar organizations, CITS |
| WWW: http://www.eff.org, under Documents & File Archives, under Gopher |
_____________________________________________________________________________|
![[CNI Home Page]](/Images/home.gif)