Why ALCU blew the CIPA case

[Nancy Willard <nwillard@RESPONSIBLENETIZEN.ORG>]

OK, so it sometimes takes me a bit, but I now realize why the ACLU lost the
CIPA case.

There are several arguments against mandatory filtering. The strongest
argument is that filtering simply does not work. Therefore, the use of
filtering presents a situation of false security and undermines the use of
other approaches that have a much greater chance of working -- "fenced
gardens" for younger children, education about how to avoid inappropriate
sites, focus on family values, policies, and effective supervision.

The ACLU did not use this argument. They presented no evidence on the
failure of filtering technologies to block access to inappropriate material.
Their case was based solely on the argument that filters block access to
protected material. Although there was some focus on overblocking of access
to sites with controversial information for teens, the primary focus was on
the restrictions on adult access to adult material. (Now I, for one, do not
give a D#$% about the ability of adults to access adult material in a public
library, especially if there is a chance that my kids may be exposed as they
walk by.)

By failing to present evidence on the inability of filtering to block access
to inappropriate material, the ACLU created the perception that filters
actually work. This was clearly the basis upon which the Supreme Court ruled
in the CIPA case. The ACLU did this because for the COPA case they were
arguing that filtering works.

It is probable, in retrospect, that the ALA should have gone it alone on the
CIPA case.

Filtering technology is not totally effective in blocking access to
inappropriate material, is not installed on all computers that kids have
access to, and there are ways to circumvent it. Filtering technology also
mistakenly and intentionally blocks access to appropriate material,
including intentionally blocking access to appropriate, but potentially
controversial, material.

Neither technology nor US laws will effectively address the concerns of
youth use of the Internet. But it is very difficult to get the conversation
on this level.

Nancy

--
Nancy Willard, M.S., J.D.
Center for Safe and Responsible Internet Use
http://csriu.org
nwillard@csriu.org

--------------------------------------------------------------------
All LM_NET postings are protected by copyright law.
To change your LM_NET status, e-mail to: listserv@listserv.syr.edu
In the message write EITHER: 1) SIGNOFF LM_NET  2) SET LM_NET NOMAIL
3) SET LM_NET MAIL  4) SET LM_NET DIGEST  * Allow for confirmation.
LM_NET Help & Information: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/
Archive: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/archive/
EL-Announce with LM_NET Select: http://elann.biglist.com/el-announce/
LM_NET Supporters: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/ven.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------