FCC and the "Fleeting Expletive" rule

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled yesterday, in a 5-4 decision, that the FCC could indeed fine networks for a "fleeting expletive" aired prior to 10 pm over the public airwaves. In the decision, they left open the possibility of re-hearing the case from the perspective of whether first ammendment rights are involved or not.

Given the fact that Obama is set to replace 3 of the 5 member FCC board, and that the "fleeting expletive" rule is a Bush administration policy, it is clear that this case is far from over.

Regardless, I am left to wonder how much this really matters in today's world anyway. Make no mistake about it - I am very pleased with the courts ruling yesterday, and fully support the fleeting expletive rule - but given that the FCC has no control over the Internet and cable television, it certainly reduces the impact of such a decision.

Unfortunately, our children see "fleeting expletives" all the time when they are playing online games with people they don't know. And, most of the time, the parents don't even know because they can't hear it from the next room - instead, it is piped into the headphones or typed on the screen. And the FCC has no control over it. Neither does anyone else.

In his written opinion on this case, Justice Scalia wrote "There are some propositions for which scant empirical evidence can be marshalled, and the hamful effect of broadcast profanity on children is one of them". Unfortunately, the harmful effect is not diminished when the broadcast mechanism is the Internet rather than TV or radio. Michael Coops, who is acting Chairman of the FCC until the new leadership is confirmed, tried to "reassure parents that their children can still be protected from indecent material on the nation's airwaves". Unfortunately, the same cannot be said of the place where they spend most of their time - namely, in online and Internet-enabled console games.

Social Networking Reunites Family

I wanted to share this story today, because I worry that I spend so much time warning of the dangers of cyber space that sometimes I forget to share the positive aspects of technology. This story reported by KSL news is a great reminder that the Internet is a great tool for helping strengthen families and bring happiness to many people's lives. The fact that a mother who gave her child up for adoption can then find him 30 years later on a social networking site is a testimony of the great blessing that technology can be in our lives.

I am so glad to be living in a time when the world is getting smaller, and technology can be used for so much good and to bless the lives of so many people. Have a great Easter weekend!

Technology won't solve the problem

I was so glad to come across this article about a study from the University of New Hampshire. It is entitled "Technology alone can't protect minors from online sex predators". Amen. The number one problem with technology solutions is the false sense of security that parents have when that technology is deployed. The problem of online predators and other cyber dangers is not going to be solved by simply making use of more technology - it requires that we interact with our children, teach them of the dangers in the world, and help them understand how to recognize the warning signs, and inform them of what to do when the see those signs.

It would be easy to mis-interpret this report, however, to indicate that there is not a problem. UNH has released other reports in recent years that indicate that online predators are not as big of a problem as the media makes it out to be, like this study indicating that it is more often the case that teenagers get involved over the Internet fully aware of what they are doing - as opposed to being lured into a meeting unwittingly by a predator. There certainly may be some validity to that notion - but that doesn't change the fact that there are predators out there, and they do prey on our children.

The bottom line from both of these reports is spot-on, in my opinion: technology won't solve this problem. Whether the problem is predators, or whether it is youth knowingly getting involved online with some one who may do them harm - the answer is not more technology. This problem will only be solved when we teach our children how to deal with these issues, and what to do about them - whether they run into these dangers in the real world or the virtual one. Technology has its place, and should be employed to its fullest - but we cannot end there. Technology cannot be a replacement for communication between parents and children.

Sexting leads to teen's death

If you haven't yet heard it, there is a new word in the English language: "sexting". It is defined as the act of sending sexually explicit photos electronically, primarily using text messaging on cell phones. These photos are usually of one self, and are normally sent to a girlfriend or boyfriend. No longer do people need to go searching for pornography on the Internet - our kids are creating it themselves, and sending it to each other on their phones. And, Internet filters and logging tools that we set up on our home computers will not catch this - it is accomplished over the phone network, not the Internet.

Of course, what these kids are not thinking about are the unintended consequences. All too often, these images will be forwarded and will spread like wildfire among many of the individual's friends and classmates. Just in the past few months there have been several news stories about this on all of the major news stations, including ABC News and CBS News. And then there is the story of Jessica Logan that aired on NBC's the Today Show earlier this month. Jessica sent a nude picture of herself to her boyfriend - when they broke up, he sent it to hundred of other students in their high school. She was harrassed, started skipping school, and simply couldn't face her peers. Finally, she walked into her bedroom and hung herself in her closet. Heart breaking.

Apart from the extreme emotional toll that sexting can have on a teenager, there is also the very real possibility that they are breaking the law - if the individual in the picture is under age, the image is considered child pornography, which has very strict laws attached to it. Distribution of one of these images to an under-aged person is also illegal. Not only are these kids causing themselves potential harm by allowing innappropriate images of themselves to exist "out there" forever, but they are also putting themselves in a very real danger of having a criminal record at a very young age, and possibly finding themselves on the sexual predators list forever.

Not very smart. But then again, teens are not known for thinking about the future. As parents, we need to know how our children are using the technology that we put in their hands - and help them understand the potential dangers and long-term effects of a split-second decision.

Cybersafety Constituency - a non-denominational initiative

I am really bothered by this article by TheRegister today. It makes the incorrect assumption that because the new Cybersafety constituency was proposed by a mormon, and someone who supports CP80, then the constituency must be a Mormon initiative to kill free speech on the Internet. Rubbish. Complete conjecture, and not even close to reality. The Cyber safety constituency, CP80 and the LDS Church are three separate entities - any attempt to link them are nothing more than an attempt to scare people into voicing opposition to an initiative that would help many people and create a safer Internet environment.

Unfortunately, as evidenced by the comments posted today, many people are taking this article at face value and are now voicing opposition to the new constituency because they don't agree with the CP80 approach, when the petition clearly indicates that the new constituency has nothing to do with CP80 at all, but rather would simply be a non-denominational organization to help make the Internet safer for our families.

If you support this initiative, based on what is written in the official petition, then PLEASE send your email of support to: cyber-safety-petition@icann.org.

And, if you happen to not be a Mormon, please let them know that - we need to show some cross-denominational support for this initiative!

30 days to make a difference!

Have you ever wondered what YOU can do to help make the Internet safer for our families? You now have that opportunity - we have 30 days to speak up in support of a vote to implement a new Internet governance organization focused on making the Internet more safe for our families. Please take advantage of this chance to have your voice heard!

For those who are not familiar with ICANN ("Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers"), it is essentially the governing body for Internet and is the entity that is responsible for overseeing the direction of this global technology. You can read more about them here.

ICANN has certain consituencies that have voting rights and that help determine the general direction of the policies that govern the Internet (as far as such world-wide technology can be governed). Many of you may be familiar with the attempt to put in place a .xxx domain that would house the adult content for the Internet - it was ICANN that had to determine whether to implement this or not (ultimately, they decided not to, which is why we don't have a .xxx domain today).

There is currently a proposal in front of ICANN for a new consituency to be created, called the Cyber Safety Constituency. You can read about this on ICANN's website by clicking here. There is a link to the introduction letter explaining this new constituency, as well as the petition itself. You can read these two documents to get a better understanding of what this new constituency will be responsible for.

Before this new constituency is approved, there is a 30-day public comment period. This is where you come in - if you are concerned about the safety of your children online, and worried about the content that they can currently access, and want to do something about the online predators that are stalking our children - make you voice heard in support of this constituency by sending an email to cyber-safety-petition@icann.org and tell them you support the "Cyber Safety Constituency". All public comments will be posted here, so you can check back to see your comments and read the comments of others on this topic.

Please do not miss this opportunity to make your voice heard! Be part of the solution, and help get this new consituency created. I did - please join me.

Utah leads the nation in online porn

This Salt Lake Tribune article is actually quite disturbing. It is a story about a recent Harvard Business School professor's study that indicates that Utah is #1 in the nation when it comes to the purchase of online pornography. Add to this the fact that Salt Lake City has shown up toward the top of the list for Google searches for extremely graphic sexual content for several years, and it shows a very disturbing trend.

The good news here (if there is any) is that this study is only looking at online pornography. There are no indications of whether this trend holds for pornography consumption in general, or if it simply means that in Utah the consumption method of choice is online rather than other means. So, it could be that this study indicates that we as a state are more technology-friendly than any other state in the nation, and we simply prefer to do all of our purchases online. Maybe we would be #1 in online book purchases, and online clothes purchases as well. OK - I admit it - am really stretching here.

So, why is it that Utah ranks numero uno in this distinctive category? Utah is a very conservative state, which would lead some to argue that we, as conservatives, are all just a bunch of hypocrites, and that this is now proof that those of us fighting the pornography battle are really closet consumers. I would be wary of such interpretations of this data. The article talks about the trends in areas with young population (OK, so Utah certainly tops this list), as well as college education and higher income. Utah would rank fairly high in all of these areas. It is also a fact that many parts of Utah, including our capitol city of Salt Lake, are becoming more liberal - based on recent voting history and trends. So, I don't think we can link this strictly to conservative "hypocrites".

The thing that really scares me is the following quote from the author of the study: "Even when I control for income, age, education, and marital status, Utah residents still consume disproportionately more than people from other states". I have no answer for why this is the case, but it makes me extremely concerned - especially for the youth of this state. More needs to be done to study this trend, and find out why Utah residents are disproportionately interested in purchasing this material online.

Very disturbing indeed.