|
Items in cart [0] |
Questions? Call 888-624-8373 |
| Copyright © 2009. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 15
PART I
OCR for page 16
Prepublication copy- subject to further editorial correction
1 -4
fraction of the public will not particularly care about the nuances of any given definition.)
Indeed, it was Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart who observed, "I can't define it fobscenity],
but ~ know it when ~ see it." Furthermore, the same image or text can have different meanings
and interpretations depending on context. For example, Saab Chatterly's Lover has been
considered pornographic in some contexts and good literature in others.
Recognizing these ambiguities, the committee chose to use the term "sexually explicit
material," which is material textual, visual, or aural that depicts sexual behavior or acts, or
that exposes the reproductive organs of the human body. Sexually explicit material may be used
for many purposes education, art, entertainment, science, personal sexual gratification or
fantasy, and so on. From common usage, "pornography" might be seen as material that is
intended to create sexual arousal or desire, and usually involving sexually explicit material.6
For expository and analytical purposes (and to prevent passages from being
misinterpreted or taken out of context), this report uses the term "inappropriate sexually explicit
material" in many places where it might have used "nomography." The use of the term
"inappropriate sexually explicit material" manifestly raises the issue of "inappropriate by whose
definition," a basic point that must be kept in mind in all discussions relating to this topic.
Public concern and controversy in this area arise from the fact that on today's Intemet, it
is easy to find graphically depicted acts of heterosexual and homosexual intercourse (including
penetration), fellatio, cunnilingus, masturbation, bestiality, child nomography, sadomasochism,
bondage, rape, incest, and so on. Although some such material is comparable to sexually explicit
videos and print media that are easily available in hotels, video rental stores, and newsstands,
other sexually explicit material on the Intemet is more extreme than that which is easily available
through non-Intemet media. Furthermore even the most graphic of these images can find their
way onto children's computer screens witha''t heino Roil cn~,c~ht which malr~c this ~1;~
different Dom most other media.
~ .O __~^, _.~ ~~~ ~~ A$~_~& l]~O LI13O Ill~111
Because the committee found that many people are unaware of the kinds of sexually
explicit material that can be found on the Internet, it pondered how best to illustrate the range of
6 Of course, "intent" is itself ambiguous, because it may refer to intent on the part of the creator
of the material, or intent on the part of the viewer of the material. Under this usage of the term,
an individual may believe that clinical discussions of sexual behavior and advertisements for
contraceptives or lingerie are "homographic" because some people respond to such material in a
sexual manner, even if those materials were not produced with such a result in mind. A second
issue (with this definition) arises in the likely event that a young child does not become sexually
aroused after being exposed to such material.
OCR for page 17
1
Introduction
The Internet is both a source of promise for our children and a source
of concern. The promise is of Internet-based access to the information
age and the concern is over the possibility that harm might befall our
children as they use the Internet. Realizing the promise in all its richness
requires that adults put these concerns into perspective and also take
responsible steps to address them. The purpose of this report is to help
put the risks of Internet use by children into perspective and to provide a
balanced assessment of different approaches that can help parents and
other responsible adults to deal constructively with the risks that children
face on the Internet, using as its primary illustrative example protecting
kids from inappropriate sexually explicit material on the Internet.
1.1 THE INTERNET: SOURCE OF PROMISE,
SOURCE OF CONCERN
Many policy makers, teachers, parents, and others concerned with
education reform believe that the Internet has the potential to enhance
and transform K-12 education. For example, the report of the Web-based
Education Commission, released in March 2001, asserted that "the Internet
is making it possible for more individuals than ever to access knowledge
and to learn in new and different ways" (Box 1.1~.
NOTE: Appendix B contains a list of acronyms and a glossary that the reader may wish to
consult.
17
OCR for page 18
18
YOUTH, PORNOGRAPHY, AND THE INTERNET
Increasingly, school-age children have the ability to reach the Internet,
driven by the steadily increasing fraction of U.S. classrooms and schools
connected to the Internet over the past 5 years and the growing presence
of networked information technologies in the home and elsewhere.] By
the fall of 2000, 98 percent of public schools in the United States had
access to the Internet, compared with 35 percent in 1994.2 In addition,
1Anne Cattagni and Elizabeth Farris. 2001. Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools and
Classrooms: 1994-2000. NCES 2001-071. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educa-
tional Research and Improvement. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
2School connections to the Internet have been supported by a variety of federal programs,
of which the federal E-rate program and the technology programs operated by the Depart-
ment of Education have been most important. For more information on the E-rate program,
see and on the Department of Education programs,
see .
OCR for page 19
OCR for page 20
OCR for page 21
OCR for page 22
OCR for page 23
OCR for page 24
OCR for page 25
OCR for page 26
OCR for page 27
OCR for page 28
OCR for page 29
OCR for page 30
Representative terms from entire chapter:
explicit material
INTRODUCTION
19
dial-up connections were used by 74 percent of public schools with In-
ternet access in 1996, but in 2000, only 11 percent of public schools relied
on such connections, with the remainder using faster dedicated-line
Internet connections. In the classroom, only 3 percent of instructional
rooms were wired for Internet access in 1994; by 2000, 77 percent of in-
structional rooms were connected to the Internet. In public libraries,
Internet access is nearly ubiquitous, with over 95 percent of all library
outlets with an Internet connection in 2000 and an average of 8.3 worksta-
tions per connection. Over half of these outlets have high-speed connec-
tivity.3 And around 17.7 million children had access to the Internet from
their homes by late 1999.4
Such changes are hardly a surprise. Though these adoption curves
substantially trail the overall price reduction curves for computing capa-
bility (unit capacity halves in price every 18 months), data storage (unit
capacity halves in price every 12 months), and bandwidth (unit capacity
halves in price every 9 months), it is likely that Internet access for homes
and schools will be the norm in the future.
For children, the Internet generally eliminates many constraints of
time and space encountered in the physical world and, as such, funda-
mentally broadens children's access to information and experiences. For
example, the Internet provides convenient access to an almost unlimited
and highly diverse (if usually unverified) library of information resources
that can be used for educational purposes. It enables collaborative educa-
tion and study, and it provides opportunities for remote engagement
with subject matter experts. It provides information about hobbies and
sports. Finally, it allows children to engage with other people on a near-
infinite variety of topics and interests. Through online friendships and
pen pals, their circles of acquaintance and diversity of experience can be
vastly enlarged across state and national boundaries.
At the same time, fueled by press reports and some personal experi-
ence, children's easy access to the Internet raises concerns in parents and
communities about less productive or safe aspects that may result from
their Internet use. One frequently stated concern relates to the easy
Internet availability of "pornography," but public concerns are not con-
fined to this area (as Section 1.3 discusses further).
Success in dealing with such concerns is arguably a necessary (but not
sufficient) condition for fully exploiting the social and educational poten-
3see .
4see
20
YOUTH, PORNOGRAPHY, AND THE INTERNET
fiat of the Internet for children. For example, a study from the Annenberg
Public Policy Center found that parents in the United States are deeply
fearful about the Internet's influence on their children while at the same
time believing that the Internet has important and positive educational
potential.5 Ridiculing such fears as if they were a sign either of techno-
cultural unsophistication or of insufficient dedication to the First Amend-
ment as is often done is not helpful.
Given the nature of the Internet and how children and other people
use it, it is likely that most children will be exposed to some inappropriate
material or experiences by virtue of their mere access to the Internet. This
is certainly true if no actions are taken to prevent such exposure, but the
National Research Council's Committee to Study Tools and Strategies for
Protecting Kids from Pornography and Their Applicability to Other Inap-
propriate Internet Content concluded during its investigation that there is
no set of actions that will eliminate this risk entirely.
Many policy makers at federal, state, and local levels (including mem-
bers of the U.S. Congress, state legislators, school boards, and local librar-
ies) have sought solutions that focus primarily on the availability to chil-
dren of pornography on the Internet. With some exceptions, the central
element of these solutions is a filter, based on technology that is intended
to allow objectionable content to be blocked. However, the overall prob-
lem has many facets technological, social, psychological, legal, emo-
tional, moral and so, too, does any particular proposed approach to
solution.
1.2 A CRITICAL DEFINITIONAL ISSUE:
WHAT IS "PORNOGRAPHY"?
The term "pornography" has no well-defined meaning. Despite the
fact that individuals use the term as though it does and behave as though
there is a universal understanding of what is and is not covered by the
term, judgments about the precise dividing line between the "porno-
graphic" and the "non-pornographic" vary widely. (And, as with any
public issue, a large fraction of the public will not particularly care about
the nuances of any given definition.) Indeed, it was Supreme Court Jus-
5Joseph Turow. 1999. "The Internet and the Family: The View from Parents, the View
from the Press." Annenberg Public Policy Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadel-
phia. This is not to say that concerns about the Internet are limited to the potential negative
influence on children. For example, many adults, including parents, worry about a loss of
privacy associated with Internet use. Moreover, attempts to differentiate children from
adults one aspect of protecting children from inappropriate material on the Internet-
may have privacy implications as well.
INTRODUCTION
21
lice Potter Stewart who observed, "I can't define it [obscenity], but I know
it when I see it." Furthermore, the same image or text can have different
meanings and interpretations depending on context. For example, Lady
Chatterly's Lover has been considered pornographic in some contexts and
good literature in others.
Recognizing these ambiguities, the committee chose to use the term
"sexually explicit material," which is material textual, visual, or aural-
that depicts sexual behavior or acts, or that exposes the reproductive
organs of the human body. Sexually explicit material may be used for
many purposes education, art, entertainment, science, personal sexual
gratification or fantasy, and so on. From common usage, "pornography"
might be seen as material that is intended to create sexual arousal or
desire, and usually involving sexually explicit material.6
For expository and analytical purposes (and to prevent passages from
being misinterpreted or taken out of context), this report uses the term
"inappropriate sexually explicit material" in many places where it might
have used "pornography." The use of the term "inappropriate sexually
explicit material" manifestly raises the issue of "inappropriate by whose
definition," a basic point that must be kept in mind in all discussions
relating to this topic.
Public concern and controversy in this area arise from the fact that on
today's Internet, it is easy to find graphically depicted acts of heterosexual
and homosexual intercourse (including penetration), fellatio, cunnilin-
gus, masturbation, bestiality, child pornography, sadomasochism, bond-
age, rape, incest, and so on. Although some such material is comparable
to sexually explicit videos and print media that are easily available in
hotels, video rental stores, and newsstands, other sexually explicit mate-
rial on the Internet is more extreme than that which is easily available
through non-Internet media. Furthermore even the most graphic of these
images can find their way onto children's computer screens without be-
ing actively sought, which makes this medium different from most other
media.
Because the committee found that many people are unaware of the
kinds of sexually explicit material that can be found on the Internet, it
60f course, "intent" is itself ambiguous, because it may refer to intent on the part of the
creator of the material, or intent on the part of the viewer of the material. Under this usage
of the term, an individual may believe that clinical discussions of sexual behavior and
advertisements for contraceptives or lingerie are "pornographic" because some people re-
spond to such material in a sexual manner, even if those materials were not produced with
such a result in mind. A second issue (with this definition) arises in the likely event that a
young child does not become sexually aroused after being exposed to such material.
22
YOUTH, PORNOGRAPHY, AND THE INTERNET
pondered how best to illustrate the range of material described above.7
After deliberation, the committee decided that the best way to illustrate
such material would be to invite the reader of this report to use a general-
purpose Internet search engine to search on terms such as "sex," "orgy,"
"bondage," "cum," or "rape" coupled with terms such as "pies," "avi,"
and "jpg." If the search engine's filter for adults-only content is turned
off, the search engine will return in the first several links a variety of Web
sites containing the content listed above.8 This process will illustrate the
content available, as well as the ease with which it is available when it is
deliberately sought out.
1.3 OTHER TYPES OF INAPPROPRIATE MATERIAL
AND EXPERIENCES
Youth have been exposed to materials of concern through many dif-
ferent kinds of media print (books, comic books, or magazines), televi-
sion, movies, billboards, and telephones, as well as the Internet. Corre-
spondingly, U.S. society has long been concerned about the types of
information to which youth are exposed. Frequently, such concern fo-
cuses on information related to sexual matters, from the facts and biology
of human reproduction to graphic portrayals of unusual sexual activity.
But in addition to inappropriate sexually explicit material, there are other
types of material that various parties regard as inappropriate, some of
which several students and parents told the committee were more upset-
ting or objectionable than sexually explicit material. These include:
· Hate speech and overt racism: material extolling the inherent or
moral superiority or inferiority of a particular race, ethnic group, or sexual
orientation; racial epithets; or religious bigotry. (Note that Europeans
70ne alternative was to include actual screen shots of such material in the report. How-
ever, the inclusion of such material would inevitably become the primary focus of this
report, rather than any of the committee s analytical work. A second alternative was to
provide specific Web sites that are good examples of the material described. However,
inclusion of such sites in a National Academies, report would give them undue promi-
nence, and the committee did not want to be in the position of increasing the exposure that
such sites receive.
8The reader may also find it instructive to turn the filter on to see how one type of
filtering works. In this case, the search results will be different, but some sexually explicit
material is likely to appear. As discussed in Chapter 12, filters seek to block certain kinds of
material from appearing ~or, equivalently, do not return links to those kinds of materials
but cannot perform this task perfectly. Note that the results from filters embedded into
search engines are not necessarily those that would be obtained from other types of filters.
INTRODUCTION
23
may regard such material as being of more concern than sexually explicit
material, a point that underscores the cultural dimensions of concern.9)
· Violent speech and imagery, including but not limited to
Graphic images of blood and gore (without medical purpose),
resulting from the application of weapons to the human body. These
images may be photo-realistic or cartoon-like, and may also involve ani-
mals and/or avatars.
Depictions of violence to the human, such as people being shot,
stabbed, or beaten up.
Information on the use and construction of weapons, explosives,
and other tools of violence.
Media violence has been a prominent social concern for many years,
especially given that the presence of violent media content is largely un-
regulated. In the case of media violence, the debate centers on concerns
that exposure to such content is one factor leading to childhood aggres-
sion. However, the broadcast of obscene, indecent, and profane language
is regulated by law,l° and so sexual content has been more heavily regu-
lated than violence on the public air waves.
· Expressions of extreme nationalism or extreme political views: for
example, materials from violent conspiracy theorists, and materials extol-
ling the inherent superiority or inferiority of certain nations or national
groups.
· Materials recruiting new members into non-traditional religious
groups or cults.
· Information on drugs, alcohol, tobacco, gambling, and the means
to gain access to them.
· Scientific concepts such as evolution and the "Big Bang" theory for
the creation of the universe.
Of course, this short list does not begin to exhaust the type of materi-
als that some individuals may regard as inappropriate for children. Dis-
entangling this relativism from the necessity of action cannot be made
easy by the mere introduction of technical means, because technology
cannot divine human intent or judgment (a point addressed further in
Chapter 2~. Further, different individuals even within a given commu-
nity may have very different sets of concerns.
9See . This point is further
explored in Computer Science and Telecommunications Board, National Research Council,
2001, Global Networks and Local Values, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.
10 18 U.S.C 1464.
24
YOUTH, PORNOGRAPHY, AND THE INTERNET
As for inappropriate Internet experiences, the committee concluded
that the potential harm from interacting one-on-one with strangers on the
Internet is a far greater threat to children than the potential harm of sim-
ply viewing inappropriate images on the Internet.ll The likelihood that
such interactions will lead to actual meetings between children and strang-
ers, with the obvious attendant dangers, although relatively small, should
not be overlooked because of the potentially very serious consequences of
such meetings.
This theme recurred repeatedly in committee discussions with many
of the parents and children at site visits, and it served to place into per-
spective the concerns expressed about sexually explicit material. Indeed,
for these parents, the risk of predators who seek to entice children into
such encounters is an especially serious danger for children compared
with merely viewing inappropriate material, and the Internet creates op-
portunities for molesters to meet potential victims in a setting where none
of the ordinary visual and location clues of the physical world apply.
Table 1.1 describes differences in the nature of the child's interaction on
the Internet between passive and interactive exposures to inappropriate
material.
Some polling data reflect these concerns to a certain extent. For ex-
ample, a survey by the Pew Internet and American Life Projectl2 indi-
cated that while parents generally agree that for the most part the Internet
is a good thing or at least has a neutral impact on their own children, they
have many concerns about the Internet and they struggle to protect their
children from the worst elements of the online experience without keep-
ing children from its benefits. They are concerned that their children will
be stalked or harassed online (parents of girls are more concerned than
parents of boys about these matters). While only a very small proportion
of strangers who contact children via the Internet are likely to be sexual
predators, they are understandably concerned about such interactions
given the possibly severe consequences. They are also concerned about
what their children might see or read online (parents of younger children
are more concerned about this than parents of older children). And many
worry that the Internet may lead some young people to do dangerous or
harmful things.
1lThe committee does not intend to say that interactions with all strangers are dangerous.
For example, the "strangers" may be students at the same age level in another school, or
participants in a moderated chat room, or the sender of a large-group mailing list that does
not support two-way interaction. In such cases, the interaction may be reasonably safe. But
it is the potential danger raised by interacting one-on-one with unknown adults that is the
committee's primary concern.
12See .
INTRODUCTION
25
TABLE 1.1 Differences in the Nature of the Child's Interaction: Passive
Versus Interactive Exposures
Passive Interaction
Interactive Interaction
Source of "threat"
The nature of possible
danger involved
Time scale of exposure
The material itself
Psychological or emotional
harm
Short (minutes for a one-
time exposure) to long
(years for long-term media
consumption)
The predator
Physical as well as
psychological or emotional
harm
Long (weeks or months)
1.4 A BROAD SPECTRUM OF OPINION AND VIEWS
Parents have a long-recognized responsibility to care for their chil-
dren and to raise them in a manner consistent with their own values, and
they can feel that exposure to certain materials found on the Internet
reduces their ability to carry out their parental responsibilities. As argued
by one parent,l3
How I train my children and what moral values I impart to them doesn't
do much good if they're simply walking by a computer in the reference
area while an adult male is accessing hard-core pornography, which has
been a very common occurrence at our library. What gives the library
or anyone else that right, especially in a public institution, to take away
the innocence of my child? We get frequent phone calls from distraught
parents . . . who are being responsible parents with their children in the
library and suddenly being exposed to the most vile material.
While the definition of "hard-core pornography" and the frequency
of adult males using library facilities to access such material are open to
debate, sentiments such as those reflected above can be powerful motiva-
tors for political action. On the other side, another parent wrote the
following:l4
Be it books, or the Internet, or movies, or music, it's our job as parents to
teach children what we believe is acceptable and not acceptable, our
values, morals.... By the time they're old enough to read or cruise the
Internet, they're old enough to know your basics of right or wrong. My
13Michelle Yezerski, director, Citizens for the Protection of Children. See
26
YOUTH, PORNOGRAPHY, AND THE INTERNET
advice is to set perimeters in cyberspace [and] then trust their judg-
ment which you instilled.
In addition, the United States has seen in recent decades increasing
cultural and social heterogeneity, and opinions on how to protect chil-
dren from inappropriate sexually explicit material on the Internet vary
widely. Such diversity was reflected in the testimony to the committee
as well.
Because the varying definitions of pornography, the nuances of pub-
lic concern about pornography, and their implications for action defy
consensus, effective approaches that deal with pornography in ways that
honor democracy and a pluralistic society must allow for, indeed em-
power, varying community judgments (and in the case of the Internet, a
possible community with no geographic bounds on the one hand and
individual family judgments on the other), a point that is common to
dealing with any of the wide range of material that some people might
regard as inappropriate.l5
There is also considerable variability in views of the Internet as com-
pared to views of other media. In one group are those who believe that
even though the Internet is a medium unlike any others, the ethical and
moral codes, cultural norms, and laws that govern behavior on the In-
ternet should be generally the same as those that govern behavior and
interactions in the physical world.l6 For example, in the non-networked
world, such techniques include movie ratings, special (restricted) sections
of video and book stores, opaque wrappings over the covers of adult
magazines, reports to law enforcement officials of suspected child por-
nographers by photo processing lab personnel, special hours or channels
for transmission of certain types of cable TV shows, and so on. Parties in
this group suggest that the problems of minors and Internet pornography
are no different than those in other media, and they see no reason for
different goals or types of regulation in the Internet domain.
In another group are those who believe that because the Internet is a
medium unlike any other, the ethical and moral codes, cultural norms,
and laws that govern behavior on the Internet should be different from
those that govern behavior in other media.l7 This second group is itself
15Differences in such judgments are also illustrated in Computer Science and Telecom-
munications Board, National Research Council, 2001, Global Networks and Local Values.
16See, for example, Jack L. Goldsmith, 1998, "Against Cyberanarchy," University of Chi-
cago Law Review, Fall.
17See, for example, David R. Johnson and David G. Post, 1996, "Law and Borders The
Rise of Law in Cyberspace," Stanford Law Review 48: 1367.
INTRODUCTION
27
divided. Some believe that the social and societal problems posed by the
Internet differ qualitatively from and are worse than their physical
world analogs, so that special regulation is warranted, including manda-
tory filters on school or library computers and prohibitions on certain
content on the Internet that may be freely available elsewhere. Others
believe that although the problems with respect to the Internet may not
necessarily be worse than in the physical world, special attention and
regulation in the Internet domain are warranted anyway, especially where
Internet access becomes an economic or educational necessity. In this
case, the desire for regulation to cope with problems with respect to the
Internet arises because the Internet is a new medium that offers opportu-
nities for solutions that did not emerge from society's solutions to the
analogous problems in the physical world.l8
Still others argue that the Internet is so different that regulations from
the physical world should not apply at all. Indeed, in the formulation of
the project that is the subject of this report, a variety of cyber-libertarians
and industry representatives argued that the project should be scoped as
narrowly as possible, and preferably should not be undertaken at all,
because any attention to these issues would simply point inappropri-
ately, from their perspective to targets for government regulation.
There are also differing and mutually incompatible approaches to
defining what is objectionable. One approach is based on the notion that
individual communities including individual families have the right
(and obligation) to define what is objectionable. A second approach, rarely
stated but often implicit as the motivating force behind certain policy
positions, is the idea that a particular definition of objectionable namely
one supported by specific advocates with a specific social agenda is
appropriate for all communities.
Then, there is a question about the agendas of some people who
object to "pornography" and sexually explicit material. While it is likely
that agreement could be reached among people of varying perspectives
on the undesirability of minors being exposed to certain types of "hard-
core" material, there is profound disagreement about a great deal of other
material related to sexuality, including nudity, homosexuality, art, mate-
rial about sexually transmitted diseases, bestiality as it relates to animal
rights, abortion and contraception, sex education, and so on. Because
many of those who raise the most vocal objections to hard-core material
also object to many other types of material related to sexuality, those with
18For more discussion of this point, see Computer Science and Telecommunications
Board, National Research Council, 1994, Rights and Responsibilities of Participants in Net-
worked Communities, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C. This report also addresses
some of the perspectives raised in the preceding few paragraphs.
28
YOUTH, PORNOGRAPHY, AND THE INTERNET
different views fear that the objections to hard-core material expressed by
the most vocal may be at least in part a cover for an agenda that will
eventually restrict these other types of material as well.
Some parents are silent about the issue of "Internet pornography" and
do not appear to be very active in attempting to keep their children away
from these materials or in protecting their children on the Internet. Silence
and inactivity may reflect a sense that the Internet presence of adult-ori-
ented sexually explicit material is simply not much of an issue for them, or
may indicate a lack of knowledge about the quantity and type of material
available or about how to keep their children from it. Or, it may signal
resignation and an attitude that the availability of such material is yet an-
other side effect of modernity, much as the smokestacks that were once
regarded as symbols of progress. It might also indicate a principled posi-
tion that it is insulting to suggest that they should have to solve the prob-
lem, that such material should not be available so profusely in the first
place, or that regulation of such material is itself inappropriate. Or, it might
indicate that parents trust that their children will not search for sexually
explicit materials online, or that they know what to do and are able to
handle themselves should they encounter such materials.
A point on which most parties agree implicitly if not explicitly is
that the Internet is a medium in which to preserve policy ground that they
have gained in other domains and to advance their policy goals further if
possible. That is, the Internet presents both new risks (for losing ground)
and new opportunities (for gaining ground). Thus, familiar policy battles
are re-fought, clothed in new rhetoric and updated with new facts, but
reflecting the same differences in values and goals that characterized simi-
lar disagreements associated with more traditional media.
1.5 FOCUS AND STRUCTURE OF THIS REPORT
The committee's deliberations revealed a degree of complexity not
apparent from the usual political debate. Nevertheless, a number of
themes recurred frequently. These themes are sketched in the sections
above, are addressed in greater detail in chapters to follow, and are sum-
marized in Box 1.2 to provide a road map for the reader.
Part I of this report examines the issue along several dimensions and
in context. This chapter (Chapter 1) provides an initial framing of the
issue. Chapter 2 describes the rapidly changing technological environ-
ment primarily as it relates to sexually explicit material. Chapter 3 ad-
dresses the economic dimensions of the issue. Chapter 4 focuses on the
relevant legal and regulatory regimes. Chapter 5 discusses children and
their knowledge of, exposure to, and use of the Internet. Chapter 6 ad-
dresses the scientific research base regarding the impact on children of
INTRODUCTION
29
30
YOUTH, PORNOGRAPHY, AND THE INTERNET
exposure to sexually explicit material. Chapter 7 examines some of the
non-scientific considerations involved in this issue.
Part II assesses a variety of generic approaches to protecting children
from exposure to inappropriate material on the Internet. Chapter 8 poses
general considerations regarding what "protection" means. Chapter 9
focuses on legal and regulatory approaches. Chapter 10 addresses social
and educational strategies that seek to educate individuals to use the
Internet safely, to make good decisions about content to be viewed, to
reduce their exposure to inappropriate material, and to mitigate the con-
sequences, if any, of viewing inappropriate material. Chapter 11 provides
a perspective on technology-based tools for protection, and Chapters 12
and 13 focus on a variety of specific tools for use by end users and other
parties.
Part III consists of a single chapter (Chapter 14) that addresses com-
munities of action that must coordinate their use of different tools, strate-
gies, and legal and regulatory approaches. Further, it recaps key findings
and conclusions and shows relationships among several threads whose
discussion has started in Chapter 1, and it outlines where a richer and
deeper knowledge base would help to address the issue of protecting
children from inappropriate material on the Internet.
Because this report is quite long, several chapters also include a num-
ber of tables with some summary observations that provide an orienta-
tion to the material of the report.
