Children’s Online Protection Law
The Persuasive Research Paper
Wolran Kim, Aug 2010
How long is the average person sitting front of computer everyday? These days, people input all information in and out from computers. How about children? They’re learning about the world on the keyboard and living on the World Wide Web. They are thrown in infinite space, the Internet. Technology affects society in many ways and it has also created new problems. Should the government enact and enforce laws to protect children from explicit Internet content? Children should be protected from exposure to inappropriate material and experiences.
One recent report estimated that about 17 million children and teens between 12-17 years of age were on the Internet. This represents about 75% of all the young people in the United States. It is important to think about some of the safety issues and the law with so many young people online. Harmful and inappropriate material can come from everywhere on the Internet—in an e-mail or instant message, through accidentally finding a pornographic website, in chatrooms, bulletin boards, or news groups (Lawton). Unlimited and uncontrolled online access also raised many concerns and created the need for new laws and regulations. The popularity of social networking sites like Facebook and MySpace has raised new fears about child predators and loss of privacy. Cybercrimes include identity theft, child pornography, hacking, and copyright trespass. “After the 2001 terror attacks in the United States, security officials grew more concerned about the threat of cyberterrorism and continue to focus on ways to safeguard our information systems” (ProQuest Staff ).
Fair Trade Commission (FTC) reviewed of the Children's Online Privacy Act and “whether it should apply the rule to new technologies,” Since the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act was passed in 1998, “the whole world has changed,” Rockefeller said during a Consumer Protection, Product Safety, and Insurance Subcommittee hearing on the law. He added “I really think Congress has to take a hard look at whether COPPA (Children's Online Privacy Protection Act) should be updated if the FTC is not going to do it.” Facebook Director of Public Policy Tim Sparapani noted that while there is no way to verify a child's age online, Facebook includes several safeguards for blocking children under 13 from opening accounts on the social networking site. He urged Congress not to weigh in with legislation, saying it might discourage innovative ideas aimed at improving children’s safety. “In fact, any amendments might undo many of our innovative privacy and safety tools,” Sparapani said. Children over 13 must depend on the privacy policies forced by web sites, which often change their policies after collecting full amounts of information from users (Gruenwald).
There are so many complicated issues and procedures for such a large area, the Internet. There are three main categories we should think about: public policy and law enforcement, technology-based tools, and social and educational strategies. The Internet is both a source of promise and concern for children. The promise is that the Internet offers such enormous positive and educational experiences and materials for our children. But children online may be too weak from exposure to sexually obvious materials, adult predators, and drug peddlers. If the full educational potential of the Internet is to be realized for children, these concerns must be addressed and secured (Thornburgh).
Actually children’s online safety is based on parents’ guidance at home but it will be much easier if children stay on the right side of the law. It will be a lot different whether protective law is out there or not because all parents do not have the same method of fostering kids. Some parents are open to letting their children use credit cards online; some parents are not. Such parental supervision is essential, says Susan Shankle, author of “What in the World Are Your Kids Doing Online?” Under the federal COPPA, nobody can ask children for personal information without parental permission (Marilyn). Sameer Hinduja, co-director of Florida Atlantic University's Cyberbullying Research Center, says he is working on a study that shows out of 5,000 students, 28 percent said they share a password with a best friend and 18 percent with a boyfriend or girlfriend. Although sharing passwords can lead to problems, Hinduja cited research that shows today's youth are tethered to technology, using everything from televisions to cellphones for about 10 hours a day. Unless every computer in that child's life has this system, it is just hard to stop all forms of cyberbullying (Bridget).
Then should society just look away from those problems? How many categories and how many different sorts of offline law? There are tons. The Internet world was built in haste in the last twenty years. Online law, especially for children, should be addressed follow the computer technology. Mr. Steyer’s organization, which was founded in 2003, provides family-oriented reviews and ratings of web sites, television shows and video games, and intends to push for more research into the media's effects on children and the setting of limits on advertising to children. He said, media has advanced at a dizzying pace, but there is almost no research about Facebook, MySpace, cellphones, et cetera (Brian).
President Obama has shown interest in the subject, telling parents to “turn off the television set and put the video games away” in speeches and running a commercial during the campaign, “Turn It Off,” that focused on education. Those media—television, films, video games, magazines, music and the Internet—were linked to rises in childhood obesity, tobacco use and sexual behavior. A majority also showed strong correlations--what the researchers deemed “statistically significant associations”--with drug and alcohol use and low academic achievement. “We have to be concerned about what's on TV, but we also have to be concerned about how much of the day kids are actually interacting with TV and other media,” he said (Brian).
Legislation of online law is at the present time a world-wide question. The Internet technology is growing too fast to pace or hold off. In 2009, Finland passed a law requiring telecom companies, as of next month, to make broadband available to all citizens, even in remote areas. UN conferences have featured discussion of an international "Internet Bill of Rights" that would include the right to affordable access; a Pew survey of attendees at the 2007 UN Internet Governance Forum in Rio found that a majority of the respondents supported the idea of such a bill. And the notion is not confined to the progressive spheres of Europe and the UN: In Washington, at least two of the five commissioners at the Federal Communications Commission, Michael Copps and Mignon Clyburn, have said that broadband needs to be seen as a civil right. (Rebecca)
It is not a light work or simple procedure even after legislated and other groups are against such legislation because such laws restrict free speech. The Supreme Court had struck down an even broader law passed in 1996 that restricted “indecency” on the Internet. After that ruling in 1997, Congress tried again with a narrow measure that targeted commercial purveyors of pornography on the Web. It was signed into law by President Clinton late in 1998. The Child Online Protection Act made it a crime to put sexually explicit material on a web site for commercial gain unless the sponsor used some means, such as requiring a credit card, to keep out minors. It never went into effect. Judges repeatedly cited free-speech grounds and blocked its enforcement. The Supreme Court in 2004 said the law violated the 1st Amendment because it would restrict the rights of millions of adults (Savage). But the Children’s Protection Law should come before of all adult free-speech and adult and children can not be treated as the same legally, just like offline.
Steven R. Shapiro, the ACLU’s legal director, said the court's decision was accord with free-speech principles. A long legal drive to protect children from sexually evident material on the Web ended in failure Jan 21, 2009 when the Supreme Court let a 10-year-old anti-pornography law went wrong. In striking down the law on free-speech grounds, the justices said parents could protect their children by installing software filters on their computers. But less than half of parents do so (Savage). This is looks like that Court said “Just stay home safely because murderers and robbers are all over the street.”
Another group against the proposed law.
A federal judge on March 22, 2007 dealt another blow to government efforts to control Internet pornography, striking down a 1998 U.S. law that makes it a crime for commercial Web site operators to let children access 'harmful' material. In the ruling, the judge said parents can protect their children through software filters and other less restrictive means that do not limit the rights of others to free speech. The law would have criminalized Web sites that allow children to access material considered 'harmful to minors' by 'contemporary community standards” (Daily American). This article reports that “Web sites backed by the American Civil Liberties Union” had challenged the Child Online Protection Act, arguing that it “was unconstitutionally vague and would have had a chilling effect on speech” (Unknown).
Of course it is part of privacy, and parenting issues are a big part of the solution, but regulation by the law will be much more dependably protective. All online crimes should be treated as offline and children must be protected by proper law because the Internet is a real world, not an imagination world. The Minor’s Online Protection Law has to be upgraded, itemized and applied to an actual state following the rapid growth of technology in accordance with the existing offline law.
The Persuasive Research Paper
Wolran Kim, Aug 2010
How long is the average person sitting front of computer everyday? These days, people input all information in and out from computers. How about children? They’re learning about the world on the keyboard and living on the World Wide Web. They are thrown in infinite space, the Internet. Technology affects society in many ways and it has also created new problems. Should the government enact and enforce laws to protect children from explicit Internet content? Children should be protected from exposure to inappropriate material and experiences.
One recent report estimated that about 17 million children and teens between 12-17 years of age were on the Internet. This represents about 75% of all the young people in the United States. It is important to think about some of the safety issues and the law with so many young people online. Harmful and inappropriate material can come from everywhere on the Internet—in an e-mail or instant message, through accidentally finding a pornographic website, in chatrooms, bulletin boards, or news groups (Lawton). Unlimited and uncontrolled online access also raised many concerns and created the need for new laws and regulations. The popularity of social networking sites like Facebook and MySpace has raised new fears about child predators and loss of privacy. Cybercrimes include identity theft, child pornography, hacking, and copyright trespass. “After the 2001 terror attacks in the United States, security officials grew more concerned about the threat of cyberterrorism and continue to focus on ways to safeguard our information systems” (ProQuest Staff ).
Fair Trade Commission (FTC) reviewed of the Children's Online Privacy Act and “whether it should apply the rule to new technologies,” Since the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act was passed in 1998, “the whole world has changed,” Rockefeller said during a Consumer Protection, Product Safety, and Insurance Subcommittee hearing on the law. He added “I really think Congress has to take a hard look at whether COPPA (Children's Online Privacy Protection Act) should be updated if the FTC is not going to do it.” Facebook Director of Public Policy Tim Sparapani noted that while there is no way to verify a child's age online, Facebook includes several safeguards for blocking children under 13 from opening accounts on the social networking site. He urged Congress not to weigh in with legislation, saying it might discourage innovative ideas aimed at improving children’s safety. “In fact, any amendments might undo many of our innovative privacy and safety tools,” Sparapani said. Children over 13 must depend on the privacy policies forced by web sites, which often change their policies after collecting full amounts of information from users (Gruenwald).
There are so many complicated issues and procedures for such a large area, the Internet. There are three main categories we should think about: public policy and law enforcement, technology-based tools, and social and educational strategies. The Internet is both a source of promise and concern for children. The promise is that the Internet offers such enormous positive and educational experiences and materials for our children. But children online may be too weak from exposure to sexually obvious materials, adult predators, and drug peddlers. If the full educational potential of the Internet is to be realized for children, these concerns must be addressed and secured (Thornburgh).
Actually children’s online safety is based on parents’ guidance at home but it will be much easier if children stay on the right side of the law. It will be a lot different whether protective law is out there or not because all parents do not have the same method of fostering kids. Some parents are open to letting their children use credit cards online; some parents are not. Such parental supervision is essential, says Susan Shankle, author of “What in the World Are Your Kids Doing Online?” Under the federal COPPA, nobody can ask children for personal information without parental permission (Marilyn). Sameer Hinduja, co-director of Florida Atlantic University's Cyberbullying Research Center, says he is working on a study that shows out of 5,000 students, 28 percent said they share a password with a best friend and 18 percent with a boyfriend or girlfriend. Although sharing passwords can lead to problems, Hinduja cited research that shows today's youth are tethered to technology, using everything from televisions to cellphones for about 10 hours a day. Unless every computer in that child's life has this system, it is just hard to stop all forms of cyberbullying (Bridget).
Then should society just look away from those problems? How many categories and how many different sorts of offline law? There are tons. The Internet world was built in haste in the last twenty years. Online law, especially for children, should be addressed follow the computer technology. Mr. Steyer’s organization, which was founded in 2003, provides family-oriented reviews and ratings of web sites, television shows and video games, and intends to push for more research into the media's effects on children and the setting of limits on advertising to children. He said, media has advanced at a dizzying pace, but there is almost no research about Facebook, MySpace, cellphones, et cetera (Brian).
President Obama has shown interest in the subject, telling parents to “turn off the television set and put the video games away” in speeches and running a commercial during the campaign, “Turn It Off,” that focused on education. Those media—television, films, video games, magazines, music and the Internet—were linked to rises in childhood obesity, tobacco use and sexual behavior. A majority also showed strong correlations--what the researchers deemed “statistically significant associations”--with drug and alcohol use and low academic achievement. “We have to be concerned about what's on TV, but we also have to be concerned about how much of the day kids are actually interacting with TV and other media,” he said (Brian).
Legislation of online law is at the present time a world-wide question. The Internet technology is growing too fast to pace or hold off. In 2009, Finland passed a law requiring telecom companies, as of next month, to make broadband available to all citizens, even in remote areas. UN conferences have featured discussion of an international "Internet Bill of Rights" that would include the right to affordable access; a Pew survey of attendees at the 2007 UN Internet Governance Forum in Rio found that a majority of the respondents supported the idea of such a bill. And the notion is not confined to the progressive spheres of Europe and the UN: In Washington, at least two of the five commissioners at the Federal Communications Commission, Michael Copps and Mignon Clyburn, have said that broadband needs to be seen as a civil right. (Rebecca)
It is not a light work or simple procedure even after legislated and other groups are against such legislation because such laws restrict free speech. The Supreme Court had struck down an even broader law passed in 1996 that restricted “indecency” on the Internet. After that ruling in 1997, Congress tried again with a narrow measure that targeted commercial purveyors of pornography on the Web. It was signed into law by President Clinton late in 1998. The Child Online Protection Act made it a crime to put sexually explicit material on a web site for commercial gain unless the sponsor used some means, such as requiring a credit card, to keep out minors. It never went into effect. Judges repeatedly cited free-speech grounds and blocked its enforcement. The Supreme Court in 2004 said the law violated the 1st Amendment because it would restrict the rights of millions of adults (Savage). But the Children’s Protection Law should come before of all adult free-speech and adult and children can not be treated as the same legally, just like offline.
Steven R. Shapiro, the ACLU’s legal director, said the court's decision was accord with free-speech principles. A long legal drive to protect children from sexually evident material on the Web ended in failure Jan 21, 2009 when the Supreme Court let a 10-year-old anti-pornography law went wrong. In striking down the law on free-speech grounds, the justices said parents could protect their children by installing software filters on their computers. But less than half of parents do so (Savage). This is looks like that Court said “Just stay home safely because murderers and robbers are all over the street.”
Another group against the proposed law.
A federal judge on March 22, 2007 dealt another blow to government efforts to control Internet pornography, striking down a 1998 U.S. law that makes it a crime for commercial Web site operators to let children access 'harmful' material. In the ruling, the judge said parents can protect their children through software filters and other less restrictive means that do not limit the rights of others to free speech. The law would have criminalized Web sites that allow children to access material considered 'harmful to minors' by 'contemporary community standards” (Daily American). This article reports that “Web sites backed by the American Civil Liberties Union” had challenged the Child Online Protection Act, arguing that it “was unconstitutionally vague and would have had a chilling effect on speech” (Unknown).
Of course it is part of privacy, and parenting issues are a big part of the solution, but regulation by the law will be much more dependably protective. All online crimes should be treated as offline and children must be protected by proper law because the Internet is a real world, not an imagination world. The Minor’s Online Protection Law has to be upgraded, itemized and applied to an actual state following the rapid growth of technology in accordance with the existing offline law.