Name of the Book: Cyber Ethics¬
Name of the Chapter: Fahrenheit 451.2: Is Cyberspace Burning?
Quote:
Any content-based regulation of the Internet, no matter how benign the purpose, could burn the global village to roast the pig.”
Lesson Expectation:
The various proposals for Internet blocking and rating. Individually, each of the proposals poses some threat to open and robust speech on the Internet; some pose a considerably greater threat than others. To urge industry leaders to develop and deploy the tools for blocking “inappropriate” speech.
Review:
The ACLU and others in the cyber-liberties community were genuinely alarmed by the tenor of the White House summit and the unabashed enthusiasm for technological fixes that will make it easier to block or render invisible controversial speech. Netscape announced plans to join Microsoft ¬ together the two giants have 90% or more of the web browser market ¬ in adopting PICS (Platform for Internet Content Selection) the rating standard that establishes a consistent way to rate and block online content; IBM announced it was making a $100,000 grant to RSAC (Recreational Software Advisory Council) to encourage the use of its RSACi rating system. Microsoft Explorer already employs the RSACi ratings system, Compuserve encourages its use and it is fast becoming the de facto industry standard rating system;
Four of the major search engines ¬ the services which allow users to conduct searches of the Internet for relevant sites ¬ announced a plan to cooperate in the promotion of “self-regulation” of the Internet. The president of one, Lycos, was quoted in a news account as having “thrown down the gauntlet” to the other three, challenging them to agree to exclude unrated sites from search results;
Following announcement of proposed legislation by Sen. Patty Murray (D Wash.), which would impose civil and ultimately criminal penalties on those who mis-rate a site, the makers of the blocking program Safe Surf proposed similar legislation, the “Online Cooperative Publishing Act.” But it was not any one proposal or announcement that caused our alarm; rather, it was the failure to examine the longer-term implications for the Internet of rating and blocking schemes.
The major commercial sites will still be readily available they will have the resources and inclination to self-rate, and third-party rating services will be inclined to give them acceptable ratings. People who disseminate quirky and idiosyncratic speech, create individual home pages, or post to controversial news groups, will be among the first Internet users blocked by filters and made invisible by the search engines. Controversial speech will still exist, but will only be visible to those with the tools and know-how to penetrate the dense smokescreen of industry “self-regulation.”
Lesson Learned:
The Internet both easily and cheaply. One of the most dangerous aspects of ratings systems is their potential to build borders around American- and foreign-created speech.
Integrative Questions:
1. What are the six reasons why self-rating schemes are wrong for the Internet?
2. What is self- rating Schemes?
3. Internet Ratings Systems ¬ How Do They Work
4. Who is Ray Bradbury?
5. Is cyberspace burning?
