Morality In Media 'Saddened But Not Surprised' by Supreme Court's Ruling on 'COPA' Case

6/29/2004

From: Patrick McGrath of Morality in Media, 212-870-3217, Web: http://www.moralityinmedia.org or http://www.obscenitycrimes.org

NEW YORK, June 29 -- Robert W. Peters, president of Morality in Media, issued the following statement on today's U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Ashcroft vs. American Civil Liberties Union, Docket No. 03-218:

"I am saddened, but not surprised, that the Supreme Court has again ruled in favor of Internet pornographers and against the right of government to protect children by striking down the Child Online Protection Act (COPA). In 1997, the Court also invalidated the Communications Decency Act, intended to restrict children's access to indecent content on the Internet.

"For over eight years-and counting-there has been no legal protection for children against the explosion of Internet pornography. During this period, countless children have been exposed to pornography as numerous surveys show, including the following:

-- Seventy of teens ages 15-17 had 'accidentally come across' pornography while on the Internet. Of these teens, 55 percent said 'being exposed to pornography would have a serious impact on kids under 18.' (Kaiser Family Foundation December 2001).

-- Nearly 16 percent of visitors to adult-oriented Web sites were under the age of 18.' (Reported in Youth, Pornography and the Internet, published by the National Research Council, at subsection 3.3, May 2002.)

-- Most girls (ages 13 to 18) say they can get around parents' rules...Nearly half say they're able to...get into a porn site (42 percent).' (USA TODAY, 2/13/02, quoting a Girl Scout Research Institute survey).

-- Eighty-four percent of boys ages 16 and 17 and 60 percent of girls ages 16 and 17 had 'stumbled on' Internet sex sites and 38 percent of the boys 'admit to having deliberately searched the Internet for pornography' (Sydney Morning Herald 3/3/03).

"Last year, I spoke with a mother who caught her pre-teen son using the family computer-stationed in a common area-to access porn sites. Having looked at some of the sites he visited, the mother said, 'I was naive about the Internet; I thought you had to pay for pornography.'

"The mother's discovery is supported by a survey described in the report Youth, Pornography and the Internet (National Research Council, at subsection 3-3, May 2002):

'In a survey of adult-oriented commercial sites, the majority of adult-oriented sites (about 74 percent) were found to display adult content on the first page (accessible to anyone who visits the page, often through the display of sexually explicit banner ads to other sites...about 25 percent employed practices that hindered the user from leaving the site (e.g., mousetrapping) and only 3 percent required a credit card or other "adult check" to proceed past the first page of the site (that is, most sites allow the user to take a "free preview" in which some additional content is provided.'

"The survey reported in Youth, Pornography and the Internet is supported by the experience of two retired law enforcement agents who follow up on complaints submitted to MIM's http://www.obscenitycrimes.org Web site. Most of the complaints are the result of porn spam. A very large majority ('almost all') of the porn sites they observe depict explicit sex free of charge.

"Screening technology has been available for over a decade and widely publicized by, among others, the companies that profit from its sale and by individuals and organizations opposed to laws restricting minors access to Internet pornography.

"But just as it did when invalidating the Communications Decency Act in 1997, the High Court again opines that screening technology is or may be a less restrictive means of protecting children from Internet pornography.

"Screening technology is, of course, part of the solution- especially for younger children-but as children get older, they have more and more opportunities outside the home to access the Internet, including computers at a friend or relative's home or at a place of employment. They also have access to laptops and palm computers connected to the Internet.

"Tech-savvy teens can also circumvent screening technology, and almost everyone realizes that no screening technology blocks all pornography. Furthermore, almost everyone understands that for one reason or another, many parents don't and will not use screening technology.

"No one in their right mind would say that harmful to minors laws are the whole solution to the Internet pornography problem. No one but ideologues continue to say that technology is."

MORALITY IN MEDIA is a nonprofit national organization, with headquarters in New York City, which works to curb traffic in obscenity and to uphold standards of decency in the media. MIM operates the ObscenityCrimes.org Web site -- where citizens can report possible violations of federal Internet obscenity laws to Federal prosecutors -- and the National Obscenity Law Center, a unique legal resource for legislators, prosecutors and others.