The odd thing about the Communications Decency Act is that it doesn't advance either communications or decency. And although it's supposed to protect children, it wouldn't help a single one of the truly endangered ones.
There's not much point in trashing this hysterical and offensive bill here (talk about preaching to the converted). But in the interest of being helpful rather than simply critical, I decided to draft my own CDA, the Media Rant version of what a "decent" act of legislation affecting communications might look like - if we lived in a world where leaders led, journalists told the truth, and parents took responsibility for their children.
We'd start by keeping most of the existing name. It invokes the notion of bringing decency and fairness to our consideration of communications, something a great legislative body like the US Congress ought to do, rather than screening videos of black lesbian movies so it can further slash NEA funding. We would just make one minor alteration in the name: The Communications Decency for Children Act (the CDCA).
Our CDCA would make the following actions federally mandated, with violations subject to fines and imprisonment:
* Politicians may not, under penalty of law, intrude upon the free speech of any American citizen unless they can prove that the speech physically harms or criminally exploits. Congress may enact no law presuming to define what is moral for law-abiding citizens, nor enact any form of prior censorship based on undocumented fears of what may or may not occur.
* Politicians are required by law to address the real problems affecting America's children - namely children having children, poor schools, racial disparities, lack of economic opportunity, the proliferation of guns and drugs. The CDCA would state as national policy that these dangers to children are far more menacing than any form of sexual imagery.
* Politicians will be prohibited from attempting to influence popular culture, from television to movies to music to the Internet. Greatly increased arts funding will be awarded and administered by bipartisan citizens and artists chosen for 10-year terms. Members of Congress have demonstrated repeatedly over the years that they are much too exploitive to fill these roles.
* It will be a federal crime for any politician to comment upon or interfere with the sexual orientation, choices, or interests of any American who does not break laws or harm others.
* Movie, TV, music, and other media companies, along with the companies that comprise America's booming $8 billion pornography business, will be required by law to donate five per cent of their profits to funding for the arts, to support visual artists, documentary makers, musicians, writers, poets, webheads - creative artists in many media. Thus, the arts need not be funded exclusively by taxpayer dollars. Let the greedy executives who happily produce so much trash (along with the rarer gems) contribute to the public good. Blockbuster action movies in which thousands of people are killed will continue to make millions, undisturbed, but a few of those millions will help support creative people and projects that can't support themselves in the commercial marketplace, but that are nonetheless important.
* The federal government, in the spirit of communications decency, will guarantee the equitable distribution of technology throughout the country by underwriting the wiring of libraries, schools, and community centers to bring new media to those who can't afford computers. In the same way massive government programs once brought water, electricity, and interstate highways to all of America, my Communications Decency for Children Act would undertake a massive public project to make America the most technologically advanced nation in the world - creating jobs, promoting cultural literacy, and linking all Americans to the global economy.
Although Congress is happy to criminalize speech by making "indecent" remarks a federal crime, it is far more reluctant to actually give American kids access to new technology.
According to The Wall Street Journal last Wednesday, about half of the teachers in the United States have received any new technology training at all. Although two-thirds of US schools claim to have Internet access, that usually means a single telephone line connected to a couple of computers in the library, the Journal pointed out last week. Equipping schools with one computer for every five students (a commonly accepted goal for education), plus connecting to the Net, training teachers, and buying software would cost $109 billion over 10 years, according to a l995 estimate by McKinsey & Co.
That's probably considerably less than it would cost to track down, round up, prosecute, and jail all the people who use dirty words on the Net in the next decade.
* My CDCA would also mandate that in legislation involving culture, technology, and the young, Congress give young people a voice and recognize that children have a right to access new technology, providing they use it responsibly.
This is a shocking bit of lawmaking, generating several changes in contemporary American life. It would require politicians to do real work rather than posture about our declining morality. It would force the government to help needy children rather than simply exploit (with the enthusiastic help of mainstream media) parents fears. It would require parents to care for the kids they bring into the world, rather than hoping V-chips, blocking software, and ratings will do it for them.
Writing this, I felt it was presumptuous for somebody like me to propose a federal law. But considering the ones Congress turns out, I could hardly do worse.
