4.2.2001 00:05
Cybertalk by Timothy C. Barmann Murphy's law
Something's
wrong with
Internet
legislation
Jonathan Bertman seems an unlikely opponent of a new law designed to protect children from objectionable material on the Internet.
He's a family physician, a father of two young boys, and he believes that using filtering software to keep children from stumbling upon objectionable material on the Web is a good idea for parents.
"There is scary stuff on the Internet," said Bertman, of North Kingstown. "We really have to be careful what our children are looking at."
Yet Bertman has joined a lawsuit, filed by the American Civil Liberties Union two weeks ago, that seeks to overturn the federal Children's Internet Protection Act. The law, passed in December, was intended to shield children from the scary stuff Bertman speaks of.
It requires schools and libraries that get federal funds to install some sort of filtering mechanism on computers with Internet access to prevent minors from seeing obscene or "harmful" images. The law is to be phased in over the next year, beginning April 20.
The problem Bertman has with the law is that it will likely make it difficult, if not impossible, for library patrons and high school students to access a Web site he runs called AfraidToAsk.com.
The site has frank depictions and explicit pictures about topics we are sometimes uncomfortable talking about. Sexually transmitted diseases. AIDS. Depression. Hemorrhoids. Breast feeding.
"It brings all these issues together under topics we're afraid to ask about," said Bertman, who is also an assistant professor at Brown University. "The site is really trying to show people it is okay to discuss this."
He started the Web site in 1996 after finding that his patients were asking him lots of questions they were clearly uncomfortable talking about. And they kept asking the same types of questions again and again.
So he put together a site with his answers, and illustrated it with pictures and drawings from medical journals and other Internet sites.
Over the past five years, he said he's invested about $10,000 of his own money. "It's not a money-maker," he said. "It's a money drainer."
His sister in Cambridge, Mass., who is a graphic designer, redesigned the site for him. A college friend helped him sign up an advertising company, which now provides enough revenue to sustain the site's operating costs. Some 100,000 people visit each month.
The site does have some jarring pictures. For example, one can see up-close, the devastating effects that gonorrhea has on male and female genitalia. The pictures are all presented in a clinical way; there's nothing erotic about them.
Bertman is the first to acknowledge that parts of his site are not for children. His intended audience is adults and "mature" teenagers. He doesn't want his own children to see it until they are old enough to handle it.
But Bertman says that a 17-year-old who is struggling with life-changing decisions, such as whether to become sexually active, should be able to access it.
Bertman's central concern is that the filtering programs libraries and schools will be required to install aren't smart enough to determine the context of how information is presented. For example, it's obvious to people whether the word "penis" is used in a medical sense, or as a sexual reference. But computers have a much more difficult time figuring that out. So filtering software typically blocks Web pages containing the word, just to be safe.
At least one program, CyberPatrol, blocks access to all of AfraidToAsk.com, he said, even sections dealing with depression and skin cancer.
Bertman said he got involved in the suit after the ACLU told him about a 15-year-old girl in Pennsylvania who was given a school assignment to do a report on sexually transmitted diseases. She wasn't able to view Bertman's site at her local library, which used filtering software, he said.
"I do have a hidden agenda: I don't want teenagers getting pregnant," he said. Too often he's seen patients getting pregnant when they didn't mean to, he said.
"I want to get the point across [tha sexually transmitted diseases] are very real, they are very scary, and you want to protect yourself."
Adults at libraries may also have trouble seeing his site after filtering software is mandated. Many libraries don't have the resources for separate computer labs for minors and adults, so all computers at those libraries would likely have filtering software installed.
(Many libraries also oppose the law. The American Library Association filed its own suit the same day the ACLU did.)
Bertman's participation in the suit has been a personal struggle for him because he agrees with the law's intent.
"It concerns me I might play a hand in having a child see something that is going to potentially hurt them."
He's not opposed to parents using filtering software -- in fact, he says he'll likely use it himself to protect his own kids.
But he said a better solution is needed for schools and libraries, rather than a one-size-fits-all federal mandate.
"The fact that we'd like to stop this law doesn't mean we should sort of forget about this issue. What we really need is local parents in communities to come up with our own decisions at the library level, the school level -- Internet policies and how we are going to protect immature kids and younger children from accidentally looking up this stuff.
"When I weigh the Children's Internet Protection Act versus the censorship issue, it's a close call. But I fall on the side of fighting against censorship."
Timothy C. Barmann covers technology for The Journal. His column runs every other week on the More For Your Money page. Send him comments via e-mail at tim@cybertalk.com.
Digital Extra:
To learn more about the Bertman's site, the ACLU lawsuit, and the new law, visit:
Printer-Friendly Version