<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><link>http://tags.library.upenn.edu/tag/government_regulation+children+supreme_court+pornography</link>
<title>PennTags Feed for /tag/government_regulation+children+supreme_court+pornography</title>
<description>PennTags Feed</description>
<item><guid isPermaLink="true">http://tags.library.upenn.edu/makerecord/url/40443</guid>
<link>http://tags.library.upenn.edu/makerecord/url/40443</link>
<title>On Protecting Children From Speech</title>
<description>&lt;p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small; font-family: Times New Roman;"&gt;Citation: Etzioni, Amitai.&lt;span style="mso-spacerun: yes"&gt;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/span&gt;&amp;ldquo;On Protecting Children from Speech.&amp;rdquo; &lt;em style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal"&gt;Chicago-Kent Law Review. &lt;/em&gt;2004: &lt;span style="mso-spacerun: yes"&gt;3-53. Google Scholar. &lt;/span&gt;5 April 2009. &lt;/span&gt;&lt;a href="http://lawreview.kentlaw.edu/articles/79-1/Etzioni.pdf"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small; color: #800080; font-family: Times New Roman;"&gt;http://lawreview.kentlaw.edu/articles/79-1/Etzioni.pdf&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small; font-family: Times New Roman;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: Times New Roman;"&gt;&lt;span style="mso-tab-count: 1"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/span&gt;This article discusses and analyses the issues concerning children&amp;rsquo;s rights to free speech.&lt;span style="mso-spacerun: yes"&gt;&amp;nbsp; According to the author, &lt;/span&gt;past court cases care more about how restricting access for children would inadvertently affect adults than they do about how there is a compelling state interest to protect children from harmful speech.&lt;span style="mso-spacerun: yes"&gt;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/span&gt;To remedy this, Etzoini thinks Internet access for children and adults should become separate.&lt;span style="mso-spacerun: yes"&gt;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/span&gt;Where it is not possible to make a separation, government regulation is needed, because voluntary measures, such as parents choosing to purchase filtering softwares, are generally ineffective.&lt;span style="mso-spacerun: yes"&gt;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/span&gt;A review of research studies concludes children can be harmed by viewing objectionable media content, although this has been more definitely proven for violent content than for pornography.&lt;span style="mso-spacerun: yes"&gt;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/span&gt;Etzoini also says that as children get older, they should have greater free speech rights, and should have their content restricted less.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small; font-family: Times New Roman;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: small;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: Times New Roman;"&gt;&lt;span style="mso-tab-count: 1"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/span&gt;The article provides a counterargument to some of the other documents published concerning how children can be protected from harmful content on the Internet.&lt;span style="mso-spacerun: yes"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;The Supreme Court cases concerning section 223 of the CDA and COPA were struck down in part because it was believed that there was truly no way for&amp;nbsp;to restrict content for children without also inadvertently restricting it&amp;nbsp;for adults.&lt;span style="mso-spacerun: yes"&gt;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/span&gt;Etzioni, however, believes there may be ways to separate Internet access based on age. Additionally, this article differs from the arguments made by Thierer, because it&amp;nbsp; favors governmental regulation of content over self-regulation.&lt;span style="mso-spacerun: yes"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;Etizoni&amp;rsquo;s reason for the ineffectiveness of voluntary regulation does however relate to a concept&amp;nbsp;Thierer discusses &amp;ndash; that of self efficacy.&lt;span style="mso-spacerun: yes"&gt;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/span&gt;If people&amp;rsquo;s motivation to filter the Internet content of minors, self-regulation could potentially work.&lt;span style="mso-spacerun: yes"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;The problem right now is that efficacy is too low for people to want to take an initiative and regulate content.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
