Censorship & High-Tech Politics: Webmaster Removes AOL From School Library's Computers

Helen editors at TCLQ.ORG
Sun Oct 19 18:22:05 MDT 1997


Interesting article.  I've been surfing for years, started out with
Prodigy, AOL, and stayed with none.  I coast the web directly and have yet
to send or receive a smutty piece of email.  Apart from disinterest, it's
very difficult finding smut on the web, IMO, but then, I've not gone
looking for it.  In searching for newsgroups, however, I've come across alt
groups for all sorts of freaks and weirdos.

When I used AOL, I browsed the chat rooms a couple of times.  Easy to
locate them, and very easy to get into racy conversations, if one is so
inclined.  Lots of heavy breathing in AOL chatrooms.  AOL is not so much an
internet provider as it is an online host.  I remember when Online Services
were distinguishable from the internet with its Jughead, Veronica, WAIS,
etc.  The internet is still not the primary service provided by AOL,
rather, their various other sites and offerings are.

Everytime I hear of a young man seduced by a homossexual adult, I KNOW that
he met the guy on AOL.

Seems to me that rights have responsibilities.  AOL as a business has a
responsibility to the consumer.  But then, maybe they're afraid that if
they don't have smut rooms, they will not have customers.
>
>Out of curiousity, anyone who still has AOL considering dropping them
>after reading this NYT article?
>
>Re consorship & its role in poltics, can we -- or political candidates
>out to "clean up the Net" -- differentiate between the "Internet" and
>"AOL" or other "Internet service providers" when its comes to "indecent"
>material on the Net?
>
>Can you "go after" AOL and not attack the entire Internet at the same
>time, as Nellen indicates above?
>
>Do folks want AOL to start monitoring chat rooms and somehow *edit out*
>or *censor* "objectionable" material?  What effects could such a move
>have on the First Amendment?  Will AOL need to go to that length in
>order to keep its customers from jumping to "pure" Net providers like
>Erols, etc?
>
>>>From the PR perspective, how could Primrose have handled it differently
>- if at all possible - when responding to such concerns/reporters'
>questions?
>
>-A
>http://www.erols.com/mack97



----------------

Helen Cadogan

I Know That My Redeemer Liveth!

http://www.tclq.org/canboulay/



More information about the Rushtalk mailing list