Republicans vs. the internet (again)

Republican senator Michael G. Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania has proudly announced a bill, HR 5319, that would require any library or school that receives any federal funding to censor "social-networking" websites. The latter is, according to various news sources, very broadly defined and would include most weblogging services as well as wikis, instant-messaging services, many e'mail services, and many interactive news-and-commentary sites such as DailyKos, Redstate, etc. In essence, it seeks to block access to the whole generation of interactive, user-centered web applications that are loosely referred to as "Web 2.0".

Unfortunately, Thomas doesn't seem to have the full text of this bill, HR 5319, available yet, and I'm dependent on published news summaries such as BusinessWeek, personal blog-entries, and legislative alerts from groups like the ALA.

Now I'm willing to grant that some social-networking sites may be useless or even counterproductive in a school environment. But local schools are perfectly capable of blocking troublesome websites on their own, without this kind of federal mandate. (What ever happened to the Republican love of local control, small government, and parental responsibility? Evidently, it was whisked away like a cardboard theater prop the moment they took control of the juggernaut that they spent the last twenty years screaming against.)

Furthermore, the mission of public libraries is not nearly as restricted and specialized as that of schools. Even if this bill made sense for schools, it makes no sense at all for libraries, whose computer services exist in order to link the general public with the electronic world, not to wall them off from it. And I can testify that it works. One of the regular users of Suburban Public Library has achived a bit of note lately on DailyKos for her regular commentaries about the recent changes in Medicare. That wouldn't have been possible if this kind of restriction were in place, and both she and those all across the nation who read and benefitted from her commentaries would be the poorer for it.

Even if it affected only users under the age of 18, it would be a disaster. The extremely broad ban contemplated by Rep. Fitzpatrick would in effect wall them off from the ongoing public conversations that they need to be aware of if they want to become knowledgeable adults. And, entertainingly, it might actually outlaw services like www.tutor.com, which provides live online tutoring with qualified teachers through school and library computer connections.

The rationale, of course, is to protect the children from "online predators". The reality? Once again the Republicans are using nuclear weapons to hunt cockroaches, inflicting enormous collateral damage on the vast, law-abiding majority in order to win political points for largely illusory blows against a small minority of abusive users.

Or -- to use an entirely different metaphor -- they're standing, like King Canute, at the low-water mark on the beach, holding up a hand and shouting "stop!" at the waves of the advancing tide. I don't think that interactive web applications will disappear just because Representative Fitzpatrick is afraid of them.

If this misguided bill is passed, it will serve only as one more barrier blocking those who access the internet through public spaces like libraries from being able to participate in the most active and vibrant part of the world's economy of information. And, of course, it'll do absolutely nothing to "protect" any kid who has access to his own, or his parents', computer.