IPcentral Weblog
  The DACA Blog

Wednesday, August 2, 2006

"The Protection of Minors Needs to be Guaranteed"
(previous | next)

When my daughter was born eleven-plus years ago, male friends of mine asked me what I'd do when she was a teenager and boys began expressing interest in her. "No problem," I would reply. "I'm going to lock her in a tower until she's thirty."

I was only half-joking. I know what teenage boys are like, and I'm not looking forward to my near-term future. But I also know absolute protection is impossible. Someone should explain that to European Commissioner Viviane Reding. The woman who has proposed moving broadcast regulations onto the Internet has now launched a "public consultation" on the risk to children from mobile phones. In a statement announcing soliciting comments, Reding says mobile phones "are a part of our daily lives," but then drops a big "but": "However, at the same time, the protection of minors needs to be guaranteed." Here's my comment in one sentence: The only way to guarantee minors are protected from mobile phones is to ban mobile phones.

I would never advocate such a thing, but I wouldn't put it past Reding. She has already begun a crusade to outlaw wireless roaming charges in the EU, despite the fact that the market has more than handled thorny interconnection issues in Europe.

She wants to examine all sorts of perceived dangers to minors with mobile phones, including harmful content, improper solicitation, privacy, and bullying. (Yes, bullying. When one kid sends a mean instant message to another kid, shouldn't that be handled by a team of EU bureaucrats?) She also telegraphs her true intent: "The more efficient self-regulation can become, the less the need for State intervention." Thus the Sword of Damocles is again suspended; I suggest European wireless carriers and phone manufacturers read Adam Thierer's latest recommendations on self-regulation, and quick.

I recognize there are threats to minors from any communications device. (I have developed an elaborate system for Internet access with my two children at home; if anyone is interested in the details just ping me.) The way I have dealt with the mobile phone issue so far is to not get my daughter one, despite her weekly entreaties. Now at some point in the future when she spends more time away from the house I will get her a phone, if only so I can easily reach her. I suspect I will get one that has a spending ceiling or is pre-paid, to avoid her inadvertently running up large bills (believe it or not, this is another area Reding may regulate). I will also research the various wireless carriers to find which has taken the most aggressive steps to satisfy a parent with safety concerns for his daughter. That is an advantage of a competitive market.

But where does the government fit into this equation? If I were a European I would be quite insulted at Reding's suggestion that I am not capable of protecting my child. I don't need the village raising my daughter, I'm quite capable of doing that myself.

It's always easy to stake out a position aiming to "protect" children. When I was growing up in the Valley of the Sun, every summer there were accounts of children drowning because they sought to escape the heat by sneaking into a neighbor's pool and swimming unsupervised. The Phoenix City Council passed an ordinance requiring that all pool owners surround their pools with a fence of a minimum height. Apparently the politicians determined that children are incapable of mounting a short fence. Unfortunately, children continued to drown every year. The only way to "guarantee" that no children drowned would have been to ban pools altogether. I don't recall our city leaders ever proposing that. Europeans should hope Reding isn't serious about her need for a guarantee, or they may see her call for a mobile phone ban. That would likely go over as well as her Television without Frontiers proposal, which fortunately has been moribund for the last seven months.

posted by Patrick Ross @ 12:25 PM | Free Speech

Share |

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly


Patrick - good post and I have enjoyed reading many of PFF/TechLibFront's comments on Commissioner Reding's many (awful) proposals. Two points - firstly, completely agree about the patronising nature of these proposals. They basically reflect the nature of Brussels regulation which is based on the 'we know best' approach, and the masses don't have a clue what is good for them. Many of Reding's proposals express that perfectly, particularly this and even more so TVWF.

Secondly, perhaps more importantly, to pick you up on your thought that TVWF has been moribund over the last 7 months. It has infact been the most active over the last 7 months than even before! Whilst publicly there may have been little said or done, behind closed doors in Brussels is where it is all happening.

There are two main areas to look at - discussions in the European Council and the various Committees examining the proposal in the European Parliament. In the Council, the Finns now hold the Presidency and hope to achieve a level of political agreement at the final Council meeting of the year prior to the proposal being debated in the Parliament (theoretically) in December.

The Parliament is where it gets interesting (for some) and where it gets 'messy.' There are SIX committees examining the Directive, each preparing a report for their respective Committees before a vote in December. Unfortunately, the lead committee is the Culture Committee who get final say over which amendments can go to the Parliament to be voted on (although amendments can still be proposed independently).

There has been a huge amount of lobbying by different stakeholders in recent months in Brussels. Quite how the battle will pan out is still in the air, however the two main political groups in the Parliament will be vital (as always) - the EPP-ED and the PSE. The lead committee (Culture) is expected to produce their draft report on TVWF towards the end of this month which probably won't be too industry-friendly considering which committee the representative is from.

Once that comes out and everyone comes back from their summer breaks (September) then you can expect a further flurry of both public and private lobbying on the issue.

Posted by: John Middleton at August 4, 2006 9:57 AM

Post a Comment:

Blog Main
RSS Feed  
Recent Posts
  EFF-PFF Amicus Brief in Schwarzenegger v. EMA Supreme Court Videogame Violence Case
New OECD Study Finds That Improved IPR Protections Benefit Developing Countries
Hubris, Cowardice, File-sharing, and TechDirt
iPhones, DRM, and Doom-Mongers
"Rogue Archivist" Carl Malamud On How to Fix Gov2.0
Coping with Information Overload: Thoughts on Hamlet's BlackBerry by William Powers
How Many Times Has Michael "Dr. Doom" Copps Forecast an Internet Apocalypse?
Google / Verizon Proposal May Be Important Compromise, But Regulatory Trajectory Concerns Many
Two Schools of Internet Pessimism
GAO: Wireless Prices Plummeting; Public Knowledge: We Must Regulate!
Archives by Month
  September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
  - (see all)
Archives by Topic
  - A La Carte
- Add category
- Advertising & Marketing
- Antitrust & Competition Policy
- Appleplectics
- Books & Book Reviews
- Broadband
- Cable
- Campaign Finance Law
- Capitalism
- Capitol Hill
- China
- Commons
- Communications
- Copyright
- Cutting the Video Cord
- Cyber-Security
- Digital Americas
- Digital Europe
- Digital Europe 2006
- Digital TV
- E-commerce
- e-Government & Transparency
- Economics
- Education
- Electricity
- Energy
- Events
- Exaflood
- Free Speech
- Gambling
- General
- Generic Rant
- Global Innovation
- Googlephobia
- Googlephobia
- Human Capital
- Innovation
- Intermediary Deputization & Section 230
- Internet
- Internet Governance
- Internet TV
- Interoperability
- IP
- Local Franchising
- Mass Media
- Media Regulation
- Monetary Policy
- Municipal Ownership
- Net Neutrality
- Neutrality
- Non-PFF Podcasts
- Ongoing Series
- Online Safety & Parental Controls
- Open Source
- PFF Podcasts
- Philosophy / Cyber-Libertarianism
- Privacy
- Privacy Solutions
- Regulation
- Search
- Security
- Software
- Space
- Spectrum
- Sports
- State Policy
- Supreme Court
- Taxes
- The FCC
- The FTC
- The News Frontier
- Think Tanks
- Trade
- Trademark
- Universal Service
- Video Games & Virtual Worlds
- VoIP
- What We're Reading
- Wireless
- Wireline
Archives by Author
PFF Blogosphere Archives
We welcome comments by email - look for a link to the author's email address in the byline of each post. Please let us know if we may publish your remarks.

The Progress & Freedom Foundation