ive federal bureaucrats off the backs of citizens and trust in the magic of the free market to solve problems. The maddening thing is this is one case where the profit motive ``is'' riding to the rescue. Ever since the alarms first went up, the software industry's wizards have been churning out programs that enable adults to monitor and block objectionable material. Not even a flaming _ e-mail parlance for a tongue-lashing _ from House Speaker Newt Gingrich has made much difference. Like many folks, Speaker Gingrich regards the congressional crackdown on the online world as an assault on every citizen's basic right to free discourse. Over the summer and in recent weeks, it appeared the House would recommend far less intrusive measures than the Senate. But the push for more reasonable steps such as online warning signs has faltered. What hope is there of keeping cyberspace as free as possible? A presidential veto would be the quick way; court cases and the inevitable discovery that the harsh restrictions just aren't enforceable would be the long, costly way. It would be better if a public outcry convinced Congress now that its attempts to curb Net-surfing are about as foolish as ordering the waves not to come rolling in (Knight Ridder 214).The two of these articles were intended to be a supplement to the main idea of this paper. They are two examples that further show why the internet can not be censored. The obscene material found on the internet has caused some decisions to be made about what violates community standards. A private bulletin board operator in California was prosecuted in Tennessee for making some material available to a member of the Memphis community. The operator in California was found guilty by the Memphis judicial system. The jury ruled that local community were co...
