Papers in PDF format

- ignored efforts by a prominent academic to warn journalists that the study which featured in the story may
have major failings.
- refused to release the study, which was conducted in an academic institution, for peer review.
- allowed figures from the study to be reported in a way which was not consistent with balance and fairness
(primary journalistic values)
- allowed incorrect statements to be made about the extent of the study.
- oversensationalised the story by using “shock” artwork.
It could thus be in the best interests of the Internet community to gather data on what is actually happening
within the area of pornography, to assess:
- whether human rights abuses of subjects used for pornographic material are taking place
- whether the Internet is being used as a marketplace for the sale of pornography
- Whether pornography is interfering with the important "public forum " functions of the Internet, and whether
it is limiting access by women and children to important information and public service resources. Working
out definitions of Internet “erotica,” “pornography,” and “sexual services,” could be a valuable mediation
function in assisting the process of tagging or rating material for screening for protection of children.
Many women from the more developed countries, accord with the traditional feminist stance against
pornography, and women of fundamentalist religious beliefs also disapprove of it. To them these values may
overwhelm other considerations, such as protecting completely free speech. In discussing freedom of speech
considerations, it thus becomes necessary for the Internet community to recognise the “special” demographics
of pornography as a political issue, and that sociological considerations may also be taken into account. If the
Internet is to develop as a universal public forum, with the “Public Sphere” characteristics identified by the
German philospher Jurgen Habermas, [Habermas, 1989] it may be argued that women, as well as children,
have a need to feel comfortable in the public spaces of the Internet, and that they should not be confronted with
pornography in such “public spaces.” While the Internet community has as a major identifiable ethic, complete
freedom of speech, this ethic does not disallow the development of particular Internet environments which may
be identified as appropriate for full public access.
Thus it is possible for the Internet community to support the right of the Internet community to uncensored
databases in principle, while accepting that some interventions in this area may be necessary. These
interventions may include the further development of screening software; self-policing of certain public
forums, public identification and exposure of certain pornographic operations.
Mediation may be particularly effective in this area, in approaching the problem of pornography from two
angles : that is, establishing the point at which adaptation of the Internet environment itself, or the use of
screening and tagging of material , may constitute a defense against attacks by national interests, and by
mediating directly with those outside interests to maintain the quality of free speech which is so valued by, and
essential to the future of, the Internet community.
Conclusion
The idea of mediation in the Internet environment is a logical progression from recognition that the emerging
Internet communications system faces serious political and regulatory problems. Though the idea of selfregulation
appears to strike at the early Internet "dream" of complete freedom, mediation, rather then being
seen as a mechanism of control, mays be viewed as a positive protector of Internet values. That is, it would
allow the Internet community to draw a line beyond which it would oppose interference from national interests,
in the interests of developing its own structure to its full social and technological potential. The mediation
concept recognises social interactions developed by the Internet, by proposing solutions which are "social" in
nature, that is, rely on community exposure, debate, and peer pressure. The framework favours education over
coercion but adheres to certain Net specific principles, allowing interventions to take place. The proposal is
constructed as a starting point of discussion and debate as to how freedoms valued by the Internet community
may best be protected.
The problems of expensive, time-consuming and complex legal solutions might apper to be overcome by the
employment of a mediation structure, (though legal solutions may be part of a resolution of conflict) but the
mediation process remains imprecise. In the realms of evolving social and political structures within the