Internet Finds a Friend in Gingrich : Rightly, and surprisingly, he opposes plan to curb indecency through regulation of content

House Speaker Newt Gingrich (D-Ga.) may have surprised some conservatives by opposing legislation the Senate approved last week to criminalize the transmission of obscene or indecent materials over the global computer web known as the Internet. Despite the political heat that was sure to follow, Gingrich correctly attacked inherent flaws in the Senate language. He said it was “very badly thought out and not very productive.”

The Communications Decency Act, sponsored by James J. Exon (D-Neb.), was intended to protect children from sexually oriented material through content-based regulation of so-called “red light” districts in cyberspace. Few people would argue with the end. But what of the means?

Legislation that would impose federal penalties--specifically up to two years in prison or fines of as much as $100,000--yet not distinguish between dirty pictures and ribald e-mail communications constitutes “a violation of the right of adults to communicate with each other,” Gingrich said.

Market-based solutions are preferable alternatives to government censorship. So is encouraging commercial providers to do more self-policing.

Rep. Christopher Cox (R-Newport Beach), for example, plans to introduce legislation that aims for the same result as the Exon measure but instead would encourage on-line providers and software developers to design products that would help parents curtail a minor’s access to objectionable materials.

Lawmakers should consider flexible alternatives to the misguided Senate language. As the House takes up debate on a broader communications bill, it should take the opportunity to help parents while protecting speech. Government simply must protect a free market in ideas.