Abstract

     National attempts to control, or at least limit, transmission of objectionable speech in the electronic media might result in failure because the absence of physical frontiers in the new electronic media, coupled with the current patterns  of convergence, make regulations aimed at the speaker very difficult to enforce. An option is to shift from the traditional regulatory model based on the speaker to a paradigm based both on electronic media speakers and receivers. The United States might be in the threshold of such a regulatory shift, as more regulations addressing the availability of objectionable programming depend on technology-based blocking mechanisms controlled by the receiver of the information: the end user of the new electronic media.
     This paper addresses constitutional and policy implications of such a regulatory transition. First, a definition of objectionable speech is provided, along with a discussion of how traditional content regulations have attempted to provide constitutional solutions to the problems associated with the exposure of minors to that content. Second, the paper takes a brief look at how the elements of convergence and transnationalism of electronic media affect the implementation of traditional regulatory approaches based solely on the speakers. Finally, the paper suggests that a variable approach, which balances responsibility between speakers and receivers for exposure of minors to objectionable content in the electronic media, might assist policy-makers in their interest in protecting minors from harm. It is argued that the United States might be taking the initial steps in that direction, relying on end user-controlled blocking mechanisms that allow parents and other guarding adults to pre- determine content to be accessed by minors under their care. However, gaps in technology might delay full implementation of such an approach.