7 - Role in Internet Censorship

In an attempt to limit access to unapproved web sites on the world wide web, the ADL pioneered what they call their "Hate Filter". The ADL has promoted their Hate Filter to parents who want to limit what the ADL considers objectionable content. More insidious are efforts by the ADL to provide their Hate Filter to public institutions such as public libraries, schools and colleges. The ADL has also worked with major Internet carries like America Online (AOL) to create "Terms of Service" which would prohibit any speech the ADL finds offensive.

The ADL web site proudly claims that their Hate Filter:

".protects children by blocking access to World Wide Web sites of individuals or groups that, in the judgment of the Anti-Defamation League, advocate hatred, bigotry or even violence towards Jews or other groups on the basis of their religion, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation or other immutable characteristics."

Limiting facts or opinions the ADL finds objectionable is not limited to their Hate Filter. ADL operatives now work with major Internet providers such as AOL to limit access to objectionable web sites. Subscribers to these services whq post opinions that the ADL doesn't like on their web pages or on Usenet are notified that their accounts are cancelled.

The ADL works to ensure that commercial ISPs create terms of service that limit what their users can read or say. By lobbying commercial carriers to censor their users, the ADL acheives their aim of outlawing free speech and expression without the contraints of the First Amendment's protections.

An ADL press release from October 21, 1996 titled "New ADL Report Documents Increased Use of Internet By Haters; ADL and AOL Explore Ways To Set Standards Against Hate Online," ADL National Director, Abe Foxman, explains in typical ADL double-talk how they are working with AOL to set policies against politically incorrect speech. These policies, known as "Terms of Service" (TOS), can then be used by commercial carriers to enforce speech regulations without concern for Constitutional Rights.

"We are working with America Online to create an atmosphere of responsibility on-line, to set standards within the framework of the First Amendment that will give assurances to parents, educators and communities that there is no tolerance for hate on-line."

In a follow-up press release from April 7, 1997 titled "ADL Calls On America Online To Adhere To Own Guidelines Regarding Hate Material" the ADL explains their relationship with AOL and what "standards within the framework of the First Amendment" means.

"In the past, the League has been gratified by the responsiveness of AOL to complaints about racism and bigotry but now calls on AOL to adhere to their terms of service regarding hate material with equal vigilance as those regarding pornography."

"While we strongly believe in freedom of speech and do not advocate censorship on the Internet," said Mr. Foxman, " we expect those companies which have created guidelines to adhere to them."

"AOL's terms of service state that AOL, Inc., its affiliates and ICPs have the right to remove content they deem, in their discretion, "harmful" or "offensive." The League calls on AOL to live up to its own commitments."

In the ADL article "Responding to Extemist Speech Online: 10 Frequently Asked Questions", the ADL explains how they work around the Constitution to stifle free speech. In this article, the ADL suggests the following:

"Commercial ISPs, such as America Online (AOL), may voluntarily agree to prohibit users from sending racist or bigoted messages over their services. Such prohibitions do not implicate First Amendment rights because they are entered into through private contracts and do not involve government action in any way.

"Once an ISP promulgates such regulations, it must monitor the use of its service to ensure that the regulations are followed. If a violation does occur, the ISP should, as a contractual matter, take action to prevent it from happening again. For example, if a participant in a chat room engages in racist speech in violation of the "terms of service" of the ISP, his account could be cancelled, or he could be forbidden from using the chat room in the future. ISPs should encourage users to report suspected violations to company representatives."

The ADL suggests in the same article that universities limit the use of their computer systems to prevent students from promoting or reading objectionable material.

"Because private universities are not agents of the government, they may forbid users from engaging in offensive speech using university equipment or university services."

"Nonetheless, public universities may promulgate content-neutral regulations that effectively prevent the use of school facilities or services by extremists. For example, a university may limit use of its computers and server to academic activities only. This would likely prevent a student from creating a racist Web site for propaganda purposes or from sending racist E-mail from his student E-mail account. One such policy -- at the University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana -- stipulates that its computer services are 'provided in support of the educational, research and public service missions of the University and its use must be limited to those purposes.'"