It's a Crime for 12-Year-Olds to Read The New York Times Online

page: 1
17
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 10:42 AM
link   

It's a Crime for 12-Year-Olds to Read The New York Times Online


www.theatlanticwire.com

The Electronic Frontier Foundation has a word of warning: many teenagers are wantonly breaking the law every day by reading news sites on the web because the Department of Justice's weird implementation of vague laws has left a number of media outlets with odd age-based legal prohibitions for their web sites.

It's hard to beat the headline the EFF uses: "Are You A Teenager Who Reads News Online? According to the Justice Department, You May Be a Criminal." The organization, a non-profit focused
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.cbsnews.com
www.eff.org
www.ibtimes.com

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
How SOPA (as written) might kill ATS and free speech online (UPDATED)
SOPA is back???
Is ACTA good or bad?
Battle for Ending Free Internet Continues With UN
edit on 7/4/13 by diqiushiwojia because: Fix URL




posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 10:42 AM
link   
According to the news, in the US, it's illegal to read the NY Times, Boston Globe and NBC News if you're under 13 and BuzzFeed, ThinkProgress and Infowars if you're under 18. The ABC, Rush Limbaugh, the Huff Post and Fox News are good for the whole family.

I'm not American, but I think that's pretty silly and the law should really be reformed. Before that happens, I hope your government doesn't enforce this law.

This paragraph from the EFF link is especially interesting:

And it’s no excuse to say that the vast majority of these cases will never be prosecuted. As the Ninth Circuit explained, “Ubiquitous, seldom-prosecuted crimes invite arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement.” Instead of pursuing only suspects of actual crimes, it opens the door for prosecutors to go after people because the government doesn’t like them.


It often happens in Hong Kong. For example, a man giving free drawings for kids on the street has been prosecuted for commercial activities, but the large companies who send armies of salespeople on the street aren't prosecuted. In this case, your government could prosecute people for reading news sites they don't like.

www.theatlanticwire.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 10:46 AM
link   
I wonder if you can get the NYT Online from an elementary school library.

Would that make the government funded school criminal?



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 10:50 AM
link   
I am so glad I am not a kid, growing up in this time and place.

All we had to worry about were things like "Nuclear Overkill Zone" and how we all lived in one in Southern California back then. Learning math and getting through wood and metal shop classes...while looking forward to driver's ed classes. Indeed.. Life was considerably different before Uncle decided he had the right to run every one of these 300+ million lives like his own child.


The kids really have it the worst though, don't they?



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 10:55 AM
link   
You would be amazed at some of the silly laws on the books in some states.

Did you know that in Texas its against the law to run for or hold public office unless you believe in God?

Still on the books.



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 11:07 AM
link   
Statutes, not law.

There are millions of them, everything that could be illegal is pretty much illegal. And those things that arent illegal yet will be illegal at some point.

Look at us in the UK, we have the same thing, millions of bs statutes to make the average man a criminal. Statutes are created by government for their own ends, nothing else.



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 11:16 AM
link   
Yeah its illegal because they want to keep our children ignorant and NOT think for themselves
utter crap



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 11:19 AM
link   
before everyone goes ballistic...user information is usually needed when you log in to read online material....the online publication DOES NOT WANT TO BE SUED for gathering information on underaged kids....so....the kid has to get permission....that's it...



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 11:20 AM
link   
May the Saints preserve the 'Elites' from the thinkers, of which there are many!



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by HomerinNC
Yeah its illegal because they want to keep our children ignorant and NOT think for themselves
utter crap


no...they want the parent to take a couple of minutes to verify that they allow their kids to give information needed for log-ins. parents tell their kids all the time "don't talk to strangers"....same line of reasoning.
maybe...a deeply religious family does not want their 12-year-old child reading about abortion, or birth control, or sexual crimes, in the NY TIMES...this isn't hard to understand folks
edit on 7-4-2013 by jimmyx because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 11:28 AM
link   
If I am interpreting the situation correctly, perhaps "illegal news reading" can be compared to jaywalking in the sense that both are technically crimes in some places but prosecution is not enforced.



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 11:30 AM
link   
It should be a crime for people of ALL ages to read the NYtimes!!!

Most people don't know that their local paper is just a new york times company**..

The paper execs don't know a damn thing about what people want to read, how to read it, or how they are sharing it.. The old paper machines contain 50 copies of the paper but doesn't know how many you paid for. Might of worked for the past 50 years doesn't mean it will now.



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 11:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by jimmyx
before everyone goes ballistic...user information is usually needed when you log in to read online material....the online publication DOES NOT WANT TO BE SUED for gathering information on underaged kids....so....the kid has to get permission....that's it...

from what i can tell, logging in isn't a prerequisite for this. their logic is that simply viewing the website indicates that one has agreed to the t&c. it has nothing to do with information being collected.

recently i was thinking of what it means to have rights taken away while visiting another's property (whether it be in cyberspace or physical land). stores can forbade people from concealed carrying on their premises, but who determines what rights you lose on another's property? someone may argue "a person can take a life on their property" and that is true, but ONLY if there is very good reason. so for what reason are guns specifically prohibited? what allows this?

there are so many statutes and precedents that it isn't even funny. contradictions abound, and still people are required to follow the law even when contradictions occur.



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 11:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
I wonder if you can get the NYT Online from an elementary school library.

Would that make the government funded school criminal?


But the app can be dowloaded to any smartphone.

www.nytimes.com...

This is another stupidity, isn't it?

edit on 7-4-2013 by Trueman because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by starfoxxx
It should be a crime for people of ALL ages to read the NYtimes!!!

Most people don't know that their local paper is just a new york times company**..

The paper execs don't know a damn thing about what people want to read, how to read it, or how they are sharing it.. The old paper machines contain 50 copies of the paper but doesn't know how many you paid for. Might of worked for the past 50 years doesn't mean it will now.


Oxford defines a crime as



illegal activities


or



an action or activity that, although not illegal, is considered to be evil, shameful, or wrong


In this context, reading a newspaper in the 21st century can be interpreted as a crime (ie. shameful) vs. surfing the web for news.



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 12:01 PM
link   
reply to post by diqiushiwojia
 


Isn't this what Oppressive Regimes like Nazi Germany, North Korea, the Soviet Union etc. would do?



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by MysteriousHusky

Originally posted by starfoxxx
It should be a crime for people of ALL ages to read the NYtimes!!!

Most people don't know that their local paper is just a new york times company**..

The paper execs don't know a damn thing about what people want to read, how to read it, or how they are sharing it.. The old paper machines contain 50 copies of the paper but doesn't know how many you paid for. Might of worked for the past 50 years doesn't mean it will now.


Oxford defines a crime as



illegal activities


or



an action or activity that, although not illegal, is considered to be evil, shameful, or wrong


In this context, reading a newspaper in the 21st century can be interpreted as a crime (ie. shameful) vs. surfing the web for news.


I don't need your clarification, i'm not a moron, don't treat me like a schmuk, and you won't be treated as such back.



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 12:05 PM
link   
reply to post by starfoxxx
 


No offense intended. Merely expanding the boundaries of what can be constituted as a crime.



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 12:07 PM
link   
sorry...but the phrase "making a mountain out of a molehill" comes to mind. a kids "rights" have not been violated if a private company refuses service to them.



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 12:09 PM
link   
reply to post by diqiushiwojia
 


Some news stories are for a more mature audience.

If a parent wants their children to read stories on a website with a requirement for a mature reader they can allow it. This is what parental advisement is... and why children can view and purchase mature content with parental advisement.





top topics
 
17
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join