In my last column, I vented a bit about how our society is not doing enough to help parents protect children from being exposed to explicit material in video games, television shows and on the Internet. I promised I’d have some ideas on how to improve the situation this week, so let’s get right to it.

I think the biggest concern most parents have today is the Internet. If you sit down and imagine the worst possible sounds and images a child could possibly be exposed to, I can almost guarantee you there’s at least a dozen Web sites dedicated to that very thing. So, I’m going to take on that 800-pound gorilla first.

What we need to do is keep children away from adult-oriented Web sites without inhibiting the free exchange of information that makes the Internet such a cool invention. Filtering software undoubtedly holds the key to making that happen, but the tools we have right now aren’t as effective as they should be.

The problem is that the filters aren’t easy enough to acquire and use, and they often don’t do a good enough job of keeping out the bad stuff and letting through the good stuff. There are a couple of things that could be done to make Internet filtering programs more useful to parents.

First, every single company that provides access to the Internet should be required by law to provide a good content filter integrated into their software. The filter should self-install and (this is very important) the default setting on the filter should be “on.” In other words, the adult who pays for the Internet connection should have to take definitive action to allow adult sites to be accessed from their computer.

And to make those filters more effective, I believe that anyone who runs a Web site intended for adults should very explicitly encode their site with a marker that could easily be picked up by content filters. We need to put an end to “stealth” porn sites that slip through the screening process. Everything should be completely above board and anyone who tries to disguise an adult site as something else should be penalized by law.

A similar philosophy could be applied for cable television. Many cable providers offer a parental lock feature that allows parents to block channels or specific programs from being viewed. Good idea, but it needs to be a requirement and not an option, and the blocking of adult-oriented shows should be a default setting and not an option that can only be activated by jumping through some technological hoops.

Video games, DVD movies and music CDs are already rated for content, so we just need to make sure there are tough laws on the books that require anyone who sells these things to require buyers to show proof of age, every time. We already do that for cigarettes and alcohol, so why not do it with other things that are obviously not suited (and presumably not intended) for the under-18 crowd?

If you agree that the law should be tweaked along the lines I’ve suggested here, I suggest that you contact your representatives in local, state and national government and let them know how you feel. You could even forward this column along to them, with my regards.

And remember — no matter what the law says, there will always be things out there that your children don’t need to see and hear, and the best and most important protection they have from these things is an involved and alert parent.

I can assure you that the creative minds that brought us gangsta rap, shoot-em-up video games, and naughtygirls.com are not looking out for your child’s best interests. If the parent isn’t doing that job, no one is.

Bill Ferguson is a columnist for the Macon (Ga.) Telegraph.