Censored In Schools

Particular countries practice some forms of filtering. In the U.S., state-mandated cyberspace filtering takes place on particular information processing systems in K-12 schools and libraries (Reichman, 2001). Content pertaining to Holocaust denial or Nazism is blocked in Germany and France. Hate speech and child pornography are blocked in lots of countries across the

Patrick Cloonan, teacher at Manheim School District, reported to Hi-Lite Online that while some websites like YouTube have inappropriate content, it can also have beneficial materials for students. In the text it said, students have better research without web filters. This confirms that students could be asked to do an assignment and the websites that are restricted are not able to be used by those students (“NYT”).

The top three filters that are used ar Url-based, keyword-based, and finally blacklist-based. Out of the schools asked the schools said 70% use Url-based filters. This is because the filter goes more in-depth and doesn’t take away from the students learning experience. Url-based is where the filter will search for educational sites and filter out the ones that are not educational. After a list of bad sites has been generated the filter will then block those site from minors accessing them will connected to the schools internet. The second filter type, which is keyword-based, is used in 60% of the schools asked. Keyword-based could be good because the filter reads the whole site and if there are any words that have been blacklisted in the filters software then the filter will block the whole site from minors access. So let's say the website the student was trying to access had a the word, “Pornography” on it the filter would ban the website from viewing. Third, Blacklists, Blacklists have a set list of websites that have been put together by the government that they think the information on the site is harmful to minors and should be blocked from access. When schools were asked if their online content was filtered 98% said content is filtered at school. The question is though to what extent. 94% said they use filtering software such as the

You’re online, searching for a good website to use, you click on one and the next thing you know the site is blocked. You repeat this process several more times ending up with only blocked websites and left with the sites with very little to no information to help you. For us students, this is what we have to deal with just about every day. When we need information on something we usually just end up with a plethora of blocked sites instead of useful information. Allowing students freedom online would not only help them with things such as finding information for papers but it would also show us that school officials trusts us and see us as young adults. There is the issue that students could abuse this privilege by looking up offensive or inappropriate material when they know they shouldn’t. To keep that problem from happening, online searches will still be monitored, as they are now, and if a student is caught looking up inappropriate material, then that student will either be warned or get penalized for their actions. By enforcing this, it would be far more beneficial to students than by blocking

Although the internet is not school property, it makes sense that schools should hold the ability to establish boundaries that limit students’ online speech. The reason being that a limitless voice online can cause disruptions to the school environment, cyberbullying, and an infringement of a school’s responsibility to protect their students.

Since there has not been a ruling in this case, the supporters of the censorship laws had to try and find a way to get the internet censored to children. So in the year 2000, Congress passed the Children's Internet Protection Act, which is aimed at the computers in the schools and libraries that the children would have access to. This law was limited to "only the schools and libraries that participated in certain federal programs such as, receiving federal money for technology". The schools and libraries that received this money were required to "install filtering software on all internet terminals to block access to sites with child pornography, obscene material, and material that is harmful to minors". My opinion on this law is that it is even better than the firs one. They are very similar, as you can tell from their names, there is very little changed in the names of the laws. I think that the sites that a minor can look at should be filtered. This way they cannot look at things that can be harmful to them.

Should students in public high schools have the right to access uncensored internet on the campus computers or electronic devices? In an article by Occupytheory.org, Internet Censorship Pros and Cons List, they believe that controlling students' access to the internet will keep students safe from dangerous situations and unethical content. For example, filtering the internet in high schools can prevent many issues like cyber bullying, pornography and protect students from becoming a victim to predators. According to the Federal Communication Commission’s web page it explains that there is a law called (CIPA) Children’s Internet Protection Act, which requires public schools and public libraries to censor out certain websites or material that

I think that web filters are a bit too restrictive, because sometimes you could be trying to do research on, lets say, a plant. When you’re trying to find information about a plant, you click on a website that seems like a reliable source, but it's blocked because it is a “forum” website, only because it has a comment section, or going on Pandora to listen to music so you can focus on your work. I’ve done that before, and it works, but no, I get to hear lunatics ramble about Alabama all because no music is allowed.

Censorship is not limited to repressive regimes or network television. Weather we know it or not censorship is happening all the time throughout the day. We censor ourselves, we listen to censored music and as students we see the internet being heavily censored in school. The Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA) was signed into law in 2000; the law requires any public schools or library to filter any inappropriate content from the computers being used by minors. Since the law has been put in place, schools across America have installed programs that use keywords to designate certain types of websites off-limits to students while using the schools internet server. The problem with these filtering programs is that they block many sites that are not pornographic or obscene in nature, Instead they tend to block sites dealing with controversial but not inappropriate content. Although the CIPA was created to protect, it has been used as a soft form of censorship in schools.

Censorship is necessary to protect children from the internet. Internet censorship is subjected to government control of the ideas and information that can be accessed, published, or viewed on the internet by the society. We do not want the future generations to be exposed to violence, sex, hate, illegal substances, and false information. Children get easily influenced by the content they search, watch or read, which could be dangerous. The children should not be allowed to access these dangerous and inappropriate information. If today’s generation is viewing these things right now, it could mean that future generation can also view it and become more violent and this could cause the world to become more dangerous than it already is. Censorship

Students will be able to access more information using the internet now that legitimate sites are no longer blocked. Teacher and school board staff will be pleased to know that by providing providing unfiltered internet access they will save thousands of dollars a year. Students won’t be any more vulnerable to harmful content than they were under the supposed protection of internet filters. Katherine Schulten states that “the majority of students have unfiltered internet access at home and regularly use it when working on homework.”(Schulten). Since most students commonly use unfiltered internet outside of school, there is no reason to believe there would be a problem using it inside of school. Unfiltered internet access will indeed be an asset to staff and students both educationally and financially. If schools choose to provide unfiltered internet access they will be glad to have made the right choice with the benefits that they will

After being assigned a school project, a young high school student walks into the library with plans on researching about his topic before starting. It’s a biology project about the mating rituals of animals, which was a topic that struck his interest. So he boots up the computer, signs in, and starts surfing the web and different search engines for his topic. Every site he clicks on, however, has been blocked. Anything having to do with mating and breeding has been censored by the library as inappropriate material. What if this high school student doesn’t have internet at home? Being unable to look up his material at the library is sure to hinder his research. This would be a very common story if web censorship in the

School internet filters take away the students ability to effectively choose their own sites and as a product, provide a disadvantage to the students in the form of an inability to practice internet safety for themselves. Schools ban websites frivolously, even going so far as to ban sites that are linked with sites that are deemed inappropriate(D). Students will have difficulty later in life such as in college where they are unable to determine if a source is inaccurate as they have never been given the opportunity to see inaccurate sources due to restrictive school internet filters. This disadvantages the students by removing choice and critical thinking from internet use and website selection, this further shows that school internet filters are too

Many schools use an Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) that protects students and teachers privacy. An Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) is a policy that a user must agree to follow in order to be provided with access to a network or to the Internet. For example, when a student first logs on the computer for the first time there is this long page, that most people do not read, that explains the computer of policy and once you scroll down to the end of the page it asks you to agree and disagree. The long page just explains the rights and responsibilities of both the computer and the users. The components of the Acceptable Use Policy are as follows: a description of the instructional philosophies and strategies to be supported by Internet access in schools;

Second, Most people will say that is better to use parental block that deny access to risky sites. Harlan Coben mention that “parental block that deny access to risky sites don't work children know how to get around them.”