Librarians And Their Subtle Protection Of Children From The Internet

This guarantees every individual the freedom to write and read what they choose. Yet in the past twenty years, thousands of books have been challenged in almost every state. This censorship is against the American ideals of individual freedom. While most censors intend to “protect” others from things they consider objectionable (Time, p.85), they are still taking away the rights of others to choose for themselves.

The biggest problem school libraries seem to face is where to draw the line on book content. But school libraries must understand that allowing book banning, they are taking away the opportunity for all students to read , instead of letting the parents decide what their child should be reading. Finlo Rohrer, BBC News Washington, explains that “In the US more and more parents are pressing schools to withdraw books with bad language or sexual content.” Parents that are uncomfortable with books in school libraries have made the effort to completely remove them from the library altogether. But when parents press to remove books that they might find unacceptable, they are actually deciding for the rest of the students as well. Mike Rose argues that “One disturbing aspect if censorship is its power to deny students in one class or an entire school system the right to read particular texts” (Agee, 61). Parents have every right to watch what their child reads and

Also, the ALA doesn’t see how suppressing ideas makes America a democratic society, and fully supports educating library staff to preach about user privacy (ALA). The ALA also feels strongly when other privacy issues of the Act are brought forth. They argue that privacy is essential in the promotion of an individual’s seek of free speech, association, and thought without being scrutinized, therefore they are prepared to educate as many as possible about the surveillance of library users (ALA). “The USA PATRIOT Act and other recently enacted laws, regulations, and guidelines increase the likelihood that the activities of library users, including their use of computers to browse the Web or access e-mail, may be under government surveillance without their knowledge or consent, so the ALA suggests to “urge all libraries to adopt and implement patron privacy and record retention policies that affirm that "the collection of personally identifiable information should

The practice of the censorship of books in schools has been prevalent due to the explicit content of them. Parents have been complaining to schools about books that count as required reading because they disapprove with the points made in the book. If a book consists of offensive or sexually explicit material, then parents would challenge the schools about them in order to prevent their children from reading them. Censorship in general has been an intensely debated issue because it is considered an infringement to the First Amendment of the United States Constitution while others argue it is used to conceal inappropriate things (Aliprandini and Sprague). The banning of books in school curriculum has also been debated since parents see

Many times in the past decade and a half since the Act was passed, there have been numerous reports of suppression of the rights protected by the First, Fourth, Fifth and Sixth amendments of the Bill of Rights, directly threatening the freedom of association, information, speech, and the right to legal representation as well as the right to liberty. This is simply unacceptable - what is the point of having a law of the land if we create and ratify legislation that destroys that supreme law? For instance, in clear violation of the Fourth amendment, the library surveillance introduced by the Patriot Act allowed monitoring of library’s public computer terminals and use of secret search warrants to seize any tangible thing in a library without probable cause and court procedure. It also imposed a gag order on booksellers and librarians to prevent them from disclosing details of surveillance.()CITE The extent of surveillance in libraries is just another reason Americans need to realize that their privacy rights have been snatched from them under the disguise of the Patriot Act. It is important to realize that the surveillance does not stop at the district or township libraries. It has reached our residential doorsteps without us realizing it. In this era of digital communication, most people rely on technology to stay connected with the rest of the world. The Patriot Act allows federal agents to monitor electronic communications, which includes wireless phones, email, and internet, without much oversight. It also allowed the government to seize business records of telecom companies as well as customer records from the Internet Service Providers.

The parents of our communities tend to fall on either side of the issue, divided into pro and anti-censorship groups. The big question that everyone is asking is if a student were to open a book and read about drugs, sex, or violence will this make a child more susceptible to this kind of behavior? Our United States board of education believes so, and has installed censorship safety precautions in the literature that is available in public schools and libraries. According to the American Library Association between 1990 and 2000 6,364 challenges against books were brought to Office of Intellectual Freedom by parents, teachers, and different pro-censorship organizations. The grounds for these challenges were that the books contained sexually explicit material, offensive language, satanic references, violence, homosexuality, or promotion of a religious belief. Some books that were on this list include The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn (for incessant use of the n word), The Catcher and the Rye (Depicts teenage depression, prostitution and use of the f word) and Go Ask Alice (Instances of Drug Use, sex, and suicide. People that are pro censorship argue that no books are being banned. That, in fact, you can buy those same books in many bookstores or other places. They argue that is their right, as taxpayers to decide what their children should have

The American Library Association promotes the freedom to choose or the freedom to express one's opinions even if that opinion might be considered unorthodox or unpopular, and stresses the importance of ensuring the availability of those viewpoints to all who wish to read them. Free thought and expression are rights protected by the first amendment of the United States constitution however there are people that continue to fight to censor and ban materials that they find offensive. Banning books robs people from learning and forming their own opinions people who challenge books usually have good intentions claiming that they want to protect children from suggestive content, dangerous opinions and profanity. The Office of Intellectual Freedom reports the top three reasons for books to be challenged are that material is sexually explicit, contains offensive language or is unsuitable to any age group. Although we need to be aware of what we choose to expose our children and ourselves to banning and censoring does more harm than good. It is wrong to ban books, everyone deserves access and exposure to different perspectives so that they can expand their thinking and form their own opinions.

Some assert that censorship is not necessary because it violates the First Amendment of the Constitution which guarantees the right to free speech. In an article titled “Banned Books” it states, “According to the ALA President Carol Brey-Casiano, ‘Not every book is right for every person, but providing a wide range of reading choices is vital for learning, exploration, and imagination. The abilities to read, speak, think, and express ourselves freely are core American values.’” (Brunner 1). In this quote, the ALA President explains in her point of view why the use of censorship is unnecessary.

Some people are all for censoring what children can read so that they are not corrupted. Other people believe that individuals should have the choice in what they want their children exposed to, and school libraries face this problem frequently. A majority of parents do not want their kids exposed to certain types of books and movies, that most libraries frequently would offer. This is hard for the school, because they have to pick and choose, and virtually censor what they offer to the students to read. People should have the freedom to expose themselves to what they want.

Some people may think that it is reasonable for materials in the library to be banned because they contain information that some people are against or disagree with.

The American Library Association states that the most challenged and restricted reading material have been children books. However, challenges are not merely an expression of a point of view; on the contrary, It is an attempt to remove materials from public use, thus restricting the access to others. Even if the motivation to ban or challenge a book is well intended, the outcome is unfair for everyone else. Censorship denies our freedom as individuals to choose and think for ourselves. For children, decisions about what books to read should only be made by the people who know them best; their parents! (Letter to the Editor). I strongly disagree when people want books banned based on their own opinion of the

What would you do if you went to your child's school and saw that they were looking at inappropriate material on the internet? Would you react the same way if they were in a public library? Who decides what is okay for your children to view? Who decides where they can view it? What can you do about them being able to view these things? Are there any laws that can prevent this from happening? What are some schools and libraries doing to help prevent children form looking at such material? These are all issues that will be discussed in the next few paragraphs, along with my opinions on the matter.

“What is freedom of expression? Without the freedom to offend, it ceases to exist.” (Rushdie) As of late, the censorship of the "offensive" materials made available in public libraries is a common topic of discussion. Should a few opinions dictate what everyone else has access to? Censorship of the songs, movies, and books that are available in libraries is pointless, biased, and unconstitutional.

Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA). (n.d.). Retrieved January 17, 2012, from American Library Association: http://www.ala.org/ala.aboutala/offices/oif/iftoolkit/ALA

Internet censorship is developing far and wide and influences us, regardless that as United States citizens, we have additional technological opportunities than what many other nations do. Numerous Americans underestimate the opportunities that living in the United States permits us. Whether we are sending electronic mail, posting on our social media pages, or seeking out the latest news, we are ensured the opportunity of self-expression and an inexhaustible amount of information right at our fingertips. Censorship takes control of people's expression, and many countries, governments, and leaders support it for this reason. Internet Censorship in the United States in comparison to different nations brings to light the global and ethical issue regarding the basic human rights of education, communication, and freedom.