Censorship and Internet Blocking

Blocking the Internet in schools could theoretically be a good idea. Most people would agree that pornography is not an appropriate subject matter for children to be viewing, and especially not at school. If Internet blocking technologies were advanced enough to only block the pornographic material and to do it effectively then there would not be such opposition. Unfortunately, that is not how it works and there are many reasons why blocking the Internet is not effective and does not work.

To effectively block even 10% of the pornography on the Internet almost all of the content on the Internet would have to be blocked. There is no blocking technology advanced enough to block just pornography. This is called Under-blocking. Unless blocking technology companies block the Internet completely they cannot protect children from viewing pornographic sites (www.eff.org).

Blocking technologies never just block the small proportion of pornography that they are able to filter out. They end up blocking useful and non-offensive material. This is referred to as over-blocking. Most of the material on the Internet is informative and useful and should not inadvertently or intentionally get blocked. Blocking pornographic material only is not possible using Internet blocking technology. They cannot effectively filter pornographic contect only without blocking valuable information (www.eff.org).

Permitting local control of the type and scope of materials blocked is difficult even on the simplest of blocking technologies. Blocking technologies are subject to expert controls. "Experts" in blocking technology companies are depended upon to decide what should and should not be seen. The websites that are blocked is even kept a secret from those using the blocking technology. There is only one blocking company that makes list of the blocked sites available to their customers or the general public (www.eff.org).

The criterion that is used to decide what should be blocked is vaguely defined and subjectively applied to everyone who accesses the Internet. Instead of being customized and designed to meet the needs of particular communities, blocking technologies group all Internet users together into one group and provide the same blocks for everyone (www.eff.org).

Blocking technology companies make many mistakes in assigning websites to block lists and almost always rely on automated systems for making content decisions. Blocking technologies tend to be error-prone. There are no effective means to check whether a website was correctly assigned to a block list or to override the blocking. There is also no way to appeal the multitude of incorrect decisions made by blocking technology companies (www.eff.org).

When the U.S. government requires blocking in public schools and libraries, the government mandates censorship in direct conflict with the U.S. Constitutional guarantees to free expression and freedom of association. Laws prohibiting the production and distribution of child pornography and obscenity already apply to the Internet. This should not be enforced by the Federal government. If a school district decides to implement a blocking technology they should be able to but should not be forced to do so by the government (www.eff.org).

Blocking technology blocks "controversial" materials related to certain issues or communities disproportionately more than other materials, thus unfairly discriminating against whole communities of people accessing, publishing, or broadcasting on the Internet. Discrimination is not fair not matter where it occurs. People should not have to face discrimination based on what blocking technology companies feel is appropriate or not (www.eff.org).

Blocking technology operation can be relatively easily bypassed even by children. Blocking is very vulnerable and in no way is it foolproof. With the knowledge that kids have today about computers, Internet blocks would prove to be no match for some (www.eff.org).

Internet blocking technologies can be very problematic. Use of blocking technology causes problems with computers during installation, maintenance, upgrades, and removal that negatively impacts the use and performance of the computers. These problems can include computer crashes, access time delays, web display errors, and other problems impacting negatively the ability to access the Internet effectively. Not only are internet blocks not effective they are also harmful to computer systems (www.eff.org).

Internet blocking is an unsuccessful remedy to an important problem that requires a more thoughtful solution. Internet blocking puts the focus on the wrong things. Parents, teachers, librarians, administrators, and local communities must work together to come up with Constitutionally acceptable solutions that encourage learning in a safe environment on the Internet, rather than relying on an unworkable technological fix (www.eff.org).

The Internet has an overwhelming volume of information. Internet traffic has been growing at an expansion rate of 15 to 20 percent a month. Trying to locate illegal or offensive data on the net would be harder than trying to isolate two paired words in all the world's telephone conversations and television transmissions at once. The difficulty of this grows harder and harder by the hour. All of the features on the Internet make it close to impossible to censor harmful material.

After reviewing all of the reasons why internet blocking can not work it is easy to see why blocking is not the best option for protecting children from obscene material on the internet. Though blocking technologies may filter a small amount of pornography the downfalls are far too many to look over. Since Interent blocking does not remove all the content that is deemed inappropriate for children there is no reason to incur all the other damages that they bring. People need to focus on other ways to protect their children and to protect themselves from censorship.

There are many ways which people can fight back against censorship. In his book, 50 Ways to Fight Censorship, Dave Marsh gives easy and reasonable ways to take a stand againt censoring. He says that the single most important thing that one can do is to speak out againt censoring. Speaking out is the primary duty of every freedom fighter. Silence is a form of censorship and when there are important issues at stake, it is a form of death. Marsh suggests that people talk about censorship, confront local politicians, attend censorship meetings, and sponser free speech "open-mikes" (Marsh, 5). Though it is a good start, speaking out is not enough.

Opposers of censorship need to take action as well as voice their opinions. One easy way to get into action is to register and vote. Voting for president every four years will not cut it though. Voting for sheriffs, mayors, and school boards can be just as important when working to defend freedom of speech. People should also read as much as possible about censorship and read books that have been banned (Marsh, 35).

When the government imposes censors on its citizen's basic rights are taken away. All American's are entitled to freedom of speech and artistic expression. Without these rights America is not a nation of freedom. Artistic expression should include all books, movies, paintings, posters, web pages, dancing, theater, graffiti, comics, television, music videos, and anything else produced by creative imagination. Freedom of expression may mean that people have to tolerate some are that is offensive, insulting, outrageous, or just plain bad. But that is a small price to pay for the liberty and the diversity that form the foundation of a free society (Heins, 5).

Supporting freedom of speech may also mean that people will hear things that they do not agree with or believe but is that not what the first amendment is all about? The first amendment gives poeple the freedom to say what they think without retributions from those who do not share their opinion. Internet blocking puts a limit on this right. It makes the first amendment mean that people are free to express themselves as long as it is not offensive to others. If something is offensive to someone, they should not look at it. It is not fair to take away one group's rights to appease another group.

The national government should not be the one to choose what citizens have access to online. If parents want to block certain websites, that is their prerogative and they should be able to do so in their home but the government should not take these rights away. It is not fair for Congress to pass laws taking away rights that have been stated for years and years in the Constitution. If a school district decides to use Internet blocks they should be able to do so, but they should not be forced because effective blocks will take away many priceless sources of information from their students.

People are responsible for what they choose to do, say, and view. It should not be up to the federal government to decide for the country what is suitable online and what is not. They would not do this is the newspapers so why should it be allowed on the Internet? If the American public only read about what the government thought was suitable, would we know of anything that was going on in the world around us?

Bibliography

Garry, Patrick. An American Paradox: Censorship in a Nation of Free Speech. Westport: Praeger,1993.

Heins, Marjorie. Sex, Sin, and Blasphemy: A Guide to America's Censorship Wars. NewYork: New Press, 1993.

Libertarian Party: The Party of Principle. http://www.lp.org/lp-blue-ribbon.html

Marsh, Dave. 50 Ways to Fight Censorship: And Important Facts to Know About the Censors. New York: Thunder's Mouth Press, 1991.

Parker, Barbara. Protecting the Freedom to Learn: A Citizen's Guide. Washington DC: People For The American Way, 1983.

Ravitch, Diane. The Language Police: How Pressure Groups Restrict What Students Learn. New York: Knopf, 2003.

Stay, Byron. Censorship: Opposing Viewpoints. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1997.

The Intellectual Freedom Committee. Intellectual Freedom for Children: The Censor is Coming. Chicago: American Library Association, 2000

The National Coalition Against Censorship. http://www.ncac.org/

The National Website for the Electronic Frontier Foundation. http://www.eff.org/