It seems unlikely that there is a school librarian out there who has not encountered a problem with--or railed against--the presence of CIPA-mandated filters on school computers. My own career so far has allowed me to experience a full range of experiences with school computers, from a filterless library to an overfiltering situation so egregious that my journey to have it resolved culminated in suing the school district that employs me—Knox County, Tennessee. I just discovered, in fact, that a Google search for “internet filtering in schools” lists the ACLU litigation for which I was a plaintiff, Franks v. Metropolitan Board of Public Education, as its second hit.
This journey toward resolution was a long one that began many months before I thought it would ever be necessary to engage the services of civil rights attorneys. I first became aware of websites that seemed inappropriately blocked by our filtering system, Education Networks of America (ENA), in the course of helping students in the library of Fulton High School with persuasive essays on contemporary topics. This discovery was underscored by my additional role as the faculty sponsor of Fulton High’s Gay Straight Alliance (GSA), since the blocked sites that initially concerned me were those of the Human Rights Campaign (www.hrc.org) and the Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network (www.glsen.org). Of note is the fact that GLSEN is an organization that is fully endorsed by the National Education Association; their site has been listed in NEA Today magazine as a resource for promoting safe schools (citation needed?).
Since I couldn’t imagine that these sites, upon review, would continue to be blocked (yes, I know; the more stories of censorship I hear the more I...
... middle of paper ...
... I am extremely proud of myself and Ms. Brinks; my peers and myself can now have unlimited access to LGBT websites and I can have the pride in knowing I was a part of it.”
Bryanna’s feelings mirror my own in that not only am I very proud of her and of the scope of what was accomplished, but also about none of it being “hard”. Convoluted, yes. A long, long circuitous path through bureaucracy, yes. But also the best, and most obvious, thing that I have ever done. Access to information is my job description; there was no question in my mind of seeing it through to the end, whatever that was going to take. And the positive repercussions have been vast and ongoing: I have had wonderful opportunities and experiences among an ever-widening network of amazing freedom-fighting librarians and others who know more than they would like to about challenging censorship.
...eflects my own views and experiences concerning LGBT group as it relates to the NASW position on Gays and Lesbian. It is because I am a social work student that I celebrate and support this statement.
The editorial “A Case of Discrimination” published in the New York Times claims the Supreme Court should rule in favor of Hastings College of Law over the student group Christian Legal Society. The authors state the college has always had a non-discrimination policy that applied to all student groups and required them not to discriminate to receive official recognition from the college. They argue that Christian Legal Society had previously adhered to this policy and then in 2004 began to ask members to sign a statement of faith. Due to this, Hastings College of Law derecognized the student group and they sued claiming a denial of their First Amendment rights. Hastings College of Law wrote their policy to conform to California state law, which makes it illegal for state funded post-secondary educational institutions to discriminate based on religion or sexual orientation. Therefore, Hastings College of Law decided it was illegal for their student groups to discriminate as well. The Ninth Circuit decided in favor of Hastings College of Law declaring their rules viewpoint neutral and reasonable (1). Although the claim appears logical, actual evidence in support of their argument is difficult to find. Thus, their conclusion is probably false, because a decision in favor of Hastings College of Law denies their student groups their First Amendment rights and ignores years of legal precedent.
Reno v. ACLU is the 1997 landmark decision by the U.S. Supreme Court providing sweeping free speech protection on the Internet. Understandably, commentators from legal and political spheres have discussed the case in terms of familiar First Amendment issues, including precedents from telecommunications law, the long-recognized exception to free speech for "obscenity," and concern for the exposure of children to inappropriate materials.
Walt Whitman once said, “The dirtiest book of all is the expurgated book.” Between the years 2000 and 2009 a total of 3200 books were challenged in school libraries in an attempt to expurgate, or censor, the content in books provided to students. Today the trend of censorship continues as popular novels such as The Hunger Games, The Fault in Our Stars, and Captain Underpants are censored from schools across the nation (Challenges by Reason).Censorship in regards to literature refers to the examination and suppressing of a book because of objectionable material. The process of censorship in school libraries often begins with an outspoken parent, teacher, student, or administrator and ends in the banning or abridgement of a novel deemed inadmissible. Censorship is protecting many students from controversial, immoral, and potentially unsuitable content; however, this is not always the case. Students, parents, teachers, and administrators with different backgrounds, beliefs, and morals are not creating a library pleasing to everyone because of the variety of opinion. Censorship in school is not justifiable, because it restricts discussion and knowledge of new, controversial, and necessary ideas, allows a handful of people to make decisions for a larger group based on opinion, and undermines democratic ideals.
Lukenbill, W. Bernard. "Censorship: What Do School Library Specialists Really Know?" American Library Association. American Association of School Librarians, n.d. Web. 06 Nov. 2013. .
Libraries in the United States have been battling censorship since the American Library Association issued its first Library Bill of Rights in 1939. This document proclaimed the American Library Association's policy on intellectual freedom. With this bill libraries have been successful in defending their collections against censorship and supporting their right to provide unrestricted access to information for all users. Now the battleground has shifted from books to electronic information, mainly the Internet. Censorship of books has decreased, and has in turn shifted and gained much more attention in ...
Objectionable content found in challenged books across the country can range from some vulgar language, to rape and incest, and even to explicit sex scenes. However objectionable these topics may be, high schoolers are already exposed to them in some way, whether it be through listening to popular music on the radio, watching television, or browsing the internet. Many parents, and even board members of some schools, object certain books for a variety of reasons. What they have failed to realize is this: if they are so concerned about what their children read in school, are they as concerned about monitoring what they hear on the radio, see on television, and search online? Many schools across the country are now taking the technological route when it comes to teaching. This often means students can have access to the internet while in their classroom. This point goes back to the prior statement of ...
This article emphasizes the point that censors go too far when they attempt to not only ban a book for their own children but want to remove it altogether from a school library, so that other students cannot read it.
In 1998, a district court in Virginia made a ruling on the use of filtering software in public libraries that set a precedent for the unconstitutionality of internet filters. Todd Anten’s article, “Please Disable the Entire Filter: Why Non-Removable Filters on Public Library Computers Violate the First Amendment gives an account of the ruling. The Loudoun County Library had instituted restrictions to internet access on all library computers with software that would block sites that “displayed obscene material, child pornog...
One day in May 1988, Rebecca Wight and Claudia Brenner were backpacking on the Appalachian Trail in south central Pennsylvania. Claudia was thirty-one, and Rebecca was twenty-eight. Along the trail, they encountered a stranger who tried to involve them in conversation. Suddenly, the quiet of the afternoon was shattered by gunfire. Claudia was hit in the arm, neck, and face. Rebecca struck in the back and head; the shot in her back exploded her liver and killed her. The stranger, Stephen Roy Carr, shot them because they were lesbians (Oliver 8). There were laws against this of course. However, unfortunately for people who identify as homosexual, not many of these laws were followed for the reason that discrimination against gay people was clearly evident in America. When this incident happened, a social movement was well under way. This movement, of course, was the gay rights movement. One of the earlier accomplishments of the movement was in 1951, when the First National Gay Origination was founded. Yet, during the 1950s, it would have been immensely illegal and dangerous to register any kind of pro-gay organizations (Head). The gay rights movement continues to create and achieve goals even today. Many people did not support the movement; however, fortunately the gay rights movement had many followers from homosexual to straight people all over the country. Some memorable leaders would be Kathy Kozachenko, first openly gay women elected into politics, and Harvey Milk, first openly gay man elected into politics. In 1977 Harvey Milk won a seat in the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. It was there that Milk delivers a famous and inspirational speech which would later be called the “Hope Speech”. The main idea to take away from th...
The fight for gay rights was never an easy task. Those involved suffered many tragedies and withstood a great deal of anguish because the world didn’t accept them for who they were. Still, there were parts of the Gay Rights Movement worthy of celebration. Despite the fact that homophobia and the mistreatment of the LGBT community still exists today, various actions throughout the decades have furthered the fight for tolerance by opening more opportunities, increasing the amount of support, and creating more equality for those involved.
The most debatable and controversial form of censorship today is the banning of books in school libraries. Banning books that educate students is wrong and selfish. Censorship of books in school libraries is neither uncommon nor an issue of the past. Books with artistic and cultural worth are still challenged constantly by those who want to control what others read. The roots of bigotry and illiteracy that fuel efforts to censor books and free expression are unacceptable and unconditional. Censoring school books in libraries can often lead to censorship of our basic freedoms guaranteed in the First Amendment. In some cases, a minority ends up dictating the majority in censorship cases. To be told what is permissible reading material and what is not is a direct violation of the First Amendment of the Constitution.
...that school officials can be held responsible if they fail to take steps to protect gay and lesbian students from antigay harassment. The changing educational climate has created a need for school leaders to identify tools, and strategies and programs that will enhance the success of all students. The decision making process used by administration also impacts how other in the organization view them (Dalton, 2006).
Herumin, Wendy. Censorship on the Internet: From Filter to Freedom of Speech. New York. Print.
“Self pity becomes your oxygen. But you learned to breathe it without a gasp. So, nobody even notices you're hurting.” Every person who identifies as any of LGBTQPIA, (or Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans*, Queer, Questioning, Pansexual, Intersex, and Asexual) can connect directly to this quote by Paul Monette, who wrote it specifically for this group of people. Thousands of people daily are shamed for being a part of it. They are taught to despise themselves for who they are. “Gay Pride” is a common LGBT phrase for a reason: to teach people who are a part of the LGBTQPIA community that they don’t have to be ashamed of themselves. LGBT rights need a lot of work, but before we can make the commitment to do so, we need to make these groups accepted in all of America, not in only a few rare “safe places.”