Internet Censorship In Public Schools

Perhaps somebody wants to check their Twitter account at school. Understandably, they get the standard firewall page: “Page Blocked: Social Media.” However, when somebody needs to do research for their project on breast cancer, they find a reputable medical journal. They get the firewall page: “Page Blocked: Adult.”

At the Onalaska High School, internet filtering is more refined than this. Even so, has internet filtering in our schools gone too far? This has become a huge controversy with two clear sides, each with their own arguments. Already a major point has been mentioned -- what to block and what not to block. When algorithms are put in charge of deciding what is safe for students they sometimes incorrectly block web pages which pose no threat to students’ safety. Many claim that people need to be in charge internet connections, not the machines. Blocking a medical journal about breast cancer makes the student’s job of researching more difficult, and it doesn’t protect them (“How Internet Censorship…”).

The American Association of School Librarians (AASL) found with their poll “School Libraries Count!” of public schools that 94% of schools and libraries use filtering software. 87% also require students to sign an acceptable use

policy and 73% have adults monitoring students as they use the internet (“Filtering in Schools”).
25 of the 50 states in the United States currently have laws requiring filtering in public schools and libraries.

They may require the organizations to install software filters which block certain content including pornography, social media, gaming, streaming, or other content. A court ruling stated that the laws would not take effect in libraries was overruled, meaning public libraries must also abide by the guidelines. Organizations may also be rewarded with technology and money if they follow certain guidelines set by the Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA). This act essentially encourages organizations to filter their internet connection to keep children safe from dangerous content (“Laws Relating

to…”).
Filtering of content is considered constitutional since adult patrons can still request for a site to be unblocked (“Laws Relating to…”). Many still argue that internet censorship violates the content creator’s rights to broadcast their opinions and the students’ rights to view the content and opinions. 52% of people polled by the AASL claimed that internet filtering did nothing for them but make research and homework more difficult since much useful content was blocked (“Filtering in Schools”).
Students may complain that they are being treated unfairly compared to adults. The AASL found that a large percentage of people actually believe students and adults are filtered to the same degree, meaning adults do not get special access to blocked sites (“Filtering in Schools”).
Internet filters have also been found to decrease the amount of distractions presented to students while they are working. About half of people say the filters limit distractions as they try to get work done (“Filtering in Schools”).
Kathy Baron raised her voice to say blocking potentially dangerous internet locations takes away an opportunity for educators to teach students about internet dangers. Students with unfiltered access can learn how to identify unsafe websites and potential dangers of social media.
Even when students bring their own devices (including laptops, phones, e-readers and tablets), they are presented with brutal internet filters. When they connect to the guest Wi-Fi at their school or library, they may find that the connection is slow and unreliable. This limit is not put in place to protect students, but it still hinders their ability to get work done.