Iggyvibal’s Weblog

st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }
<!– /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:Helvetica; panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:536902279 -2147483648 8 0 511 0;} @font-face {font-family:Helvetica-Bold; panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-format:other; mso-font-pitch:auto; mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;} @font-face {font-family:Helvetica-Oblique; panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-format:other; mso-font-pitch:auto; mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:”"; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:”Times New Roman”; mso-fareast-font-family:”Times New Roman”;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} –>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:”";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:”Times New Roman”;
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}

Filtering the Internet in the USA : Free Speech Denied?

Book Title: Readings in Cyber Ethics

Library Reference: None

Amazon Link: http://www.amazon.com/Readings-CyberEthics-Second-Richard-

Spinello/dp/0763724106/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1239751209&sr=8-1

Quote: “In some sense, this was a bargain made with the devil because those opposed the

CDA expected that filtering programs would largely be used in the privacy of one’s home, not in

public institutions such as libraries, schools, and community centres.”

Learning Expectation:

I expect to learn in this chapter why does USE keep on filtering the internet? Isn’t it true

that internet is a free space for everyone, where anybody can have access and share ideas on

it.

Review

Firstly this chapter talks about the filtering of internet in the United States of America,

where in the industry developed and deployed different kinds of different filtering programs.

According to this chapter the US Congress is suggesting that the use of filtering programs would

be mandatory. I still can’t get the point of this entire filtering programs, why does the American

government need to filter access in internet? Who will benefit from that? Americans or the

government itself?

Before going on any further this chapter also discussed the definition of filtering or

blocking software. Based on the definition Filtering or Blocking software can be taken to be a

mechanism used to restrict access to internet content, based on an internal database of product

or restrict access to internet content through a database maintained external to the product

itself. It is clear that filtering or blocking software restricts access to internet content, and in

addition to this in USA there’s are two systems that could be used for this which is more

dangerous. These systems are: RSACi and PICS the main feature of these systems is to rate a

certain website on theirselves and afterwards search engines will return or access sites that

satisfy a pre-set profile.

These programs are certainly more dangerous than blocking software because if it’s ratings did

not pass the pre-set profile then the site is banned or users will not be able to access the site.

The National Coalition Against Censorship characterizes the problems associated with

such programs as follows:

<!– /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:Helvetica; panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:536902279 -2147483648 8 0 511 0;} @font-face {font-family:Helvetica-Bold; panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-format:other; mso-font-pitch:auto; mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:”"; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:”Times New Roman”; mso-fareast-font-family:”Times New Roman”;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} –>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:”";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:”Times New Roman”;
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}

1. Oversimplification. How to distinguish “good” sex from “bad”?

2. Overbreadth, Ratings and filters often ignore context and, thus inevitably exclude

material that users might want to have, along with material they might not want.

3. Feasibility. The internet is many times vaster and the task of describing its contents is

virtually unimanigable

4. Subjectivity. Any rating system that classifies or describes content is dependent on the

subjectivity of the rater.

5. Full disclosure. Few internet filters disclose what you lose by using them. The makers of

these products claim that information is proprietary and its disclosure would provide a

roadmap to objectionable material.

6. Security. Filters and ratings give a false sense of security by suggesting that all parents

need to do to protect children is to block disturbing ideas and images.

Basically this characterization by the National Coalition Against Censorship aims to

eliminate confusion and is concerned with public’s safety.

Based on this the author arrived at a conclusion that if filtering software is going to be used it

must follow conditions:

1. The specific criteria for censoring web sites must be approved by the Library Board and

made available to the public on request

2. The implementation of this censorship must be in the control of the library staff, not

some outside company, which could not be held liable for this Board or to the

community.

3. The black list of censored web sites, together with the reason for blocking access to

reach site, should not be a secret. It should be made available to the public on request

4. There should be a procedure for members of the public to ask library staff to re-consider

classifications of web sites, both to have some removed from the black list, and also to

have some new ones added

These conditions must be followed because these are somewhat guidelines so that there

treatment to everybody will be fair at the same time people will be happy and able to access the

internet.

Note that the characteristics and conclusion was from this chapter, I just wanted to show it

for additional knowledge.

What I have learned:

I’ve learned that with those blocking software if it was to be implemented continuously

they must satisfy the conditions set so that everybody will be treated fairly

Integrative Questions:

Why does the US Government keep on pushing those blocking softwares?

Who will benefit from those?

Identify the two systems of rating

Is it more dangerous compared to the blocking software?

If yes, why is it more dangerous?