Censorship and the internet (Any schools or organisations will sensor…
Censorship and the internet
Any schools or organisations will sensor access to material they feel is inappropriate for students or employees to be accessing during the school or work time and they do this by using filtering software.
The school would have a moral as well as a legal obligation to block access to inappropriate material in order to safeguard the students as part of its duty of care.
However, schools will less often block access to far less controversial sites.
Common sites blocked by schools and businesses include social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter and video streaming sites such as YouTube.
These sites are not inappropriate themselves however schools and employees often consider them nothing but distractions.
Any schools who block YouTube under the guide of being educationally distracting, despite the huge amount of educational materials, the students and teachers are now prevented from taking advantage of as part of his or her learning.
Debate really kicks in at a national and government level.
Governments often require internet service providers to block certain websites from their users.
In the UK our government requires internet service providers to block sites relating to:
Sites of infringing copyright.
Most would argue this is sensible and balanced and the use of government to intervene on a moral level in extreme content is understandable.
However, not all countries are the same and the issue is hotly debated as to where to draw the line between protecting the general public and infringing on their freedom of speech and Human Rights.
There are some countries such as North Korea who so tightly control the access of their content over the internet, their citizens are barely aware of what is out there. This is to ensure the public in these countries are not able to access any material that might contradict the messages of the political and social situation of that country.
Technology to track and monitor behaviour - falls into 3 broad categories:
Deliberately chosen by the user
E.g. Sports watches which monitor heart rate, calories burnt, distance travelled.
E.g. CCTV cameras.
Some would argue that using CCTV is a good thing, especially if it has lead to a reduction in crime.
However others would argue that it has gone too far and where does surveillance in order to protect turn into invasion of privacy.
Tagging Devices attached to criminals in order to monitor their movement.
Internal monitoring systems used by organisations to log online activity of their employees.
Some people would argue that an employer has the right to expect and monitor the work rate and productivity of its employees. It would also be reasonable to have a company policy which does not allow them onto social media sites during office hours.
However is it reasonable to monitor what is posted to social media sites during an employee's lunch break, or is this now a step too far.