I suppose it would make sense for me to start with some of the supporting arguments for internet filters so I’m gonna do just that! One thing that internet filters do well is blocking sites that have inappropriate content (go figure). With children accessing the internet at younger and younger ages as technology continues to evolve we must take steps to protect them from inappropriate content. I don’t think there’s really any argument against that point.
The problem is internet filters don’t always do their intended job and they certainly aren’t tamper-proof. From my experience, internet filters are often overly-protective. I get that you don’t want me accessing porn sites or whatever, but blocking breast cancer sites just because of the word “breast”? Come on… Even to this day North Central’s website is blocked at my work because of “religion”. It’s not like North Central plasters religious propaganda all over their website and most of the time I’m simply trying to access my school email so it seems a bit silly.
And do school networks really need to block social media sites? I think this is especially ridiculous in high school where you know the students are constantly on it anyways and they will do anything to get around the filter just to check on their latest feed updates. Not to mention it is laughably easy to get around the filters to begin with. I haven’t even mentioned the blocking of all email websites too.
Basically what I’m getting at is that they have the right idea with internet filters, but the execution is just off. Filters are simply too easy to bypass and are overly strict on the things they block. Hopefully these issues can be ironed out over the next few years, but as of now I don’t believe filters are doing an adequate job of protecting young children from inappropriate content without hindering the web experience. And can we all agree that by high school we’re all mature enough to surf the web, no strings attached? (We’ll find our way around the filter regardless!)
No comments:
Post a Comment