Technology has always had the effect of both expanding on and limiting intellectual freedom. The invention of the printing press even had this tug of war effect. Before this invention, knowledge was the property of the few to be shared only with other privileged few. When books could be made more quickly and less expensively and dispersed to the masses, there was a backlash. Classicists believed that information in the hands of the people, those “coffeehouse modernists,” would become skewed and lose its meaning, when in fact, criticism and dissent can only further intellectual thought and discussion. (Battles) Today, with the unprecedented explosion- both in amount and availability – of information in the World Wide Web, information is everywhere. There are those who wish to deny access to this vast array – either because of age, beliefs, or commerce.
“Intellectual Freedom is the right of every individual to both seek and receive information from all points of view without restriction. It provides for free access to all expressions of ideas through which any and all sides of a question, cause or movement may be explored. Intellectual freedom encompasses the freedom to hold, receive and disseminate ideas.”
http://www.ala.org/ala/oif/basics/Default2272.cfm
As a librarian, the freedom to allow others access to information is an integral part of the job. When others impose on that access, by forcing filters on public computers, for instance, that freedom is compromised. When one is denied information, one is denied the tools to develop thought processes and become a capable, logical decision maker. Filters are placed on public computers in order to protect children from online predators and inappropriate material. However, sometimes these filters block more than what they intended, thereby limiting young people’s access to the information they require. Intellectual freedom implies total, unsifted admittance to data.
Technology is not always something to be feared and controlled; its sheer openness can be used to facilitate education. “Social technologies test the boundaries of intellectual freedom precisely because they provide an open forum for ideas…. Rather than viewing these tools as negative, [librarians] should investigate the values of online tools for furthering intellectual freedom by promoting creative thought, communication, and collaboration” (Lamb, 38). Discussion breeds independent thinking, and the Internet allows discussion with others who may be miles away. In this manner, technology is not a hindrance to intellectual freedom; rather, it enhances it.
Discussion Questions
1. In what ways can web 2.0 technologies be used to enhance intellectual freedom?
2. Is requiring parental permission for access to technology an infringement on the intellectual freedoms of minors?
Sources
http://www.ala.org/ala/oif/basics/Default2272.cfm
Battles, Matthew. Library, an Unquiet History. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Co., Inc., 2003. 245p, paper, $14 (ISBN 0-393-32564-4).
Lamb, Annette. Intellectual Freedom for Youth: Social Technology and Social Networks. Knowledge Quest v.36 no. 2 (November/December 2007) p38-45
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
As a parent I take my responsibility for my children very seriously. I do think that filters can be used as a crutch and limit a child’s rights, however, it is important to have the tools available to offer some protection to a child (especially if a parent can’t be with them at that time). A parent needs to be asked in order to even accept or deny this tool.
I want to be able to sit at a computer with my child and be there to explain anything unusual that comes up. If libraries allow children access to technology without parental consent it opens the library up for accepting the responsibility of the child or makes a child responsible for him/herself. Quite probably before they are ready. At the very least it opens up the possibility for serious community and legal trouble.
Bottom line, yes it does limit a child’s intellectual freedom, BUT part of parenting is limiting freedoms that are dangerous until a child is old enough, mature enough and responsible enough to handle said freedom.
-Holly C.
Web 2.0 technologies are helping to enhance intellectual freedom by allowing users to find information in non-traditional locations. According to Fowler, "using search engines, social networks, wikis, and data exchanges, users are able to connect with the information they are seeking" (Whose Data Is It, Anyway?). Users are able to find different sources in order to find different points of view and different types of information which is what intellectual freedom is about. It allows everyone access to information and Web 2.0 technologies are providing the means to accessing this information.
I believe that requiring parental permission for minors is infringing on their intellectual freedom rights. It is the responsibility of parents to teach their children right from wrong, so they won't access materials they know they shouldn't. Librarians should provide information to everyone that requests it and should not discriminate based on age (or any other factor). If a librarian blocks access to materials, then that would be censorship and based on the Library Bill of Rights, "libraries should challenge censorship in the fulfillment of their responsibility to provide information and enlightenment" (ALA).
Jessica Kay-Oosterhouse
Sources:
Fowler, J. Whose Data Is It, Anyway? Information Today. v. 24 no. 9 (October 2007) p. 21
Library Bill of Rights. Retrieved April 6, 2008 from http://www.ala.org/ala/oif/
statementspols/statementsif/
librarybillrights.cfm.
No, I do not believe that requiring parental permission for access is an infringement. Minors are ultimately the responsibility of their parents or guardians. It is up to the adult to make decisions for them since they don’t possess the necessary reasoning skills to do so. I would imagine that it would also be more efficient. If a library doesn’t have a parental permission restriction on access inevitably some child will access material their parent doesn’t approve of. The parent will become upset and confront staff members about it. At least one staff member will have to find a way to pacify the patron. This is an unnecessary waste of time that could be better spent doing something productive. And it could easily be prevented by having the parent make the decision about access when they get their library card.
I do not think that requiring parental permission for access to technology is an infringement on the intellectual freedoms of minors. I think that minors do have intellectual freedoms, but the parents should have the right to decide which technology their children can access. Would it stand if a librarian let a child look at something on the Internet if a parent had asked that they not and the librarian argued intellectual freedoms? I think that the librarian would still lose in this situation because the parent is the guardian of that child since they are not old enough to decide for themselves.
I do think though, that parents need to educate their children in what is right and wrong so that these limitations to access are not necessary. This is the responsibility of the parents, but I think many parents do not take this upon themselves.
Web 2.0 technology can enhance intellectual freedom in that, there are no rules to expression. And when one has the liberty to express their mind they easily get help when needed. So of the forms in which web 2.0 technology exhibits itself is through web conferences and blogs among others. When people exchange ideas here others get to know what they did not know. If filters are possibly put on even these forums, then technology can be termed extremely detrimental.
True we should protect the minors from what will destroy their lives. In my opinion parents should be asked because some parents believe that information sort should be useful. But to me it all depends on the child’s up bringing. If children can sort out what is right from what is wrong, then their parents’ permission will not be necessary. The thing is they always copy from friends too. So the librarian should play their own part in the protection of these children’s future. So if they copy or get access to any information that is not constructive to them, the librarians are not to blame. Besides these children are in the growing up in an era where technology changes by the day, so there can only be so much restriction for minors.
1. In what ways can web 2.0 technologies be used to enhance intellectual freedom?
Blogs and RSS feeds allow the rapid dissemination of information. It allows people to access a wide range of facts and opinions.
2. Is requiring parental permission for access to technology an infringement on the intellectual freedoms of minors? Not necessarily. Children will naturally navigate around such roadblocks over time.
If I look at it from the perspective of the ALA Code of Ethics, of coarse denying a child the right to view "restricted" material. However, we know that not all children are able to critically evaluate information available on the web. Since I work with lower elementary students, I tend to think of younger children. In my opinion, a child could be in a sense "scared" if they see something on the internet that is obsene. I think of an article I read years back (I'm not sure of the author or title) that had said students were intending to look for the white house's web site, but if the user wasn't careful and typed in .com instead of .gov, they were taken to a pornographic site. Even though they had good intentions, they were still taken to an inappropriate sight. For the young students, this could be very devistating.
"Filters are not a total safeguard. While some might say some protection is better than no protection at all, the association is concerned that filters will give parents and legislators a false sense of protection" (Newsletter on Intellectual Freedom, vol.48 issue 5). While filters can "protect" students from obsene or inappropriate material, we still need to teach our children strategies to use when surfing the net.
I guess that the purpose of parental permission to access the web has good intentions, it still infringes on their rights (however I'm not saying that I disagree with the concept).
Web 2.0 can help in many ways to enhance intellectual freedom. I think of the proliferation of blogs. So many more points of view are available. They are a primary source of information. Most of the time I would rather read what someone has to say than read it reworked by a journalist. Information is given that may not be printed by standard news sources because it is controversial. Of course one has to read critically because there are so many voices. I can only imagine what effect blogs and wikis would have in a country where information is limited, like in China, Cuba or other countries. Blogs may also allow students here to see viewpoints that they would not normally be exposed to.
While I understand the argument for it being infringement, I think it is not fully up to a librarian or a library to be the parent of a child and determine what a child should see. A parent should be active in a child's library involvement and they should be the ones to determine if the child should have access or not.
Parents are considered the legal guardians of their children. For this reason, asking for parental permission to restrict the child's Internet access is completely up the parent to decide. Just as when reading a controversial book in school or participating in a sex ed course, parents are given the option of releasing their child. Whether or not you agree with the parent's decision does not change the fact that in the eyes of the law, the parents have the right to limit their child's information access.
Web 2.0 technologies can enhance intellectual freedom. What we are doing in this course is enhancing intellectual freedom through our blogs wikis. IM’s and Flickr’s and all other semantic web tools are just a way to open conversations. When patrons inquire about an issue through Meebo or just follow links to articles and websites at del.icio.us and leave a comment; this is all enhancing communication between people wherever they are all around the world.
As most have argued, I think that requiring parental permission for access to technology is not a contravention on the intellectual freedoms of minors because minors need guidance. I think that another solution could be like what I found when I went to visit Rochester Hills Public Library. They have a place only for children where filters are placed on the computers and another place for the teens where light filters are placed and they have a third place where there are unfiltered computers for adults. I think that this is a fair solution; any parent can be at ease with their kids being at this library and librarians don’t have to deal with every parent.
In what ways can web 2.0 technologies be used to enhance intellectual freedom?
It helps people use different types of technology to find answers to things. You can go find answers on blogs, talk to different people through the internet in order to find what other people are thinking.
Is requiring parental permission for access to technology an infringement on the intellectual freedoms of minors?
No, we are their parents and responsible for the things they do. So until they are 18, I think we should have a say in what they do on the computer.
1. Web 2.0 technology allows people to access information in a variety of ways. As a teacher, I recognize that students love trying out new pieces of technology and are often more willing to read and complete assignments that utilize use Web 2.0 technology.
2. Yes,it does limit intellectual freedom but if I was parent I would want my child to have my permission before using certain pieces of technology. At the Paterson Free Public Library, about 20 miles west of New York, director Cynthia Czesak has installed software filtering devices only on computers in the children's area. The rest of the library system uses a system that matches a user's birthdate to keep children from accessing certain sites.
Source: www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/06/24/scotus.internetporn.library/index.html
1. In what ways can web 2.0 technologies be used to enhance intellectual freedom?
Web 2.0 technologies enhance intellectual freedom by allowing users to have access to a wide range of information, mostly free of regulation in a timely manner(blogs, websites, RSS feeds etc.)
Web 2.0 technologies also allow for infringement of our civil liberties as well, however.
2. Is requiring parental permission for access to technology an infringement on the intellectual freedoms of minors?
Yes, I believe it is. The only true filter is the human mind. Restricting access arbitrarily for minors is a library's reaction to our overly litigious society.
Technology is playing a central role in intellectual freedom. With chat rooms and blogs and wikis people totally remote from each other are able to start a dialogue and basically explore any topic under the sun. This class is a good example of the role technology is playing in intellectual freedom, we discuss issues; cite sources with links which can be viewed by all instantaneously. We can create and revise and combine, all in the name of self expression. Technology has given us a platform to learn and teach. It has done what the printing press did before it, democratized knowledge, allowed us to be active participants in the architecture of that knowledge.
I would say that requiring parental consent for minors to use the internet does qualify as an infringement on intellectual freedom. The internet is perhaps our most valuable source for information, and it seems wrong to deny any person access to information. We do not require consent for minors to read potentially offensive books, and in some respects, this is no different. This would be especially detrimental to the research process for young people who wish to examine ideas and information that their parents might not be comfortable with. For example, a teen may wish to use the internet to find information on birth control, but due to consent rules, is unable to do so - thus one might argue that requiring parental consent for internet access leads to teen pregnancy.
However, even at that, I am not totally opposed to the idea of requiring consent, for several reasons. First, it is the parent's responsibility to set boundries for their child and determine what sorts of activities are appropriate. Secondly (and perhaps more importantly), it reduces the library's liability should something happen, whether something as relatively simple as a teen viewing a pornographic website, or something much more serious, such as a child establishing an online relationship with a predator. From a management perspective, it only makes sense to do what it takes to avoid lawsuits.
Post a Comment