My Views in My. . . Space/Blog

First, let me admit that I do not like the idea of using social networking sites like MySpace, Facebook or Friendster for teaching students. I am not old-fashioned, conservative, or afraid of technology. This attitude is purely self-serving--I do not want to be held responsible for any problem that a student may get into when using one of these sites on my watch. And to anyone who says that if you keep a close eye on them then all will be well, I'll say you have never been around teenagers. I work in a high school and the students there all know about MySpace and other social networking sites. They use them all the time. In fact, I spent quite a lot of time shutting off computers to get them off those sites. Yes, there are filters on all the computers in the school but the students know how to bypass them. Now, let me digress for a moment onto the DOPA issue.

We do not need a law like DOPA (Deleting Online Predators Act). There is already a law in place to deal with the issue of children and Internet use in school and public libraries. CIPA (Children's Internet Protect Act) was enacted in 2000 to "address concerns about access to offensive content over the the Internet on school and library computers." Because of this law, schools and libraries have filters on them. What is DOPA going to do that CIPA can't? Nothing, except allowing the government to over-regulate the Internet. Like Roush notes in his article, because the language in DOPA is so broad, all its passage will do is place more restrictions on school and library computers, and in so doing, access to good sites will be blocked as well. In addition it may widen the "digital divide" between the rich and the poor in this country who rely on school and public libraries for their computer needs.

I read an article by Brian Kenney last year. It was called "We Don't Need no Tech Control: The Deleting Online Predators Act is Both Dopey and Dangerous, " and can be found on School Library Journal at http://schoollibraryjournal.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleid=CA6337058

In this article, Kenney argues against the Deleting Online Predators Act (DOPA) which was proposed on May 10th of 2006 by a group of politicians calling themselves the Republican Suburban Caucas. This act could become a federal law that would require most schools and public libraries to make sites like MySpace.com or any other site "that allows users to create web pages or profiles that provide information about themselves...and offers a mechanism for communication with other users such as a forum, chat room, email or instant messenger" inaccessible to children. The group of politicians argue that when parents send their children to school or to a public library, they expect their children to be safe from all danger, including virtual danger such as online sex predators. This act, they feel will give parents some piece of mind. Kenney, however, argues that this act is tantamount to federal censorship because the act "is overly broad and too restrictive" and would include blocking not only sites like MySpace, but others like Blogger, AIM, and parts of Google and Yahoo. Kenney further states that this act will not solve the problem of Internet predators, but instead will infringe our rights by denying access to valuable teaching and learning aids. He admits that there are dangers on the Internet, as there are in the parks or malls, but claims the politicians are using this measure as a way of creating hysteria and eventually election votes in November by being anti-sex predators. Instead, he advocates teaching children how to safely navigate the Internet by developing media literacy and teaching responsible behavior in real life and on the Internet. Finally, Kenney reminds us that education, not the government, is our best defense to any online danger.

Now I ask, "Where do parents fit into this equation?" Instead of asking schools and libraries to do more, shouldn't we demand more of the parents? Many children spend hours on MySpace and other chatrooms not during school time or when they're visiting the library, but when they're at home, in their parents' or friends' homes. Should the government put filters there instead? Of course not. Parents have to do more about monitoring their children's Internet activities. The libraries and schools should not be used to police their children.The Internet, as Kenney states, is still evolving, and so cutting off access to certain sites and tools, would further disenfranchise many low-income children and families who have no other place to send read their emails, and get information. The digital divide is wide, but this law could make it even wider by not allowing these families to experience these changes. Some groups are catching up but this measure could set them back tremendously. I know that I spend quite a lot of time telling my students to get off certain sites that are considered inappropriate, but I would rather do that than tell them, "Sorry, we just don't have access to that information."