Internet Filtering
|
Pros |
Cons |
|
It is not the fault of the blocking
software when it comes to unintentional blocking of sites, it is the fault of
parents, teachers, and librarians who have not been properly trained to use
the software. (Free Expression
Policy Project) Pornography has
been linked to violent sexual crimes such as rape and child
molestation. Frequent exposure to pornography is
believed to contribute to child inhibitions toward sexual behavior and it
encourages sexual expression among children. (ProjectKids) Frequent viewing of pornography tends
to shape the child’s attitudes and values toward sex instead of their parents
attitudes and values shaping their views.
(ProjectKids) It is believed that during childhood,
our brains are being “hardwired” for future sexual attitudes and beliefs. (ProjectKids) |
Blocking software scans pages for
keywords and therefore, sometimes blocks out things such as Super Bowl XXX. (Peacefire) Blocking Software has engaged in
somewhat of a corporate cyber war, having blocked some companies because of
their opinion against them. For
example, Cybersitter blocked Time Magazine because they published a negative
article about the Cybersitter software. Since the blocking software is often inaccurate,
why don’t we just teach our children to be responsible internet surfers. Give them
intellectual tools to deal with unwanted and inappropriate sites when they
come across them. (PeaceFire) Keyword blocking is considered to be the problem with most blocking software. There is an upside to keyword blocking, it
can be tuned off, however, since that is the basis
of most of the software programs, it renders them unusable for all intensive
purposes. (PeaceFire) Blocking software is
unconstitutional, it violates the First Amendment. (PeaceFire) |