John Fleming sends this article from OnlineJournal.com: "Edward Winslow in is article for Onelinejournal.com discusses the rights the PATRIOT Act infringed upon and PATRIOT II will continue to infringe upon. Amendments four and six are overlooked in the sense that some people are no longer safe from illegal search and seizure or are allowed effective legal counsel. Many of the search and seizure cases have involved email."
Chris Gilmore sends this article from CNN.com: "The author of the article entitled "Court says colleges can restrict Internet access" on CNN's website, describes the decision of an Oklahoma district court to allow the University of Oklahoma president to determine what sites students and faculty are allowed to view while on the school's system. Subsequently, school president David
Boren, was sued by a professor claiming that his First Amendment rights were being violated. The courts ruled in favor of David Boren and the university has banned adult Internet sites from its system."
Stefanie Kealey and Taki Naito send pages from PeaceFire.org: Taki says generally, "Peacefire.org was an interesting website that I found that allows people under the age of 18 to discuss about freedom of speech over the Internet. This site was created for people who are against censorship for students and people under the age of 18. Many anti-censorship groups have used this site to challenge Internet censorship laws in congress and several state legislatures as well." Stefanie sends an affiliated page called, "Blind Ballots": "This article is brought to you by Peacefire.org, a group against internet censorship. Three years ago, a dilemma occured when a censorware program, Cyber Patrol, blocked the websites of numerous politicians. Peacefire describes the types of settings that the websites are blocked under and argues that the politicians campaigns were sabotaged by the software that blocking their sites in schools and libraries.
Julie Lauenger provides this article from the Electronic Frontier Foundation: "Since 1920, The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has been fighting censorship. They believe that the censorship of pornography goes against the first amendment and "impedes the struggle for women's rights." In response to the public's concern, the ACLU discusses their opinion of the effect of anti-pornography on discrimination, violence, and exploitation of women."
Blake Loscalzo suggests this site from Microsoft: "More and more children are having Internet access opportunities at home
and in school. Unfortunatly, not all the information available on the Internet is appropriate for these young minds. Microsoft and Illinois Police Department's Internet crime unit has created Safekids as a way to inform parents and children about the dangers that lurk through out The Net."
Paul Lavoie sends this site on Book Burning: "This website is unnamed. It is a site formed by opponents of censorship of books, and followers of Salman Rushdie. He was a man who had a bounty put on his head by the Iranian government for speaking against Islam. This site has quotes by famous people of different time periods against censorship, which shows the concept of censorship being dangerous traverses time."
Jeffrey Lees sends this site from the Electronic Privacy Information Center: "This website provides information about the law we discussed in class regarding blocking technology in public schools and libraries. Current Internet Censorship Efforts are discussed throughout this website as well as Free Speech advocacy. Along with Federal Censorship the user can find information on other less restrictive censorship legislations that have been proposed."
April Mahoney sends this article called "An Unknown Casualty": "The article "An Unknown Casualty," by Tom Wicker, addresses the problems of wartime censorship. This article appears on the website for the National Coalition Against Censorship, as well as the March 20, 1991 issue of The New York Times. Wicker writes about information withheld from the public concerning the millitary tactics during the Persian Gulf
War, which can easily be paralled with the current situation of the U.S. in Iraq. This article may raise questions in the reader's mind as to what other informations have been withheld from the public during wartime and perhaps after war."
Michelle Spangle provides this article from Cyber.Law.Harvard.edu: "'Internet Filtration: Rights to Listen, Rights to Speak, Rights to Tune Out' by David Melaugh argues that internet filtration is inefective and a violation of free speech. Melaugh discusses the function and faults of the three major forms of filtration: keyword filtering, site blocking, and rating systems. He argues that keyword filtering can block educational sites, site blocking is constantly outdated and not reflective of
current websites, as they can never be updated as fast as websites are changed, and that rating systems eliminate the web's potential to be "an online analog to the classic 'public forum'‹a place of some visibility which allows citizens to speak their mind and be heard."
Becky Allen sends this site from the Citizens Internet Empowerment Coalition: "The Citizens Internet Empowerment Coalition is dedicated to protecting the freedom of speech on the Internet. The site contains links to many current court cases and laws regarding the first ammendment. It gives detailed, technical explanations and is extremely comprehensive."
Marshall Annis and Kristy Klein provide this site from Freedom Of Speech Online: Marshall says, "The Freedom of Speech Online asks the question "Should free speech on the internet be treated differently than other forms of free speech?" Freedom of speech in public speaking or in print can be somewhat
regulated; people can say what they want as long as it is not obscene. The internet however has
the potential to reach a much larger audience, and almost anyone can anonymously publish whatever they want, and therefore is almost impossible to regulate[.]" Kristy says, "This website, http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/~jmrobins/overview.htm called "What is Freedom of Speech Online?" discusses the differences between regular free speech and online free speech. For example, the Internet has potential to reach a huge audience, or no audience at all. The article also address regulation. It would be extremely difficult to be able to make sure that all types of a certain material are blocked completely.
In addition to that, some material might be blocked accidental."
Deepak Arora and Jan Voolstra suggest this site called "Censorship and Free Speech": Deepak say, "A [brief] differentiation is established in the beginning, which is referred to throughout the essay. Following this, definitions and examples of both, free speech and censorship, are given. Finally, the significance of the difference between the two is presented." Jan concurs: "In his report on the ethics of modern Communication, Jeremy Bowers includes a section that explores free speech by looking at all of its definitions and where they apply,it then defines censorship in the same format as it did free speech. The good thing about this site is that it also compares the two and explains the importance of having a difference."
Paul Chuong sends this site from Atheism.About.com: "This link describes where freedom of speech originated as well as what it entails. It discusses what Americans feel about it both the positive and the negative aspect. To back up these beliefs, links on various court cases, which have challenged freedom of speech and censorship, have been put in the website to further prove the point of how many Americans feel about this topic."
Katie O'Keeffe sends this site from RadioFreeWorld.com: "RFW or RadioFreeWorld.com is devoted to our constitutional right to protect our speech in various genres. RFW offers a wide range of protected 'eclectic' music, concerts, interviews as well as Internet and TV sources on the subject as well. There are virtual reality effects and chatrooms for those of us who are ignited by the very idea of censorship."
Sophie Moravej suggests this site from the Center for Democracy and Technology: "The Center for Democracy and Technology is a non-profit organization working to influence public policy concerning the Internet. Their goals include "democratizing" the Internet, non-censorship, privacy protection, and affordable mass Internet usage. Email notifications about legislation and current issues are optional and free."
Pornography. Warning! The following pages may contain objectionable material and/or links. Also, I would like, in the interest of balance, to give the pornography industry a link, but doing so would probably violate University policy.
