Indianapolis Public Schools seems to be itching for a lawsuit based on its Internet policy (pdf) (via Dispatches from the Culture Wars and a number of other sites). The Freedom from Religion Foundation is calling them on it. The policy includes in the list of blocked categories:
Alternative Spirituality/Belief – Sites that promote and provide information on religions such as Wicca, Witchcraft or Satanism. Occult practices, atheistic views, vodoo rituals or any form of mysticism are represented here. Includes sites that endorse or offer methods, means of instruction, or other resources to affect or influence real events through the use of spells, incantations, curses and magic powers. This category includes sites which discuss or deal with paranormal or unexplained events.
(emphasis added). There’s enough wrong with this that I’m not sure where to start. First, why should some religions be preferred over others? And why should non-religion be lumped together with “alternative” religion?
Web-filtering for schools is a tough business, particularly if you have a bunch of parents with widely differing agendas breathing down your neck, but this one strikes me as gratuitous. Ed Brayton has this to say:
What a bizarre amalgamation of unrelated things that is. What in the world is atheism doing lumped together with witchcraft in the first place? It’s not as if atheists believe in witchcraft any more than they do in Christianity. Oh, that’s right – to the fundamentalist mind, there is no distinction; anything non-Christian is evil and all in exactly the same way. And of course, praying to God to affect or influence real events is totally different from casting a spell or sprinkling chicken blood on the ground.
As an IPS parent, I prefer to not block any sites. That said, this is tough…where to start? Where is the line? A lawsuit if you block too little, a lawsuit if you block to much. Where is the State and our fearless Super on this?
I’ve run multiple types of web-filtering software. The category you listed is on all of them, and this isn’t an IPS policy, per se. This is a result of the web filtering software company decisions.
You can’t expect IPS to allow kids to look at some satanic worship site that has human sacrifice details. (Before I’m blasted by a satanist, I know that may not really in your “true” religion, but there are a lot of wanna-bes that post crap like that). So, they check the box that blocks “Alternative Spirituality/Belief”.
If it pisses you off that Athiesim is in there, find out who makes the software IPS is using and go after that company. Force them to take that group out, or make it its own line item.
Once that is done, you can see if IPS decides to still check the box.
Doesn’t surprise me, in that Gene “Cufflinks” White really imagines himself above the law (losing a suit after he ordered teachers in some middle and elementary schools to teach over the summer without even a discussion of compensation being the best-known example of dozens), and the operating model at IPS seems to be the congregationalist church, with White as the presiding Elder whose name is painted on the side of the van in letters as large as the church name itself.
It’s both amusing and disturbing to see this stuff from the inside, and to see how the religious fervor of White’s war on Ghetto-ness (he made his bones that way while superintendent of Washington township schools) wins high praise in the Star and among white suburbanites who don’t care about inner-city schools otherwise, so long as they don’t have to pay for ’em. IPS makes cosmetic changes to win PR glory–this is the way we demand the game be played now, it should be said–which are rushed into operation without foresight or oversight. And the grunt work of keeping the chains oiled and the nuts and bolts tightened goes largely undone.
What standing would anyone have to sue over un-blocked sites?
And c’mon, Jason, it’s the software’s fault? This is stated IPS policy. Even if it weren’t, this isn’t a private enterprise. They’re obliged to respect the law, which they’ve shown over and over they don’t quite get.
I’d like to see the entire IPS policy before I get *too* self-righteous. What I saw on the Freedom From Religion site looked like only a partial copy. There could be caveats further down the line.
But, ultimately, “the software made me do it” probably doesn’t get them out of the woods. I haven’t read the case law in a long time, and I don’t know exactly how it would be framed as a legal matter, but software standards would probably be a viable defense if IPS had to show only that their policies were reasonably related to a legitimate government interest. But, since we’re talking about religious discrimination, they might be in an area where they have to show they are using “the least restrictive means” in achieving a “compelling governmental interest.”
How something is categorized has a lot to do with how it is initially evaluated.Stealth is still an effective strategy for those wanting to push forward an agenda. I remember back in 80s a couple school board candidates hiding their agenda til after they were elected,but they could do it only once.
Sesame street recently celebrated 40 years on the air and it was pointed out that it was banned in Mississippi initially in 1969 because blacks and whites were shown together( as equals, I assume was the issue).
China was in news recently as having censored Obama’s speech on openness.Eventually censorship in China will collapse just as East German censorhip was undermined and people resented that they were forced to live a lie.
Rightly or wrongly I credit MTV back in the 80s for a watershed generational change of accepting gay people as ‘a normal acceptable alternative’. Give it one more generation.
Self-serving censorship becomes more and more counterproductive when everyone can click up anything they want.The internet will not be stopped forever even where it is now. I’m absolutely amazed sometimes what I get into just idly meandering wih my mouse..
The Louvre paintings are online ,for example.
Our emphasis in schools needs to be to put everything into a perspective rather than knee-jerk banning.. I saw the gradual turning away from smoking by youth in my last years of teaching.Now the emphasis is on drinking..Anything banned becomes a cause celebre.We can’t ban sex,but we can emphasize contraception as usual and normal…
And what has been put into a general perspective of knowledge and experience is no longer bannable without great resentment.
Well, I don’t get the impression that the IPS IT department is filled with the brightest bulbs on the block. Some of the stuff they do almost defies the threshold of sapiency.
Part of the answer is not to have computers and web browsers in the classroom, until and unless someone learns to make them effective there.
The skills we want kids to have don’t generally come from a screen…
(They COULD come from a screen, sure – just as some folks can give themselves an excellent liberal education using just the books at their local library.
But that’s not the norm, and ‘educational software’ has yet to set the educational world on fire, in the main.)
My point was to say I believe their “policy” was a copy and paste of the software filtering software manual, and they just moved around the paragraphs to indicate which options they chose. I think most parents would be upset if they didn’t check the “Alternative Spirituality/Belief” option on their block list, and it isn’t practical to separate them.
In fact, a quick Google search shows almost the same policy for all Tennessee K-12 schools. http://ao.ena.com/AO/Policy?community=8595
It looks like IPS and TN both use the same company for webfiltering.
All I am saying is that this policy isn’t something that was thought through on a committee and they all said “Oh yes, make sure to block the atheists too!” It was likely the result of an overworked network administrator subcontracted the filtering, passed on the standard block list and then an administrator that doesn’t know how to turn on a computer rubber stamped it.
It isn’t some big conspiracy or attempt to squash religious freedom (or the WHITE MAN’s war on the Ghetto!), it sounds like an honest mistake with best intentions.
All in all, I’d be a lot more pissed if this was at a library. I feel the schools don’t have to have the same level of freedom on the Internet. The kids are there to learn, and I don’t mind blocking there to clear up distractions.
Put another way, do you feel they’re squashing Nintendo’s first amendment rights? After all, they block games too.
Sorry for double-posting, but the bigoted remarks about “White’s war on Ghetto-ness” is still under my skin.
School are required to having filtering software if they get e-rate funding, something I just remembered from my e-rate days: http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/cipa.html
Again, there seems to be other big issues with IPS. As I said before, I’m avoiding Indy because I don’t want to send my girls there. However, save the arrows for occasions where IPS goes against standard school practices elsewhere and at the same time does something stupid.
The reference wasn’t to “White Man’s” war on ghetto-ness, but rather “Eugene White’s” war. Eugene, who is a black man, is the superintendent of Indianapolis Public Schools.
Hey.. and why is everyone avoiding the fact that ALL GLBT sites are also on that list including those that might provide good research on topics like civil rights protections, same-sex marriage, etc. I’m all for blocking porn, but the Indiana Equality and HRC would also be blocked.
Seriously? This is what we are going to be up in arms about? I’m more concerned with the failing educational system than blocking sites. Kids don’t need to spend time looking at any non-school related information on the internet during school hours. If they need to research a paper on this subject – do it the “old fashion” way, get a book from the library! >gasp<
Hi–Kelly Bentley here. I serve on the IPS School Board. I’m not a fan of blocking websites either, but the issue is complicated by the fact that children are involved. Regarding the “policy”–I checked into the situation and the “policy” in question isn’t a policy of IPS. It actually comes from INschools.net, the K-12 network serving all E-Rate consortium members in Indiana. They are part of ENA (Education Networks of America). INschools has a multi year contract with Indiana DOE. They have created these rather sweeping categories of blocked sites through their filtering system. School districts can customize these filters and I’ve been told that IPS does not block alternative spirituality sites. I’m not sure that would be true in the other 190+ school districts in Indiana.
First, which is it, Jason? I’m a bigot because you didn’t know that was Eugene White, or because you didn’t know he’s an African-American, or because you don’t know what “ghetto” means as an adjective, or because you missed the quotes? Or was it that with the distraction of the thing burrowing into you you couldn’t be bothered with the point, which is that White’s operating model is the church, and specifically the black church’s common distain for low-class behaviors?
Second, policy goes through Gene White’s office, period. (varangianguard’s right about the IPS IT department, but even they wouldn’t release a policy statement without his approval.) It might very well be a cut-and-paste job, but what if it is? It’s still his responsibility. As for this being a “standard” school practice, if it were we’d have heard of a half-dozen lawsuits before this.
(By the way, and in case the issue was in doubt, anyone who thinks Gene White is influenced by what “parents think” or “want” doesn’t know the first thing about Gene White. Parents who disagree with him–like those who whoop and clap when their child is handed his diploma–are more likely to be arrested than listened to.)
The schools have no reason to provide online access to the internet. The students do not use it for research for classes, they use it for facebook and wikipedia. If a teacher wants a student to do research, send them to the school library or arrange a field trip to the public library. As a seventh grade student, we were given assignments that required all of us to go to the local public library branch in a small town and learn to use the reference collection in order to complete the assignments. This required many of us, whose fathers did not get home from work until late, and whose mothers, for the most part did not drive or had no second car to drive, to walk over a mile each way, through corn fields along a creek and over a railroad track and along busy streets, just to get to the library. And then we walked the same way home, in the dark. In the winter months.
As someone pointed out, we have not invested in teaching teachers how to use the computer as a tool to teach with. Take the internet option out, disconnect the pcs from the system. And make sure the teachers have access but not to their “adult entertainment” sites. :)
Did they block access to christian sites that provide links to the bible and its descriptions of slaughter, vile treatment of women and slaves, and the erotic, oft times pornographic, psalms literature?
And did the right wing fox news gop leaders shout and cry over china censoring Obama? They sure tried hard enough to censor his talk to US students and were successful in many backward states, such as Indiana. I did not hear a peep out of them. Of course, I do not watch them that much, one can only laugh so hard for so long. And their vile hatred of the president and America is leading down the path of the Klan and the anti-abortion groups hate speech that riled the stupid into their acts of hatred. Censorship is always stupid. Putting the internet into the hands of students while they are supposed to be learning is stupid. EOM
Don’t mind me, Jarue — I’m up in arms about a *lot* of stuff. This isn’t what’s keeping me up at nights. But, I think the government showing religious preferences is something that deserves some push-back when it happens.
Kelly, thanks for adding some actual facts to the discussion.
Sorry, Doug and Doghouse, I made the exact same mistake you guys did. I jumped to a conclusion without understanding. I don’t mean to tie my mistake to yours as a half-hearted apology, I really to mean it. I just wanted to point out that we’re all pretty quick to jump to conclusions.
We’re all human, including the people that came up with this list.
As for the other points around here about “Do kids really need on the Internet”, I am mixed. No, they don’t need to be surfing for the hell of it. However, the Internet is a tool used by businesses. They better learn how to use it before they get a job, and learn how to keep from getting distracted by writing on some blog when they should be…uh…working.
Gotta go.
Kids will go on the internet whether it is needed or lot. Why not use computer in school? It’s just shelves of books like any library but easier to access with a mousee that clicks it all up..I learned to use a computer mouse when I was almost 60 yrs old,so maybe I shouldn’t be the one in charge of computer use at school.
It reminds me of the argument back in 1957: if I learn how to drive on an automatic car,will I be able to drive as well as those who learned on stick shift? The previous drivers training class to mine had to do a driving test on stick shift ,I didnt. It was like I got off easy.There was moral outrage.Things don’t change so much,and moral outrage can still be frivilous.
We think we’re unique in our times.We are and we aren’t: a question for debate.
Despite all the shoutin’, I think that what Kelly said is most interesting, although I will agree that the blocking seems ham-handed.
Bottom line: Should the progeny of the human race survive the next ten thousand years, Archaeologists, and Paleontologist will be searching for relics of today’s civilization. This generation will comparatively seem so primitive and remote that exact physical resemblance will be altered to some degree. The very communication of culture will not assume nor will those then wish this far back beyond their concepts of their “good old days.” We will be more removed than our present ideas of Cave-men. Today’s superstitions and myths may be replaced by others that will gradually founder and fail continuously growing smaller until extinct. Our human race no longer needs the “religion meme” and our evolution continues. The human race is capable of so much and unlimited progress across the universe. Once the imagination focuses its attention, (and it will), with all religions on the wane, achieving more and more, these mental fantasies will become fewer accordingly.
Stifle the imagination?
No! Free it; Freed from the cell of superstition is not suggesting a “Utopia” but still another “giant leap for mankind,” and will permit a greater harmony among all people. Release from the prison of religious myths will allow the redirection of these powerful motives now corralled by superstitious chimeras. The portion of the brain that contained and catered to that cultural trait, that meme, will redirect those efforts and energies. Part of our human “business” today is laying a foundation where these same efforts and energies will evolve exponentially.