The Pros And Cons Of Internet Censorship
Censorship, in true form, is the systematic banning of books, the Internet, or other literature due to content that has been deemed inappropriate. In the United States, it is used widely in the context of adolescent literature. Resistors to this movement often claim that the government is violating many children’s first amendment rights. Numerous cases have been brought. Others find this act of restricting material devastating to the education system. Censorship has infringed on children’s first amendment rights and has violated the civil liberties of American youth. First, it is critical to examine the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which states the basic rights of a child as recognized by the United Nations. It states that the governments have a responsibility to take all available measures to make sure children’s rights are respected, protected, and fulfilled (Article 4). Also, when an adult is making a decision on behalf of a child, the child’s opinion must be taken into account (Article 12). Children also have the right to obtain information that
…show more content…
is important to their health and well-being. Governments should encourage and even provide mass media to provide information that children can understand. These rights, when examined as one unit, constitute as legislature similar to the United States’ First Amendment. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution allows citizens to express freedom of speech and press. It also disallows the government from making laws that infringe upon this right. Though this is a clearly defined right to be shared by all (presumably adult) citizens, it does not specify in cases of adolescents. Because of this, instances of First Amendment infringement against children often go unnoticed. Numerous cases have been brought before the Supreme Court on the basis of these violations. Cases such as these assist in defining the legal boundaries of the First Amendment. Three crucial cases are Tinker v. De Moines, Pico v. Board of Education, and Board of Education v. Island Trees Union Free School District. The Supreme Court, through these cases in particular, help define a child’s legal First Amendment rights. In the 1968 case of Tinker v. De Moines Independent Community School District. Students wore black arm bands to school in protest against the Vietnam War. They were asked to remove the arm bands, with refusal to do so resulting in suspension. In a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court ruled that students do not “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech at the schoolhouse gate”. Clearly put, students have the right to personal opinions, given that these are not disruptive to the school climate. In the Pico vs. Board of Education decision, a school board attempted to remove books from the school library based on objectionable content. The Supreme Court rejected the removal of such books because “the right to receive ideas is a necessary predicate to the recipient’s meaningful exercise of his own rights of speech, press, and political freedom” and made clear that “students too are beneficiaries of this principle” (Pico v. Board of Education). The First Amendment, the case specifies, protects a student’s right to revise available viewpoints that cannot be suppressed by school officials on the basis of political disagreement on information. While attending a conservative Educational conference, officials of the Island Trees Union Free School District concluded that the books, Slaughter House Five by Kurt Vonnegut and Black Boy by Richard Wright should be taken out of the library.
Many students and parents questioned the school board’s decisions to remove these books from the library and were backed by a 5-4 vote by the Supreme Court. The Court held that school officials cannot remove books simply because they personally believe that the books are objectionable. The First Amendment protects the right to receive information and ideas and prohibits suppression of material simply because government officials, including school officials, dislike the material. Justice William Brennan states, “The special characteristics of the school library make that environment especially appropriate for the recognition of the First Amendment rights of
students”. It is important to mention that though children do have some First Amendment rights, school districts have the power and even the duty to enforce order in their schools. These rights can be subordinated to achieve legitimate educational goals. This does not, however, infer that the First Amendment does not apply to students. It means that, “Within the educational setting, the right to free speech is implemented in ways that do not interfere with the school’s educational mission. Students cannot claim, for instance, that they have the right to have incorrect answers to an algebra quiz accepted as correct, nor can teachers claim a right to teach anything they choose.”
To have a functioning school system, this is necessary to keep order. However, there are many instances that school boards, parents, and faculty over-step their boundaries and deny students the rights that they are guaranteed by the First Amendment. As stated in the Convention on the Rights of the Child, it is still the duty of all adults involved to ensure that children’s rights are fulfilled. As mentioned in Tinker v. De Moines, a child’s intellectual rights are normally surrendered at the schoolhouse doors. In an environment where education about numerous subjects, it is curious that preference is given to non-controversial topics. By banning literature that features viewpoints other than mainstream society can allow for discussion on controversial topics (Pavonetti 9). By presenting children with viewpoints other than their own, debates can be mediated and constructive. Pavonetti writes, “Children are growing up in a very complicated and difficult world, and they will have tough decisions to make throughout their lives. Literature plays an important role in teaching them what the world is like.” Children with access to objectionable material will enable them to meaningfully participate in societal conflicts. Censorship exists in schools in numerous approaches, most frequently in the form of book banning and curriculum restriction. In an attempt to remain as neutral and non-controversial as possible, school boards and parents request for topics to be removed from the curriculum and school libraries. Among the most frequently censored topics are multiculturalism, homosexuality, sex education, and religion (McCluskey 5). Parents and board members alike believe that explicit content is damaging to a child’s development, though as stated by C. K. Meena, “Children cannot bloom into rebellious individuals if we do not arm them with the right wrong vocabulary”. This is neither encouraged nor allowed in the public school system. The banning of books is among the most controversial varieties of censorship. Students are restricted from accessing whole works by various authors. Popular writers such as Judy Blume, John Green, and Sherman Alexie top this list (American Library Association). These and many other censored authors not only have written numerous books with literary merit, their books are popular and relatable to children. By limiting these relatable resources, this type of censorship hampers the school’s ability to explore all possible avenues and “reach” students. Instruction becomes bland and formulaic and children as a result become disinterested. Katherine Paterson writes, “When our chief goal is not to offend someone, we are likely not to write a book that will not deeply affect anyone”(Blume 71). Censorship also requires curriculum restrictions in the classroom. When teachers are stripped of their professional judgement, we forfeit the educational legitimacy we praise. Because schools are expected to be places of moral development, course work must be chosen systematically to be non-controversial. Teachers are unable to teach students to read critically to make informed decisions about literature on their own (Whitney 1). As a result, a child’s ability to formulate ideas is severely absent. One must be taught to respect their peers at an early age, as this skill is challenging to learn at an older age. In the midst of the age of adolescent censorship, children's First Amendment rights are infringed regularly in the United States education system. As stated during the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, a child is entitled to the fulfillment of their rights and to obtain information that will be beneficial to their health and well-being. They also are entitled to their opinion being taken into account and for the government to provide mass-media resources for their education. In addition to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the United States’ First Amendment allows for freedom of speech and press. Though this law is clearly defined, many are unclear about the Numerous cases have been brought before the Supreme Court and have served to define the precise rights of a child. Collectively, they determined that children have the right to receive information and ideas and are entitled to their own opinion. These cases include Tinker v. De Moines, Pico v. Board of Education, and Board of Education v. Island Trees Union Free School District. Controversial material in educational settings allows for constructive discussion. Lastly, practices such as book banning and curriculum restriction hinder the opportunities for education about the world and appreciation for differing cultures. In all, censorship infringes on a child’s educational freedom and civil liberties. It creates major injustices in the individual and education system alike and as a result, it adversely affects the world.
is important to their health and well-being. Governments should encourage and even provide mass media to provide information that children can understand. These rights, when examined as one unit, constitute as legislature similar to the United States’ First Amendment. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution allows citizens to express freedom of speech and press. It also disallows the government from making laws that infringe upon this right. Though this is a clearly defined right to be shared by all (presumably adult) citizens, it does not specify in cases of adolescents. Because of this, instances of First Amendment infringement against children often go unnoticed. Numerous cases have been brought before the Supreme Court on the basis of these violations. Cases such as these assist in defining the legal boundaries of the First Amendment. Three crucial cases are Tinker v. De Moines, Pico v. Board of Education, and Board of Education v. Island Trees Union Free School District. The Supreme Court, through these cases in particular, help define a child’s legal First Amendment rights. In the 1968 case of Tinker v. De Moines Independent Community School District. Students wore black arm bands to school in protest against the Vietnam War. They were asked to remove the arm bands, with refusal to do so resulting in suspension. In a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court ruled that students do not “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech at the schoolhouse gate”. Clearly put, students have the right to personal opinions, given that these are not disruptive to the school climate. In the Pico vs. Board of Education decision, a school board attempted to remove books from the school library based on objectionable content. The Supreme Court rejected the removal of such books because “the right to receive ideas is a necessary predicate to the recipient’s meaningful exercise of his own rights of speech, press, and political freedom” and made clear that “students too are beneficiaries of this principle” (Pico v. Board of Education). The First Amendment, the case specifies, protects a student’s right to revise available viewpoints that cannot be suppressed by school officials on the basis of political disagreement on information. While attending a conservative Educational conference, officials of the Island Trees Union Free School District concluded that the books, Slaughter House Five by Kurt Vonnegut and Black Boy by Richard Wright should be taken out of the library.
Many students and parents questioned the school board’s decisions to remove these books from the library and were backed by a 5-4 vote by the Supreme Court. The Court held that school officials cannot remove books simply because they personally believe that the books are objectionable. The First Amendment protects the right to receive information and ideas and prohibits suppression of material simply because government officials, including school officials, dislike the material. Justice William Brennan states, “The special characteristics of the school library make that environment especially appropriate for the recognition of the First Amendment rights of
students”. It is important to mention that though children do have some First Amendment rights, school districts have the power and even the duty to enforce order in their schools. These rights can be subordinated to achieve legitimate educational goals. This does not, however, infer that the First Amendment does not apply to students. It means that, “Within the educational setting, the right to free speech is implemented in ways that do not interfere with the school’s educational mission. Students cannot claim, for instance, that they have the right to have incorrect answers to an algebra quiz accepted as correct, nor can teachers claim a right to teach anything they choose.”
To have a functioning school system, this is necessary to keep order. However, there are many instances that school boards, parents, and faculty over-step their boundaries and deny students the rights that they are guaranteed by the First Amendment. As stated in the Convention on the Rights of the Child, it is still the duty of all adults involved to ensure that children’s rights are fulfilled. As mentioned in Tinker v. De Moines, a child’s intellectual rights are normally surrendered at the schoolhouse doors. In an environment where education about numerous subjects, it is curious that preference is given to non-controversial topics. By banning literature that features viewpoints other than mainstream society can allow for discussion on controversial topics (Pavonetti 9). By presenting children with viewpoints other than their own, debates can be mediated and constructive. Pavonetti writes, “Children are growing up in a very complicated and difficult world, and they will have tough decisions to make throughout their lives. Literature plays an important role in teaching them what the world is like.” Children with access to objectionable material will enable them to meaningfully participate in societal conflicts. Censorship exists in schools in numerous approaches, most frequently in the form of book banning and curriculum restriction. In an attempt to remain as neutral and non-controversial as possible, school boards and parents request for topics to be removed from the curriculum and school libraries. Among the most frequently censored topics are multiculturalism, homosexuality, sex education, and religion (McCluskey 5). Parents and board members alike believe that explicit content is damaging to a child’s development, though as stated by C. K. Meena, “Children cannot bloom into rebellious individuals if we do not arm them with the right wrong vocabulary”. This is neither encouraged nor allowed in the public school system. The banning of books is among the most controversial varieties of censorship. Students are restricted from accessing whole works by various authors. Popular writers such as Judy Blume, John Green, and Sherman Alexie top this list (American Library Association). These and many other censored authors not only have written numerous books with literary merit, their books are popular and relatable to children. By limiting these relatable resources, this type of censorship hampers the school’s ability to explore all possible avenues and “reach” students. Instruction becomes bland and formulaic and children as a result become disinterested. Katherine Paterson writes, “When our chief goal is not to offend someone, we are likely not to write a book that will not deeply affect anyone”(Blume 71). Censorship also requires curriculum restrictions in the classroom. When teachers are stripped of their professional judgement, we forfeit the educational legitimacy we praise. Because schools are expected to be places of moral development, course work must be chosen systematically to be non-controversial. Teachers are unable to teach students to read critically to make informed decisions about literature on their own (Whitney 1). As a result, a child’s ability to formulate ideas is severely absent. One must be taught to respect their peers at an early age, as this skill is challenging to learn at an older age. In the midst of the age of adolescent censorship, children's First Amendment rights are infringed regularly in the United States education system. As stated during the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, a child is entitled to the fulfillment of their rights and to obtain information that will be beneficial to their health and well-being. They also are entitled to their opinion being taken into account and for the government to provide mass-media resources for their education. In addition to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the United States’ First Amendment allows for freedom of speech and press. Though this law is clearly defined, many are unclear about the Numerous cases have been brought before the Supreme Court and have served to define the precise rights of a child. Collectively, they determined that children have the right to receive information and ideas and are entitled to their own opinion. These cases include Tinker v. De Moines, Pico v. Board of Education, and Board of Education v. Island Trees Union Free School District. Controversial material in educational settings allows for constructive discussion. Lastly, practices such as book banning and curriculum restriction hinder the opportunities for education about the world and appreciation for differing cultures. In all, censorship infringes on a child’s educational freedom and civil liberties. It creates major injustices in the individual and education system alike and as a result, it adversely affects the world.