D#11,HW#2 Intros/Conclusions

This assignment really made me think about the way I am presenting information in my paper. I used the methods suggested in the text to revise my intro and conclusion a couple of different ways.

Original intro (Defining a problem)

Several years ago, there was public controversy over a book titled, Why Johnny Can't Read. Now, the controversy has become, "What Johnny is Viewing on his Computer Screen." Many parents believe that their children are protected against exposure to inappropriate content when those children use computers at school and in public libraries, but that is not necessarily true. While Internet filtering and blocking software has been installed on many public and school computers, the effectiveness of that software is constantly being challenged. Congress attempted to address the issue when it passed the Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA) in December 2000 (Carson 248). Unfortunately, the provisions of this law do not pertain to all libraries, and the content that must be restricted is limited (Bocher 36). The result is that children are not as safe as many parents have been led to believe. Federal regulations governing the use of Internet filtering software need to be modified to include all public and school libraries, with no stipulation as to the source of funding for any particular library.

Revision 1 (Defining the argument)

Federal regulations governing the use of Internet filtering software need to be modified to include computers in all public and school libraries, regardless of the sources of funding used by those libraries. The laws that currently apply do not go far enough to protect children from inappropriate or undesirable content. Although Internet filtering software has been installed on many public and school computers, the effectiveness of that software is far from ideal. Congress attempted to address the issue when it passed the Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA) in December of 2000 (Carson 248). Unfortunately, the provisions of the Act do not pertain to all libraries, and the content that must be restricted is limited (Bocher 36). The result is that children using public or school computers may not be as safe as parents and teachers may have been led to believe.

Revision 2 (Tell a story)

The teacher and librarian were both shocked when they discovered a third-grade student using a computer to play games on Playboy.com. They did not understand why the Internet filter had not automatically blocked access to the site. One of the reasons may be the current laws that govern the use of Internet filtering software on computers used by children in public and school libraries. The federal law that applies to filtering is known as the Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA), which was passed in December of 2000 (Carson 248). Unfortunately, the provisions of the Act do not pertain to all libraries, and the specific content that must be restricted or blocked is limited (Bocher 36). The result is that children are not as safe as many parents and teachers have been led to believe.

Original conclusion

Two steps should be taken to improve the situation. First, legislation should be drafted that will expand CIPA to include all public and school libraries. According to Nancy Kranich, former president of the ALA, the current legislation "force[s] libraries in economically disadvantaged areas to use already scarce resources to install expensive and unreliable filtering technologies or lose vital federal funds they need[...]"(Jost 481). Funding should not be used to blackmail libraries. Second, filtering requirements should be standardized for public and school libraries in order to reassure parents and teachers that children will be protected when accessing information on public computers. As outspoken as the ALA has been on the subject of freedom of access to information, they admit the need for additional measures to protect children, and their "Internet Toolkit" includes several pages of recommendations to help libraries deal with the issue (ala.org: Toolkit 6-9). Consumer Reports testing showed that even the worst filter successfully blocked 88 percent of the access to pornography (ConsumerReports.org). That seems worth the effort. No filter will be 100 percent effective, and educating users about safety will remain a high priority. The Internet will continue to see increased use in the immediate future, and it is up to responsible adults to ensure that our children have positive experiences in their quests for knowledge.

Revision 1 (Summarize the argument)

Rapid advances in technology and information access via the World Wide Web almost guarantee that filtering will continue to be a controversial topic. Parents and teachers need to feel confident that children will be exposed to a minimal amount of inappropriate material when using the Internet for research or pleasure. The current laws need to be changed to address that need. One way to ensure children’s safety is to effectively filter or block the “bad” sites, and to do it uniformly on all publicly accessible computers. Admittedly, no filter will be 100 percent effective. Teaching children to use safe techniques for all aspects of Internet use, including social networking, doing research, or just “surfing the Web” for pleasure, must remain a high priority in schools and libraries. Libraries are careful about the print resources they make available for children, and should be just as concerned about electronic resources. As adults, our goal should be to do whatever we can to make access to information safe for children. Technology may change, but for right now, effective filtering is one way to achieve that goal.

Revision 2 (Speculate about the future)

Technology is advancing at a phenomenal rate, and the software used to filter Internet access will undoubtedly continue to see improvement. Perhaps the day will arrive when computers will be “smart” enough to filter content according to the age of the user. Until then, responsible adults must rely upon the capabilities of the filtering software available. Those adults should insist that the law be changed to include all public and school libraries that offer Internet access for children. Only then will it be reasonable to expect a basic level of safety for children surfing the World Wide Web.