[LM_NET] FCC proposed regulations for Internet safety education

[Nancy Willard <nwillard@CSRIU.ORG>]

Hi all, 

The FCC has published its regulations for the Internet safety education.
These are available here:

Here is the operative provision:

A. Subpart F-Universal Service Support for Schools and Libraries.   The
following sections of Subpart F are revised as follows:
1. Amend § 54.520 to read as follows:

§ 54.520 Childrenšs Internet Protection Act certifications required from
recipients of discounts under the federal universal service support
mechanism for schools and libraries.
* * * * 

(c)(1)(i) The Internet safety policy adopted and enforced pursuant to 47
U.S.C. § 254(h) must include a technology protection measure that protects
against Internet access by both adults and minors to visual depictions that
are obscene, child pornography, or, with respect to use of the computers by
minors, harmful to minors.  This Internet safety policy must also include
monitoring the online activities of minors and must educate minors about
appropriate online behavior, including interacting with other individuals on
social networking websites and in chat rooms and cyberbullying awareness and
response.

Now I hate to say "I told you so" ;-) but in my earlier communications on
this, I indicated that based on a reading to the earlier regulations the FCC
was likely to merely add the statutory language to the certificate
requirement. This is what they are recommending. So indeed, I did tell you
so. And this addition means that there is no need for data retention and
accountability as one DOJ-funded Internet safety organization has been
telling you will be necessary.

Note the language: "The Internet safety policy adopted and enforced ..."
This means you will need to have a board hearing and change your policy.

But hold on this policy review - these regulations are not final. That will
take a couple of months - first there are 30 days for comment.

And there are two other issues that the FCC is also asking for comment on.
This includes "overriding the filter for adults for a bona fide research or
other lawful purpose." And they are also seeking clarification on the
language "matter that is inappropriate for minors." This language is in the
original statute but was never fully clarified in the prior regulations.

I am flat out THRILLED they are asking for guidance and will likely change
the regulations to address these two issues.

This means that in every district, you are going to have to have a
discussion about *exactly* what CIPA requires to be blocked - period - and
what else is being blocking for convenience. For far too often, I have heard
from educational staff indicating that the tech services staff is blocking
categories that do not contain "harmful material" if the term "harmful
material" is read in the context of the other requirements: "visual
depictions that are obscene, child pornography, or, with respect to use of
the computers by minors, harmful to minors."

So the discussions in schools will need to focus on what exactly CIPA
required be blocked. Then the "overriding for lawful purpose" needs to be
read in the context of "overriding the filter to allow access to the
material *that must be blocked under CIPA.*"

All of the other material that the district is trying (in vain at the high
school level) to block for other purposes - the entertainment, bandwidth
categories - need to be considered In a separate category with the ability
to override more widely distributed.

So the end configuration that I would recommend in districts would be this:

Material to be blocked: visual depictions that are obscene, child
pornography, and the following kinds of material that the district deems to
be harmful to minors, including sexual materials that are inappropriate for
minors (excluding materials for LGBTQ teens), and anything else the district
thinks should never be accessed by students. Note, the filter can be
overridden to allow access to this material for a "lawful purpose." So if a
principal or school resource officer needs access to an adult site that has
pornographic materials because there is a legitimate report that a student's
picture is on this site, this would be considered a "lawful purpose."

I would also include in another category of sites that should generally be
blocked as generally harmful for minors - but may be accessible by special
permission at the high school level. In this category would fall such sites
as hate groups. Generally harmful for minors. But it may be appropriate in
some classes for the teacher to be able to allow the students to look at
some carefully selected hate groups so that they can study the phenomenon of
online hate. So in this category would fall the "generally harmful material
that we should allow students look at under very careful guidance for
important instructional purposes." So this should require a level of school
leadership review.

Lastly, there is material blocked to ensure use in accord with educational
purpose and to address bandwidth concerns. This is the category where we
have some significant problems - because of the wide breath of the blocking
by the filtering companies which is disrupting access to materials for
instruction. Also I still have reports that counselors can't immediately get
access to Facebook or MySpace to investigate materials upon student report
of a concern - and this presents a safety concern.

It is my opinion that all instructional staff should have the ability to
override the filter to allow access and to allow student access to material
in these categories for bona fide educational purposes. Note clearly, this
is NOT a CIPA issue, this is not "material harmful for minors." This is
materials that the district is blocking using the filter because of
*convenience.* And all safe school staff need to be able to immediately have
access for safe school purposes.

What we need to insist from the filtering companies is several levels of
blocking and overriding capabilities. There needs to be two levels:

Material that must be blocked because it is harmful to minors. The filter
can be overridden to access these sites only with district leadership review
for a lawful purpose, which includes student safety concerns or carefully
designed instruction at the high school level.

Material blocked because it is not of instructional value and/or because of
bandwidth concerns. All certified staff, classified technology/library
staff, and safe school staff not falling into these categories should have
the authority to override the filter to access these sites for instructional
or safe school purposes. But there would need to be clear guidelines for
when this is considered appropriate - and if staff is overriding the filter
for non-instructional or non-safe school purposes there needs to be a
consequence. 

All best.

Nancy



-- 
Nancy Willard, M.S., J.D.
Center for Safe and Responsible Internet Use
http://csriu.org
http://cyberbully.org
http://cyber-safe-kids.com
http://csriu.wordpress.com
nwillard@csriu.org

Cyberbullying and Cyberthreats: Responding to the Challenge of Online Social
Aggression, Threats, and Distress (Research Press)

Cyber-Safe Kids, Cyber-Savvy Teens: Helping Young People Learn to Use the
Internet Safely and Responsibly (Jossey-Bass)

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Please note: All LM_NET postings are protected by copyright law.
  You can prevent most e-mail filters from deleting LM_NET postings
  by adding LM_NET@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU to your e-mail address book.
To change your LM_NET status, you send a message to: listserv@listserv.syr.edu
In the message write EITHER:
1) SIGNOFF LM_NET
2) SET LM_NET NOMAIL
3) SET LM_NET MAIL
4) SET LM_NET DIGEST

 * LM_NET Help & Information: http://lmnet.wordpress.com/
 * LM_NET Archive: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/archive/
 * EL-Announce with LM_NET Select: http://lm-net.info/join.html
 * LM_NET Supporters: http://lmnet.wordpress.com/category/links/el-announce/

--------------------------------------------------------------------