>
> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 04:50:20 -0700
> From: Sara Kelly Johns <sarakellyjohns@YAHOO.COM>
> Subject: Re: No Dopa This...
>
> Thanks, Art, for posting this. There are many
> educational reasons to oppose DOPA and this sounds
> like a bill that could be offered as an alternative
> when contacting senators. Many of the recent exciting
> learning opportunities in our schools have included
> the use of blogs and wikis, for instance. Use of these
> technologies would be forbidden in schools.
I am no fan of DOPA -- for all of the obvious reasons. But the above
statement is in error. There is an educational exception in DOPA. All
educational uses of these technologies can be allowed. The major problem in
schools, if the bill gets signed into law, is that some tech directors will
think that DOPA requires all uses to be locked down. So we have to be really
careful to not think DOPA means more than it does.
Actually, I do not think if DOPA is enacted there would be much of an impact
in schools or libraries. Students should not be engaged in non-educational
use of a school Internet system for these kinds of communications anyway.
Nothing in the bill requires public libraries to block proxies. Kids who
want to engage in social networking will simply find a way around the block.
My biggest concern is that the lack of clarity in the legislation will lead
to mistaken conclusions such as the one above, which will lead to
unnecessary restrictions.
And, the underlying problem is that online predation is a *real concern* and
this legislation will do absolutely nothing to address this very real
concern.
The reason DOPA passed by such an overwhelming votes is simple. I discovered
this when I was trying to defeat CIPA. My Senator told me that he totally
agreed with my concerns. But he simply had to vote for CIPA because he was
up for reelection and a vote against a bill that claims it will protect kids
online would simply lead to harmful ads against him claiming "Senator *
voted against legislation that would protect your child online." The
concerns regarding the legislation are too complex for anyone running for
office to be able to effectively communicate the more detailed message of
why the bill was opposed to voters. Everyone one wants simple solutions --
push a button and our kids are safe. Elected officials are safe when they
vote for simplistic solutions.
Sorry Art, I do not hold out much hope for a federal office of Internet
safety. Let me rephrase this. Such an office may be established, but I do
not hold out much hope that anything good would be accomplished. I think we
have to address these issues at the state level. I am trying to launch an
initiative in Oregon to do this and to be a model for other states.
Nancy
Nancy
--
Nancy Willard, M.S., J.D.
Center for Safe and Responsible Internet Use
http://csriu.org
http://cyberbully.org
nwillard@csriu.org
Cyberbullying and Cyberthreats: Responding to the Challenge of Online Social
Cruelty, Threats, and Distress, a resource for educators, is now available
online at http://cyberbully.org.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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, e-mail 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 * Allow for confirmation.
* LM_NET Help & Information: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/
* LM_NET Archive: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/archive/
* EL-Announce with LM_NET Select: http://elann.biglist.com/sub/
* LM_NET Supporters: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/ven.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------
LM_NET
Mailing List Home