CENSORSHIP, THE INTERNET,
INTELLECTUAL FREEDOM, AND YOUTH
KAY E. VANDERGRIFT
As a society we want our young people to be literate, thoughtful,
and caring human beings; but we also attempt to control what they
read, think, and care about. We feel the need to "protect" children
from dangerous or disturbing ideas and information. Of course, what
is dangerous or disturbing to one person or segment of society may
be exciting and innovative to others and perhaps just "the truth" to
still others. This combination of multiplicity of values and concern for
young people keeps censorship alive in school and public libraries.
Current concerns for literacy and critical thinking in education may
actually increase incidents of censorship. Literacy assumes the
power of texts and encourages exposure to competing ideas and
beliefs. Critical thinking implies questioning, the analysis and
evaluation of those beliefs to come to a personal judgment that
empowers young people to take ownership of ideas and control of
their own intellectual and moral lives.
New technologies are also causing an increase in incidents of
censorship. The history of communications technologies, from the
written word to modern electronic media, has been written with fear
as critics contemplate the most dire consequences of each move
that takes us farther from the personal one-on-one interaction with
another human being in real time and space.
The internet and the world wide web are especially problematic. In
the virtual world of these media, there is a potential for a kind of
anonymous intimacy that can be very seductive in our often
fragmented, disconnected lives. Young people, often very
comfortable with and eager to explore these new media at the same
time they are coping with the myriad problems of coming-of-age in
our society, may be especially susceptible to such seduction. Like
most things, this can be either good or bad.
I am encouraged and impressed by students who have exhausted
traditional school and library resources who discover new and more
current material on the internet and the web. At times they even
participate in dialogues that move knowledge to new dimensions. I
am even more impressed to see previously unmotivated students,
seduced by information and ideas, discovering the power of their
own intellects through electronic exchange. For me, the question
becomes: Are we willing to give up this potential (if we could) to
"protect" young people from "dangerous" encounters?
For the most part, I can make the analogy to other media and
decide that, if we are not willing to eliminate books and libraries
because they may contain "dangerous" ideas, why would we
attempt to keep young people from the internet and the world wide
web? Obviously, however, we do attempt to "protect" young people
from much that is available in traditional print media, and various
types of filtering software are now available to "protect" young
people in the electronic world as well.
I fear that again concerned adults, often professional educators, are
burying their own heads in the sand with the mistaken notion that,
therefore, young people will not be exposed to these dangerous
ideas. Such ostrich-like behavior focuses our attention on banning
things, diverting our energies from the very real educational process
of helping students sort out, select, and look critically at the
information and the individuals they encounter in this virtual world.
What is needed is not censorship but powerful and thoughtful
dialogue focusing on inquiry and the development of personal
judgment. Only then will tomorrow's adults be prepared to deal with
the difficult decisions that face them in the 21st century.
As concerned adults, we need to understand conflicts of intellectual
freedom, not as something negative or practiced by those less
enlightened than ourselves, but as a process in which we are all
participants playing various roles based on age, family background,
societal position, religious beliefs, and profession. As professional
teachers and librarians, those who serve youth in school and public
libraries have a pivotal part to play in this ongoing intellectual and
moral drama. In order to best serve young people, we need
consciously to consider both the basic underpinnings of intellectual
freedom in our society and the requirements of the professional
roles we play. My personal interpretation of professional
assumptions and our role in this drama follows, and I invite others to
read, question, think, criticize, and share their own interpretations to
help keep this drama alive. Without this ongoing dialogue and
challenge to ideas and beliefs, there is no intellectual freedom.