|
|
|
October 12, 2006
Selective blog blocking by Interior Department?
I don't like blog blocking, especially selective blog blocking, and I am disturbed to see evidence (via Glenn Reynolds) that the Interior Department might be doing both. Here's Baron Bodissey's list of the blocked and not blocked: Blocked Blogs:If that's accurate, it does indeed reveal selective bias. This reminds me of a similar situation in Kentucky, and while it's one thing for a private employer to do this, when it's the government, the standard changes. Aside from the issue of blocking access to conservative or libertarian sites while allowing liberal or socialist ones, I'm wondering about the goal here. If it is to discourage employees wasting time on the job, then why allow access to any news sites at all? I'd like to know whether the Interior Department blocks yahoo news, the New York Times, the Drudge Report, and the Raw Story. If they don't, I'd wonder why; should employees be reading news? And if they should (or if they are allowed to), then what about analysis and opinion? Every major news site offers the latter in addition to news -- as do many blogs. The only common distinction is is that the latter tend to be less widely read than the former. Isn't it an editorial judgment (a content based one) to allow discrimination based on the economic value of the publisher? I don't see how the federal government can make these valuations based on types of speech in a manner consistent with the First Amendment. UPDATE (10/16/06): Via Pajamas Media, Sean Gleeson looks at the DOI's goal (which is to block all blogs, not just conservative ones), and explains why it makes no sense. UPDATE (10/17/06): Pajamas Media asked Baron Bodissey to perform an "up-close and personal" examination, and after an exhaustive review, he points to a subordinate as the most likely explanation: "The department started blocking certain categories of websites, and then made a list of exceptions that would be allowed through the filter. That's a long list, and it would be passed down the food chain from the Network Administrator through his subordinates until it reached the poor schmoe at the bottom of the heap who would have to do all the data entry to list the exceptions. posted by Eric on 10.12.06 at 12:14 PM |
|
March 2007
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
March 2007
February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
• War For Profit
• How trying to prevent genocide becomes genocide • I Have Not Yet Begun To Fight • Wind Boom • Isaiah Washington, victim • Hippie Shirts • A cunning exercise in liberation linguistics? • Sometimes unprincipled demagogues are better than principled activists • PETA agrees -- with me! • The high pitched squeal of small carbon footprints
Links
Site Credits
|
|
Not to give the impression that I agree with this sort of thing, but it is very possible that they've installed a commercial blocking program, that has selective categories for blocking.
For example, Kim's site is blocked because it is categorized as a gun blog. "Guns" is a category that a company can check as excluded. I appealed their categorization, but was told to sod off. Political is a different category that most companies don't turn off.
Then there are general blocks for language and pictures that could be considered offensive.
I cannot come up with any way that Belmont or American Thinker would fit in a category that wouldn't also snap up Kos.
So it does look bad, but until we have more info, I'm still on the fence. The government, especially because of the higher standard, should block all blogs (because government employees shouldn't be using people-paid-for equipment for their personal use), unless reading blogs is part of their job. And the "I was just using it during lunch" is no excuse. It's not your computer to use for personal reasons EVER. If someone wants to read the Internet on their lunch break, then they should bring their own computer and go to an Internet cafe.