Slashdot Mirror


Illinois University Restricts Access To Social Media, Online Political Content

onproton writes Northern Illinois University recently began restricting student access to web pages that contain "illegal or unethical" content which, according to University policy, includes resources used for "political activities...and the organization or participation in meetings, rallies and demonstrations." A student raised concerns after attempting to access the Wikipedia page for Westboro Baptist Church, and receiving a filter message informing him that his access of this page would likely violate the University's Acceptable Use Policy, along with a warning that "all violations would be reviewed." This has lead to questions about whether some policies that restrict student access to information are in the best interest of the primary goal of education.

130 comments

  1. More about Indoctrination by jasonrice22 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Perhaps it is because the university is more about indoctrination than education.

    1. Re:More about Indoctrination by wisnoskij · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Perhaps it is because all universities are more about indoctrination than education.

      Fixed that for you.

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    2. Re:More about Indoctrination by fightinfilipino · · Score: 4, Funny

      Perhaps it is because some universities are more about indoctrination than education.

      Fixed that for you.

      only a Sith deals in absolutes.

    3. Re:More about Indoctrination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Our internet usage policy at the labs was ANYTHING that is legal, including porn. You did get told got to a corner and turn your monitor as not to offend anyone with your fetishes. The stories the lab assistants told. Labs were also open to the public, you just had to register and have proof of local permanent residency, and you got booted if a student needed a spot. Any punishment the University could dole out, including expulsion, was able to be overruled by a jury of students, so long as it wasn't over anything illegal by law or not paying your tuition. Very liberal and democratic. The student government had the power to block renovations and new buildings being built. They have a lot of say in the Universities finances, including raising funds from alumni and having new buildings built.

      The student body as a whole had roughly equal power to the management, but everyone was respectful of their duties. I enjoyed working there as a student employee. Administration people were very nice, teachers were nice, co-workers were nice, students were nice. It was a great time.

    4. Re:More about Indoctrination by wisnoskij · · Score: 4, Funny

      I never realised how ironic/hypocritical that statement was until now.

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    5. Re:More about Indoctrination by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      That may be true but it is this particular University that is making the situation painfully obvious today.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    6. Re:More about Indoctrination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      I tried to see if that was true, but my university won't let me visit any of the websites that talk about it :(

    7. Re:More about Indoctrination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only some Siths deal in absolutes.

      (That makes me a real non-Sith, because I didn't *absolutely* state that *all* who deal in absolutes are Siths, that itself an absolute statement making one unable to make it (being a Sith and all) )

    8. Re:More about Indoctrination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      You're a conservative victim, aren't you? With such a chip on your shoulder about higher ed, bet you're an evangelical Christian.

    9. Re:More about Indoctrination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I didn't *absolutely* state that *all* who deal in absolutes are Siths

      And neither did Obi-Wan. It's all about context. He was talking to a fellow force user, Anakin. Ergo, Obi-Wan was stating that, among force users, those who deal in absolutes are Sith, not that everyone who deals in absolutes is a Sith.

    10. Re:More about Indoctrination by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

      So only conservatives are supposed to have freedom of expression, freedom of speech, and the like?

    11. Re:More about Indoctrination by SpockLogic · · Score: 1

      Perhaps it is because the university is more about indoctrination than education.

      This reeks of the university administration imposing a policy that the faculty and students will ultimately defeat.

    12. Re:More about Indoctrination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Only some Siths deal in absolutes.

      No true Sith deals only in absolutes!

    13. Re:More about Indoctrination by hallkbrdz · · Score: 0

      Precisely!

      Any educational value is just incidental.

    14. Re:More about Indoctrination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have quite a lot of "higher ed" don't you? Your level of indoctrination is even higher than most. Good luck with that.

      Signed: Not a conservative or an e-Christian either...

    15. Re:More about Indoctrination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't trust Obi-Wan. He twists the meanings of words and outright lied to Luke about his father!

      Obi-Wan: "What I told you was true, from a certain point of view."
      Luke: "Okay. So, from everyone else's point of view, 'murder' = kill someone, and from your point of view, 'murder' = change your name and occupation?"

      Fuck postmodernism.

    16. Re: More about Indoctrination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Silly, his point is the the statement only a Sith deals in absolutes, is an absolute.

    17. Re:More about Indoctrination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Obi-Wan was stating that, among force users, those who deal in absolutes are Sith, not that everyone who deals in absolutes is a Sith.

      You're forgetting the word "only."

    18. Re:More about Indoctrination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you're a butthurt internet liberal flailing about in another poor attempt at smug cityboy sarcasm. Way to go buddy.

    19. Re: More about Indoctrination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It has nothing to do with postmodernism and everything about Lucas writing himself into a corner and then deciding to do a complete about face. Continuity be damned. Episodes IV and V were continuous, you see, from a certain point of view.

    20. Re: More about Indoctrination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes but postmodernism allowed him to pull that shit. "Truth is what we understand it to be." Meh.

    21. Re: More about Indoctrination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wouldn't go blaming the university over all. This may be an over zealous IT department trying to apply corporate ideals in an educational environment. For example things like trying to force compliance with CALEA even though it has been decided in the courts that CALEA does not apply to higher education institutions.

  2. Tor... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    For however many years freedom has left.

  3. Graduate Students.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Well, that's one place I won't be applying for graduate school. Although NIU sounds like a fly by night school anyway... It's UI-UC that's on my radar.

    1. Re:Graduate Students.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, it's a joke of a school in the middle of a corn field.

  4. could've sworn this was not the case by MoFoQ · · Score: 3, Informative

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

    Supposedly the policy applies to employees not students.

    1. Re:could've sworn this was not the case by wiredlogic · · Score: 3, Funny

      Because an institution of higher learning prefers its workers to be dumb and uninformed.

      --
      I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
    2. Re:could've sworn this was not the case by Stormy+Dragon · · Score: 5, Informative

      That's the schools PR spin, but it's undermined by the fact the policy itself specifically says it applies to students:

      Northern Illinois University information technology resources, including the electronic communications network (NIUnet) on the NIU campus and off-campus education and research centers, computers attached to this network, and any associated computational resource or service are for the use of persons affiliated with Northern Illinois University, including faculty, staff, emeritus personnel, and students in good standing. Information technology resources are provided by the university to further the university's mission of research, instruction, and public service. The use of these resources should be consistent with this mission, this policy, and the University’s other use, security policies, and other applicable regulations including the State Officials and Employees Ethics Act (SOEEA). Pursuant to the NIU Electronic Mail policy, the email system may be utilized for personal messages subject to the limitations set forth in these and other applicable policies and to the extent that personal usage does not interfere with assigned responsibilities. By using NIU services, all individuals, including, but not limited to, employees, students, customers, volunteers, and third parties, unconditionally accept the terms of this policy.

    3. Re:could've sworn this was not the case by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess it's easier to enjoy your cushy sinecure while telling all the students to go out and ruin their lives being worthless protesters and activists

      I don't know what shithole you went to, but Oxford is anything but "strong liberal". Your education is likely to lead you to not change but to take over the world, and you will probably succeed.

      However, the academics are - as OP put it - "pusillanimous" when it comes to political influences on themselves, and if they'd actually bothered putting their cushy career on the line to prevent all the crap they didn't want, it wouldn't have come.

    4. Re:could've sworn this was not the case by wiredlogic · · Score: 2

      They blocked the Wikipedia page about the church which is mostly a detailed list of their bigoted views and activities. It isn't illegal or unethical to learn about hateful people. Should they also erase Hitler from history too?

      --
      I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
    5. Re:could've sworn this was not the case by msauve · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "Because an institution of higher learning prefers its workers to be dumb and uninformed"

      No...because an employer pays for their employee's Internet access so they can do the employer's business. It's not like there aren't multiple ways to access the Internet.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    6. Re:could've sworn this was not the case by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      brain-dead little AC faglet such as yourself

      This is comedy gold. I'll leave you to try and figure out why, mr. AC.

    7. Re:could've sworn this was not the case by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 1

      "Because an institution of higher learning prefers its workers to be dumb and uninformed"

      No...because an employer pays for their employee's Internet access so they can do the employer's business. It's not like there aren't multiple ways to access the Internet.

      In other words people will switch to using smartphones and tablets to access Facebook, Wikipedia, politically correct websites, etc... and nothing really changes. Censorship is a game of Whac-A-Mole that the censors will always loose.

      --
      Only to idiots, are orders laws.
      -- Henning von Tresckow
    8. Re:could've sworn this was not the case by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1) You didn't go to Oxford.
      2) One exception does not disprove the rule.

    9. Re:could've sworn this was not the case by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They blocked the Wikipedia page about the church which is mostly a detailed list of their bigoted views and activities. It isn't illegal or unethical to learn about hateful people. Should they also erase Hitler from history too?

      Why get your butthole all knotted up over this? They do a REVIEW of the content. However this is completely illegal, it is a first amendment violation, but if your smart enough (after all your suppose to be somewhat smart if your in college) you would go off campus to do whatever research you want.

      I would have to wonder if this is related to corporate sponsorship, god forbid they get their asshole knotted up over how the colleges image would look if someone studies about Hitler, or some bigoted Church, considering how unethical corporations are themselves. Or other students that have their assholes knotted up because they found another student studying or just reading something out of curiosity.

      Simply said the colleges are trying to save face.

    10. Re:could've sworn this was not the case by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean the Huffington Post repeated what they were told without even bothering to fact check it? How shocking!

      ~

    11. Re:could've sworn this was not the case by penix1 · · Score: 1

      "Because an institution of higher learning prefers its workers to be dumb and uninformed"

      No...because an employer pays for their employee's Internet access so they can do the employer's business. It's not like there aren't multiple ways to access the Internet.

      In other words people will switch to using smartphones and tablets to access Facebook, Wikipedia, politically correct websites, etc... and nothing really changes. Censorship is a game of Whac-A-Mole that the censors will always loose.

      It depends on the goal of the censorship. If the goal is to prevent you from ever accessing the restricted content, then you are correct. On the other hand if the goal is to prevent you from using my network to access it, then they certainly can do that.

      --
      This is a sig. This is only a sig. Had this been an actual sig you would have been informed where to tune for more sigs.
    12. Re:could've sworn this was not the case by wiredlogic · · Score: 1

      you would go off campus to do whatever research you want.

      You do realize what a completely inane comment that is.

      --
      I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
    13. Re:could've sworn this was not the case by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > They blocked the Wikipedia page about the church which is mostly a detailed list of their bigoted views and activities.

      I know, right? It's Wikipedia, FFS... why didn't they just change the article to something they find more acceptable? Certainly if they feel entitled to "cleanse" the Web for students, faculty and staff, it must be for the greater good to cleanse it for everyone in the world?

      (Tap tap tap... there. Now the article just says "Fred Phelps was a heckuva guy.")

    14. Re:could've sworn this was not the case by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      After all, that seems to be standard procedure at the Huffington School of Medicine.

    15. Re:could've sworn this was not the case by onproton · · Score: 2
      1. I am a bit taken aback at the responses referencing this Huffington Post article - a couple of quick notes:
      2. The University policy restricts access to these websites for students as well as staff, in some cases it is possible to still click through to the page after the filter message, but visitors are issued a warning informing them that accessing the site is likely against policy and, in essence, that that they are being watched (as shown in the source referenced in the article).
      3. I cannot speak to the intentions of the University, but (as seen in other responses here) the policy itself specifically states, "By using NIU services, all individuals, including, but not limited to, employees, students, customers, volunteers, and third parties, unconditionally accept the terms of this policy."
      4. In addition, the accusations presented go deeper than just social media - to the point that any controversial material, or discussion of such material, would be a violation. Again, I cannot say if this is the intention, or speak to how the policy will be enforced, but this is the way the terms are written.
      5. .
      6. I understand that we tend to rely heavily on the media to fact check our news for us - and frankly, I am shocked at the lack of research The Huffington Post seems to have done prior to publishing this article. Simply reading the terms of the policy in question seems to point out numerous contradictions to the University's statements.
  5. Turn it around: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    An AUP governs the use of campus equipment and services.

    I clicked the link and read the article, and there's gasping outrage about how they're "limiting free speech" by telling students they *also* can't use the campus computer systems for things like political messaging, meetings, rallies, or anything else - in other words, no, you can't spam the student body.

    And for those of you who think that it's not right that they'd limit that sort of usage, think long and hard about this:

    - Campus Christian Ministry decides to start spamming the entire campus with pro-life messages.
    - Young Republicans club start spamming the entire campus with messages calling for the impeachment of Pres. Obama.
    - ROTC program starts spamming the entire campus with messages encouraging students to sign up for military service.

    Where's your unfettered free speech now?

    1. Re:Turn it around: by Richy_T · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Doesn't follow. There's a big difference between solicited and unsolicited email.

    2. Re:Turn it around: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't get your point. The summary says they blocked access to Wikipedia articles. Does the university library also cuts out definitions of "communism" (or any other term they are afraid of) from their encyclopedias?

    3. Re:Turn it around: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not really. You're still chewing up resources to send it, and I guarantee that the first time some poor tender-hearted 18 year old is forced to confront the fact that their pat assumptions about the world aren't universally held true, the line between "solicited" and "unsolicited" will be drawn along lines of "does this agree with my prejudices."

      So you avoid the problem by telling people - like you do at any workplace - that they are expected to behave professionally, and not like a bunch of assholes, while using the corporate network. You want "free access to anything you want"? Go pay for your own service.

    4. Re:Turn it around: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It comes down to is anything online considered under the freedom of speech or not. If NO, then let them filter. If YES, that is what personal spam filtering is for.

      Now as far as the using your own equipment that has to be routed through the school network, they should not be filtering by content. I am all for bandwidth throttling if they really do need to preserve so everybody has access.

    5. Re:Turn it around: by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 3, Informative

      An AUP governs the use of campus equipment and services.

      I clicked the link and read the article, and there's gasping outrage about how they're "limiting free speech" by telling students they *also* can't use the campus computer systems for things like political messaging, meetings, rallies, or anything else - in other words, no, you can't spam the student body.

      And for those of you who think that it's not right that they'd limit that sort of usage, think long and hard about this:

      - Campus Christian Ministry decides to start spamming the entire campus with pro-life messages.
      - Young Republicans club start spamming the entire campus with messages calling for the impeachment of Pres. Obama.
      - ROTC program starts spamming the entire campus with messages encouraging students to sign up for military service.

      Where's your unfettered free speech now?

      Yeah how dare those conservatives exercise their rights to free speech its not like you can mark them as spam and never hear anything they say again. Hell lets take this a step further lets just curtail all political speech on a public campus, In-fact lets set aside an area where they can say what they think where no one else was to hear it we can call it a free speech zone...

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    6. Re:Turn it around: by wisnoskij · · Score: 3

      What does spamming the entire campus body have to do with accessing a political article on wikipedia?

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    7. Re:Turn it around: by TapeCutter · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The right to free speech does not mean a university has to provide the publishing infrastructure to make that speech. By logical extension of your standards universities must also provide spray cans so that students can spray paint their thoughts onto the campus buildings. Also Fred Phelps is not a defender of free speech , he's a serial pest who harrases people at family funerals, I really wish more of his victims used the "fighting words" defense as an excuse to beat the shit out of the repulsive little turd.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    8. Re:Turn it around: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Conservatives on a college campus? Whaaaatttttt?????

    9. Re:Turn it around: by lgw · · Score: 5, Interesting

      right to free speech does not mean a university has to provide the publishing infrastructure to make that speech.

      But this isn't about publishing. This is about web access. What was your point again?

      Also Fred Phelps is not a defender of free speech , he's a serial pest who harrases people at family funerals

      The man is a freaking icon of free speech. Only hateful, harmful, ugly, disagreeable speech needs any protection in the first place. I can't think of a living speaker who offends my more than that guy has. If you don't support his right to free speech, you're simply unclear on the concept.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    10. Re:Turn it around: by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      - Campus Christian Ministry decides to start spamming the entire campus with pro-life messages.
      - Young Republicans club start spamming the entire campus with messages calling for the impeachment of Pres. Obama.
      - ROTC program starts spamming the entire campus with messages encouraging students to sign up for military service.

      Where's your unfettered free speech now?

      Why anybody would be worried about those groups or any other boggles the minds. If the content isn't illegal, then why censor it? Surely if kids are smart enough to be in college, they are smart enough to hit a delete key for content they don't want.

    11. Re:Turn it around: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Surely if kids are smart enough to be in college, they are smart enough to hit a delete key for content they don't want.

      I think you're grossly overestimating kids.

    12. Re:Turn it around: by Kjella · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The man is a freaking icon of free speech. Only hateful, harmful, ugly, disagreeable speech needs any protection in the first place. I can't think of a living speaker who offends my more than that guy has. If you don't support his right to free speech, you're simply unclear on the concept.

      That's not a two way street. Just because all the speech that needs protecting offends someone doesn't mean all offensive speech should have protection. Threats, libel, slander, fraud and perjury are all forms of speech. Playing loud music at 3AM is arguably a form of expression. The "freedom of speech" card is not absolute in any country on earth, even the US.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    13. Re:Turn it around: by DRJlaw · · Score: 1

      The right to free speech does not mean a university has to provide the publishing infrastructure to make that speech.

      No, but it does mean that a public university (note: NIU is a public university, i.e., an institution established by the State of Illinois) which decides to provide a publishing infrastructure cannot the restrict use of that infrastructure based upon the content of what is published without having a compelling interest and using the least restrictive means necessary to achieve that interest.

      Your post would be relevant if NIU was debating whether to roll out internet access. Since it has already done so, it does not get to withdraw that publishing infrastructure simply because it views the content as being controversial, political, or somehow less worthy than "approved projects."

      Lawyered...

    14. Re:Turn it around: by penguinoid · · Score: 3, Funny

      - Campus Christian Ministry decides to start spamming the entire campus with pro-life messages.
      - Young Republicans club start spamming the entire campus with messages calling for the impeachment of Pres. Obama.
      - ROTC program starts spamming the entire campus with messages encouraging students to sign up for military service.

      Where's your unfettered free speech now?

      In my spam folder?

      --
      Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
    15. Re:Turn it around: by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

      The right to free speech does not mean a university has to provide the publishing infrastructure to make that speech.

      No shit university can do whatever it wants.. as a result they can expect to be held accountable for propagating indefensible policies. Fact this university is state funded means they have to answer to more than just students.

      By logical extension of your standards universities must also provide spray cans so that students can spray paint their thoughts onto the campus buildings.

      Censoring content is not spray cans sorry.

    16. Re:Turn it around: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You mean all that money they already paid?

    17. Re:Turn it around: by ahankinson · · Score: 1

      It's not a corporate network, it's a university network -- there's a difference. A university network is, essentially, an extension of the library.

    18. Re:Turn it around: by Monoman · · Score: 1

      The library doesn't have unlimited porn, social media, music, etc etc but that is what the majority of the students are using the network for at the school. There isn't nearly as much "personal research" going on in a library as there is on the Internet.

      I'm not saying network access should be restricted. I'm just saying let's be honest about how it is being used.

      --
      Keep the Classic Slashdot.
    19. Re:Turn it around: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > The "freedom of speech" card is not absolute in any country on earth, even the US.

      Yeah, but your regulations have to be blind to the *content* of the speech. In other words, you can't have one rule for things you like and another for things you don't, as most are wont to do. So you have to prohibit, for example, all loud speech at 3 AM, not just particular speakers you find offensive.

      Perjury is one of the worst examples of selective enforcement, as lawyers and prosecutors skate the line all day and get away with it while normal people usually get hammered.

    20. Re:Turn it around: by Adambomb · · Score: 3, Insightful

      For all I detest the fact, i still hold that anyone should be free to be a complete fucking idiot. If you hold ultra fundamentalist nutjobs as being limitable speech you are simply paving the way for rationalism to be limited in the advent of a fucking moronic demographic spike. Overestimating future generations is kind of what has fucked america over already.

      --
      Ice Cream has no bones.
    21. Re: Turn it around: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn. The authoritarian follower 'do what you're told because somebody says so' corporate apologists are all over then place here.

      I also love how we've redefined 'professional' as 'meak, compliant, and conformist'. Just the sort of things authoritarian followers love.

    22. Re:Turn it around: by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      Just because all the speech that needs protecting offends someone doesn't mean all offensive speech should have protection. Threats, libel, slander, fraud and perjury are all forms of speech.

      You're getting speech confused with the consequences - or lack thereof - of said speech. Two separate issues.

    23. Re:Turn it around: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL - they ARE communists, why would they want to hide the definition of communism?

      Gee... I wonder who could possibly have been behind taking away YOUR free speech?

      http://balder.org/judea/Hate-Speech-Laws-Immigration-Jewish-Influence-USA.php

      Why, it's our Jewish 'masters', who view us all as 'goyim' (meaning 'cattle'), put on Earth to do their bidding...

    24. Re:Turn it around: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But this isn't about publishing. This is about web access. What was your point again?

      That the University has no obligation to provide unlimited free access to all internet content. If the guy wants to read and express political views not related to his studying he can pay for his own web access. What would be scandalous is if a university would make students sign a promise to never look for information about X. This is not the case, they are free to read what they want, but not to use the library access to read about things not related to their studies. If he wants to game the system he can find a way to have to write an essay about a controversial political topic, then claim he could not do proper research due to the web restrictions.

    25. Re:Turn it around: by JenovaSynthesis · · Score: 1

      Free speech guarantees you the right to say it free from consequences. It says nothing about a guaranteed venue or audience. And any college would have a legitimate interest in blocking that material over their e-mail system on a mass scale. It's happened before:

      "An estimated 3000 [Michigan State University] students protesting the ban on alcohol at Munn Field tailgate parties resulted in police firing tear gas at the crowd. The gathering was planned in advance by an email spread through the student body email system asking students to gather and protest the ban. The university police informed students, via the school newspaper, that anyone getting on Munn Field would be arrested for trespassing. One student crossed the fence and was arrested by campus police. Shortly thereafter, 30-40 students crossed the fence and when the remaining students saw the police unable to arrest everyone, approximately 1,500 students poured over the fence on Munn field. The students played football, frisbee and played in the rain and mud. The police then tear gassed the students, who then left and went to the University President's (M. Peter McPherson) house. When the students learned the President was not available, they then went to Grand River Ave, and a small riot ensued."

      And don't pull the "only conservatives are restricted" card because it is easily annihilated.

      --
      Anonymous Cowards generally receive no replies because you're a coward and I'm a bitch :)
    26. Re:Turn it around: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just because all the speech that needs protecting offends someone doesn't mean all offensive speech should have protection. Threats, libel, slander, fraud and perjury are all forms of speech. Playing loud music at 3AM is arguably a form of expression. The "freedom of speech" card is not absolute in any country on earth, even the US.

      I find it interesting that in many States going door-to-door to discuss politicians with your neighbors is "unlawful, unregistered lobbying/political activity/campaigning" when the Founders of the United States who wrote Amendment I actively libeled and slandered the English crown--or the poor soldiers who "committed the Boston 'Massacre'" after one of their own taking a bullet to the gut--and so on, but we still have this "not [an] absolute" constantly invoked in the context of unforgiveable and indefensible censorship by a totalist crowd actively buddied-up with those who seek to ensure there can be no effective political activity outside their control.

      Hmm...

    27. Re:Turn it around: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > By logical extension of your standards universities must also provide spray cans so that students can spray paint their thoughts onto the campus buildings.

      Are you retarded?

    28. Re:Turn it around: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > This is not the case, they are free to read what they want, but not to use the library access to read about things not related to their studies.

      The only school I know of with a library policy like that is Hogwarts.

      > If he wants to game the system he can find a way to have to write an essay about a controversial political topic, then claim he could not do proper research due to the web restrictions.

      Or he can take the story to the press and let them embarrass the malicious idiots setting policy even more effectively.

    29. Re:Turn it around: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only school I know of with a library policy like that is Hogwarts.

      A lookup for "libraries policy" and "computer use policy" exact match restricted to .edu domain yielded 82,300 and 7,310 results respectively (out of which less than 0.4% mention the word "Hogwarts").

      Or he can take the story to the press and

      and be redirected to Wikipedia to read that Acceptable use policies are quite the norm in schools and workplaces. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    30. Re:Turn it around: by lgw · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Again with the "express". No, let's stay on the topic of "should a university provide students with the ability to read up on controversial political topics?" Of course they fucking should, or what's the point of a university? If a university doesn't exist for the very purpose of providing open access to all the information that there is without any for of censorship, what good is it? Such an institution should receive no accreditation, and no public funds.
       

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    31. Re:Turn it around: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > A lookup for "libraries policy" and "computer use policy" exact match restricted to .edu domain yielded 82,300 and 7,310 results respectively

      Since I'm sure your read all seven thousand links, how many included something to the effect of "[students] are not to use the library access to read about things not related to their studies"? I'm sure Bob Jones University does, but I doubt Berkley, Stanford, Harvard, MIT or Caltech do.

      AUP is just a document. Existence of a document does not imply that it's been reviewed for ethics, legality, or feasibility. It also doesn't imply any sort of immunity from public criticism.

      > blah blah AUPs hurr durr wikipedia

      Everyone has policies and 99% of them are crap, like everything else. A good way to get a shitty policy changed is to shit all over it and the people that made it in the media. Sometimes bureaucrats get fired and occasionally political careers get ended, it's great!

    32. Re:Turn it around: by DrEmu · · Score: 2

      For Heaven's sake. There are those of us who have been thinking "long and hard" about this since we went to college 50 years ago. It's a First Amendment violation pure and simple, and the fact that somebody feels they get to "think about it" is disgusting. There is nothing to think about when faced with censorship. It is the fundamental enemy of mankind.

  6. Re:Conservatives hate Fred Phelps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually one of the most skillful trolls I've seen in some time. Was this impromptu, or were you saving it up?

  7. Turn it around: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that's really a whole 'nother animal. to effectively be able to spam the entire campus, the campus IT would have to actively condone it by allowing a particular person's or group's email address to send to a some large email lists. at least, that's how a good email system works. a smart IT group would not allow extra-curricular groups like that to send to email lists. instead, they would have the group send their proposed email to a university official, who would then make sure the email doesn't violate any laws or policy. after approval, the email is sent out en mass.

    i disagree with filtering the web at university for anything other than malware and pornography.

  8. Re:Conservatives hate Fred Phelps by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

    Fred died.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  9. My guess by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Someone in IT over the summer was told to put on filtering NOW but some campus administrator. That person then found one quickly and installed it, without checking what it actually filters (although filtering companies do make that tough). There's probably lots of gotcha sites that are filtered at NIU nobody knows about yet.

    1. Re:My guess by mpe · · Score: 1

      That person then found one quickly and installed it, without checking what it actually filters (although filtering companies do make that tough).

      It also appears to be fairly common for such companies to not be exactly honest about their filtering criteria either. Especially when it comes to anything "political".

  10. Re:Conservatives hate Fred Phelps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Responding to your own stupid post with an equally stupid reply. You're a total moron greenwow

  11. Re:Conservatives hate Fred Phelps by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

    Nobody liked Fred except the 100 brainwashed family members in his "congregation". I was thoroughly disappointed with the gay community's reaction to his death, I had been looking forward to a Brazilian style Mardi Gras at Fred's funeral. Turns out they have a lot more self respect and common decency than Fred, who knew?

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  12. Re:Conservatives hate Fred Phelps by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

    God damn Fred Phelps.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  13. Link to Policy and University Clarification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    http://doit.niu.edu/doit/polic...

    Using the resources for political activities, including organizing or participating in any political meeting, rally, demonstration, soliciting contributions or votes, distributing material, surveying or polling for information connected to a political campaign, completing political surveys or polling information, and any other activities prohibited under the ethics act and/or other state/federal laws.

    Emphasis mine, and this makes sense from a CYA perspective. The next one though it bizarre:

    Use of personal social media sites, following specific direction to cease or not utilize university equipment or time to an extent or during time periods that would interfere with professional responsibilities, including, but not limited to

    ??? - can somebody explain what the heck this means. Oh wait, next link.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

    That only applies to employees. I think that's where the confusion is. Students -- unless they are an employee

    Sorry, this was a poorly planned, executed and communicated rollout. Sounds like a new position for Vice President of IT will be opening for a major university soon...

    1. Re:Link to Policy and University Clarification by presidenteloco · · Score: 1

      Prohibited: "political activities, including organizing or participating in any political meeting, rally, demonstration, soliciting contributions or votes, distributing material, surveying or polling for information connected to a political campaign, completing political surveys or polling information"

      Let's face it, this is fascist bullshit.

      Screams to be ignored, and, of course subverted by surreptitiously using the accounts of university administrators to send out the political information.

      And of course, there's always the good old pasting notices on lampposts and walls. Back in the day, we used a subversive communication system called a "phone tree" for organizing protest rallies.

      --

      Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
  14. I have two words to describe this policy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bovine excrement.

  15. A student raised concerns after attempting to access the Wikipedia page for Westboro Baptist Church,

    Aw, that'd be a shame if they couldn't access their totally inconsequential Two Minutes Hate target.

  16. It's for their own good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Students who have not completed their indoctrination/education are too stupid to discern when right wing reactionary fascists are deceiving them. So, NIU will be glad to assist and protect them. Always serving the student's interests.

  17. You cannot be surprised? by hackus · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Anyone who is stupid enough to pay a University via a banker to become "institutionalized" deserves exactly what they get.

    In the age of the internet, if you have to pay someone to sit you in a room and teach you like a trained monkey you have serious problems that go way beyond education.

    Universities are sort of like the last DINO's that hung around after the big rock thing from the sky happened. In this case the rock is the formation of the modern internet.

    I would pay about $500 bucks for a Bachelors degree, max for the outside chance a University actually provided something I can't do myself with a Internet connection.

    --
    Got Geometrodynamics? Awe, too hard to figure out? Too bad.
    1. Re:You cannot be surprised? by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 3, Interesting

      In the age of the internet, if you have to pay someone to sit you in a room and teach you like a trained monkey you have serious problems that go way beyond education.

      I'll actually say that's quite wrong. At least it is for me anyways. I actually learned networking from the Cisco Network Academy at my local community college. The teachers there combined their literally decades of field experience with Cisco's curriculum, and I can honestly say just from that alone I probably know more than some of the people I've worked with in the past who themselves have been in their jobs for decades, and are where they are from learning it the way you describe...in fact some of the things I've seen some people do wrong are just downright scary from a security perspective.

      Now if you want to make that argument about typical schools with high tuition rates, there's a ring of truth to it. I don't know why, but I often find that the more people spend on their education, the worse it is. There are outliers of course, but it tends to be the rule that if you paid a lot for your education, then you paid too much.

    2. Re:You cannot be surprised? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      In the age of the internet, if you have to pay someone to sit you in a room and teach you like a trained monkey you have serious problems that go way beyond education.

      I went to college to meet chicks.

    3. Re:You cannot be surprised? by BlueStrat · · Score: 1

      In the age of the internet, if you have to pay someone to sit you in a room and teach you like a trained monkey you have serious problems that go way beyond education.

      I went to college to meet chicks.

      "If you want to to get laid, go to college. If you want an education, go to the library." - Frank Zappa

      "Where's the college library?"

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    4. Re:You cannot be surprised? by Mitchell314 · · Score: 2

      Which is why I want my doctors to be solely educated by google! And the folks who build the planes and cars I ride in.

      --
      I read TFA and all I got was this lousy cookie
    5. Re:You cannot be surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An Ivy League University provides you with daily opportunities to meet and get drunk with some of the wealthiest and best-connected kids in the country. The people that go there are future leaders of mega corporations, politicians, and the like. The connections you form with them will provide you with employment opportunities that you could never get by any other means.

      Your self-education on the Internet may give you knowledge, but there is no way that liking people on Facebook compares to this.

    6. Re:You cannot be surprised? by mjwalshe · · Score: 1

      I actually found that doing my CCNA at one the physical cisco academy's very usefully having 20 routers and switches to play with makes the course so much easier. I even went in on my day off and did some additional experiments to get to the bottom of some OSFP strangeness. And to pass you have to be able to fix a real broken network

    7. Re:You cannot be surprised? by mjwalshe · · Score: 1

      You go to uni for more than just that and do you have the hardware required to do a physics or other stem degree in your garage.

    8. Re:You cannot be surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Physics undergrad requires what, a calculator?

    9. Re:You cannot be surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > An Ivy League University provides you with daily opportunities to meet and get drunk with some of the wealthiest and best-connected kids in the country.

      While this is true, the vast majority of students are not at Ivy League or legendary-tier engineering schools.

    10. Re:You cannot be surprised? by Sciath · · Score: 1

      Like some southern red necked female hog said, "Ain't no law a'gine be'n stupid." Anyone can "self medicate" with over-the-counter remedies (i.e. Wikipedia, etc). Understanding is an altogether different horse. And a big part of that comes from the education, personal experience with instructors and rigorous academic structure of a higher education. Unless you insist upon proclaiming yourself another "Einstein", or savant. But even Einstein had a higher education. And savants are only geniuses in one or two subjects while being socially maladjusted. The hypothesis that one can become an expert in something without supervised education is pure hubris for it ignores other aspects of education that one cannot experience on a error prone superhighway without signals, traffic control, etiquette, speed limits, etc.

      --
      "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
    11. Re:You cannot be surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, that's hardly true for some subjects. I take it you've never tried to learn chemical engineering (what I got my Bachelor's degree in a year ago) from the internet. It's not great for that. You might get through the first year or two of a chemical engineering curriculum, but after that you actually do need instructors who know what they're talking about and can explain why some things are important.

  18. Never heard of it by EmperorOfCanada · · Score: 1

    I guess this is why this fine academic institution has never crossed my radar. I have never heard it mentioned in any publication, any citation, any contest win. I am not saying that they don't publish squat but that nothing they have published managed to catch my attention. And when I read something in Nature, etc I will check to see which institution the various authors are from to mentally compile a list of intellectually active institutions.

    So as far as I can tell this place is the intellectual opposite of say, MIT.

  19. They don't want to promote unethical behavior... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...must not be a business school.

  20. Could someone please explain to me by PJ6 · · Score: 3, Informative

    exactly what is "illegal or unethical" about the content of the Wikipedia article on the Westboro Baptist Church?

    1. Re:Could someone please explain to me by CurryCamel · · Score: 1

      Perhaps we are looking at this the wrong way round?
      Could it be that their intention was to block all of SoMe, politics and wikipedia, to allow students to concentrate, discourage c&p homework, and to encourage students to think for themselves?
      The "think of the children, block the pr0n" is just a cover.

    2. Re:Could someone please explain to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Very short version: Ethics is a system to impose consistent but subjective value judgements.

      By calling it unethical to access that content they are saying in fancy ivory tower speech that they just don't want people to access it.

  21. vote with your wallet by mindcandy · · Score: 1

    Universities (including the public ones) are a business like any other and are highly sensitive to voting with one's wallet.

    At the one I work at we actually go to great lengths *not* to monitor, record, or police what students do beyond what's needed to keep the peace.
    we also invite students to bring their game consoles in after major releases so we can fine tune stuff to ensure decent latency.

    tl;dr somebody is having power trip there and/or just bought a shiny new piece of oppressionware and checked all the boxes.

  22. If the entire student body... by istartedi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If the entire student body doesn't shut down the school, or at least picket the office and generate some arrests, they should be horribly ashamed.

    At the University of Virginia, the Board of Visitors fired the president in an unwarranted way. Student protest helped get her reinstated. If student action can do that, I'm pretty sure it can get such an absurd policy overturned. You just have to have the brains to recognize it, and the balls to pursue it.

    Anyway, shame on the students if this is allowed to stand.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    1. Re:If the entire student body... by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If the entire student body doesn't shut down the school, or at least picket the office and generate some arrests, they should be horribly ashamed.

      In a situation like this there are so many people complicit in intellectual censorship that the only way to deal with it and maintain the school's reputation is to have a special investigator find everybody who signed off on it, everybody who could have objected, and everybody who was complicit and did not specifically and provably object to it, and fire them for cause. Then fire everybody who tries to cover it up and impede the investigation.

      I sure wouldn't send my kid there given the current leadership. Tweaking any one policy will leave the same anti-intellectual stooges in control of the school. There's either a strong pro-intellectual signal sent or the status quo remains.

      So, what's the Board of Trustees' position on this? Typically they don't want to rock any boats and do nothing about such incidents - they love to get wined and dined, collect a stipend, and rubber stamp administrative decisions while occasionally approving a hire of a search firm to find a new President. The old days of active Trustees are nearly extinguished.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    2. Re:If the entire student body... by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      No, one way to handle it is to form an investigative committee to research the problem and bring back the recommendation to open up the internet. (The specific recommendation is the unwritten part of the committee charter.) This is a University, you realize (and firing tenured faculty "for cause" is neither easy nor risk-free).

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  23. No Homework Allowed, YAY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps one of the most controversial of the terms is the restriction on political activities such as surveying, polling, material distribution, vote solicitation and organization or participation in meetings, rallie

    If I was a professor there I would try to stretch that to mean no distributing tests to students in your class, no more faculty meetings, and no assembling for graduation! Especially if I was a political science professor, I'd be 'forced' to cancel our class meetings and then ride out of rest of the semester getting paid for nothing.

    I'm glad no one I know went there or lives in the area. Someone really fucked up, though it sounds like they are trying to squash some type of student resistance about something.

  24. Phelps is not a living speaker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    he died in March 2014. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Phelps

  25. burn the buildings down and go to a new school by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    problem solved

  26. I'm wondering about protocol by Voyager529 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    According to one of the comments in TFA, https:/// worked fine, so they were only blocking HTTP. This leaves all the other suspects to their devices - the cornucopia of IM clients, VPN traffic, torrent traffic, usenet, diaspora/retroshare, in-game discussion via Steam or Second Life, IRC, etc. Sure, some of those are summarily blocked, but it seems they're doing such a poor job of acting in malice that I'd deem it sufficient to chalk the issue up to incompetence instead.

    1. Re:I'm wondering about protocol by tommeke100 · · Score: 1

      exactly.
      When you're blocking everything, you're blocking nothing.
      Instead of having a clear view of what was on the mind of students, these students will now use anonymous proxies, vpn , tor and the like to still access this content.
      In turn, the university will have lost control or at least oversight of what the students were actually accessing.

  27. Not according to the AUP by s.petry · · Score: 1

    I'm not sure if you read the article and checked the block page screen shot, I did. The University spokesperson stated that it was not a block and the student could log in. The image has no option to bypass or go to a next step, it's a block.

    Next, the spokesperson claimed that the policy only applied to staff at the University. Reading their AUP there is no such restriction to staff, and in fact the first paragraph includes students. Northern Illinois University information technology resources, including the electronic communications network (NIUnet) on the NIU campus and off-campus education and research centers, computers attached to this network, and any associated computational resource or service are for the use of persons affiliated with Northern Illinois University, including faculty, staff, emeritus personnel, and students in good standing. Emphasis mine.

    The spokesperson may have been confused (or simply dishonest) as later in the same paragraph a justification mentions employee ethics as a "justification", not an inclusion or exclusion. Information technology resources are provided by the university to further the university's mission of research, instruction, and public service. The use of these resources should be consistent with this mission, this policy, and the University’s other use, security policies, and other applicable regulations including the State Officials and Employees Ethics Act (SOEEA). Again, emphasis is mine.

    The AUP is not legaleze, and can be read and interpreted without much difficulty.

    Sure, it's possible there was a network F*ck up or something else which cause the student to receive the block. That said, if the student agreed to this AUP the University is within their rights. I have modified numerous customer facing AUPs, they are always reviewed and approved by legal before consumption. If the University claimed to have released this AUP "on accident" or "with accidental content" I would call bullshit.

    If their intent was not to censor content for students, the AUP needs to be scrapped and re-written to exclude students from the policy. Obviously they also need to correct their censoring software to exclude student computers and networks and ensure that it's only censoring content for faculty.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  28. Free Speech Movement 50th anniversary, UC Berkeley by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Free Speech Movement 50th anniversary, UC Berkeley this fall, come on down. Reunion and Celebration
    September 26-October 1, 2014
    Free Speech Movement Archives http://www.fsm-a.org/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Speech_Movement
    It's all about political speech. Unbelievable. Nip this one immediately.

  29. Mod parent up... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mod parent up...apparently, today, a liberal education isn't.

  30. Free speech: The right to yell in someones ear ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah how dare those conservatives exercise their rights to free speech

    Most asshats, educated until they burst or not, do not seem to be able to grasp that a) the "freedom of speech" rule is only applicable between the gouverment and a person (not between two persons) b) "free speech" is not, and has never been, the right to force other people to listen to whatever soundwaves he to produce.

    Hell lets take this a step further lets just curtail all political speech on a public campus

    Hell no. A "free speech" rightsholders has the full right to invade your classroom -- you know, where your teacher is trying to convey knowledge to a group of willing students, which you and those other students payed good money for -- and disrupt whatever is going on there by starting a rant about whatever his thanwhile interrest is (or just make a series of gluttural sounds or maybe just wave his arms around).

    And yes, that was sarcasm. :-)

  31. What better place to suppress thought by gelfling · · Score: 1

    Than a college campus. Good Job and All Hail

  32. More about Indoctrination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps it is because the university is more about indoctrination than education.

    Universities have become corporate-training facilities in the eyes of CEOs. Education and knowledge are the anti-thesis of the desired drone workforce. Have you been to an interview recently? Employers want degreed workforce earning minimum wage.

  33. Information quality is a good way to rate. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Look at the universities that are dropping and falling out of the national rankings (like every major U in Virginia, where education funds from the lottery have long since been diverted away by the state legislature) and you'll see that many or most of them are the ones that are firing off their IT staves, migrating to "the cloud," and otherwise lowering and restricting the quality, volume, and reliability of the information that's traded on the campus.

    Restricting the information to which people have access is just one more way to lower the quality of the information, and also the quality of the University that attempts it. It's certainly more damaging than mere fund strangulation, because the damage caused by politics appears to be exponentially related to the ignorance of those who play politics in education.

  34. Why are they censoring in this way? by matbury · · Score: 1

    The question is why? What do they hope to achieve with this kind of censorship. I can understand wanting to censor sites that promote and enable illegal activities. I can understand K-12 schools trying to censor porn and violence (doesn't work but at least trying keep parents happy, BTW). So what do they hope to achieve with blocking Wikipedia and other sites? What's their intended outcome? And if they're blocking individual pages, who's combing through the entire internet and deciding what to allow and disallow and how are they deciding it? (Abviously not volunteers from Westboro Baptist Church).

    BTW, are they also blocking TOR and encrypted proxies? Are they preventing students from using their own mobile connections? Can't see how this will achieve anything other than generating suspicion ill-will and contempt for the university's leadership.

  35. Academic freedom by liamoohay · · Score: 1

    This position that the university has taken will have definite chilling effects on academic freedom. It is clearly inconsistent with their mission as a research university, and I sincerely hope they reconsider this policy.

  36. who owns the campus internet? by JimNoord · · Score: 1

    Guess it depends on who "owns" the internet access at niu. Prsumably this only pertains to university computers so 3g and 4g devices are unaffected. The question then is whether students should be allowed to use privately funded internet access by basically renters or tenants. Most private business have internet policys. Dont see the damages here.