According to the Merriam Webster dictionary, filtering is "to remove by means of a filter". Ok... I guess that can be helpful. I couldn't figure that out myself and never mind that all they did was use the root of the word in its definition... It takes skill and true word craft to be one of the leaders in dictionary publication, am i right? Fine.
Dictionary.com says that a filter is "any substance, as cloth, paper, porous porcelain, or a layer of charcoal or sand, through which liquid or gas is passed to remove suspended impurities or to recover solids." since I don't believe this can truly apply, I'll take it that they more likely meant "to act as a filter for; to slow or partially obstruct the passage of".
Finally there is the urban dictionary, with their own definition of "drinking an alcoholic beverage through a prostitute's used (and still warm) underwear." Ok. Fine.
...At least that one was specific.
So CIPA wants to filter in schools. I believe that regardless of which definition of 'filtering' we should follow, we should look at the idea with caution. The last thing we want our young and impressionable students doing is drinking alcohol or getting too friendly with prostitutes. The last thing we'd want our government to do is to start 'filtering' content.
One has to ask, where does filtering end and censorship begin? I'm sure that the censorship in China is also being done just to protect the overly curious minds in that country. Filtering, as we may call it, has power. If i shield something from someone, they do not know its relevance and therefore they do not develop interest and they do not ever inquire. Isn't it possible then for our future children to be restrained in the questions they ask based on what they have or have not been allowed to be exposed to. We can protect them from content such as prostitutes and pornos. But anything else, including facebook which in today's new media fronteir is almost a hub of information itself, is just... well... dirty.
Filter.
No comments:
Post a Comment