According to the February 22nd Indianapolis Star, public access to the Army's Reimer Digital Library was denied February 6th, with only those with a username and password being able to access the information. Going to the website, my computer provides a warning that accessing the site could be potentially dangerous. I think htis might have to do with the statement, "Use of this DoD web site, authorized or unauthorized, constitutes consent to monitoring" (http://www.train.army.mil/).
According to the Federation of American Scientists website, they filed a Freedom of Information Act request on February 13th, asking for all unclassified files so that they could provide them on their website.The Federation of American Scientists then posts on March 6th that the site is restored, but when certain documents are attemptedto be downloaded, they are restricted.
What else would we expect? If the Army chose to not provide public access to material, but then was persuaded to do so involuntarily, why would we expect to see all the material? I worked as a civilian at a military hospital. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely loved the place, but no one was ever worried about malpractice. According to them, it was extremely difficult to sue a federal institution. So, if one wants complete access to the army's resources, they'd better be prepared with a lot of persistence and financial support.
I did go to the website. I didn't find anything restricted, but I may not have dug deep enough. I did get good information on how to respond to depleted uranium, how to determine direction within the target area, and how to prepare a range card for an M60 machine gun. Who knows what I didn't have access to simply because it wasn't there?
Sunday, March 9, 2008
Women are from Venus
I don't want to take a stand on this one. I just think it's interesting...
The February 15th issue of the Indianapolis Star stated that London's Transport Authority was refusing to display a poster of Venus by Lucas Cranach because it was too racy. They said they would display the poster if the bottom half was cropped out. I guess the breasts were ok, it was the vagina. But, on Feb. 22, the Transport Authority allowed the poster after a lot of ridicule, sans cropping. "The posters went up on February 22 and so far there have been no reports of spontaneous orgies breaking out on the tube nor has anyone been struck blind by having to view the racy art work" (DigitalJournal.com).
I don't know. I'm pretty well-traveled, but have not been to London. I'm not sure how well the nude artwork would go over in our culture. It wouldn't work in Asia. Certainly the Transport Authority does have people of all ages traveling along it; it's a public service. I'm sure many people rely on the subway as their primary means of transportation. If the artwork were to be in a museum, well, people don't have to go to the museum. Over and over I've stressed that parents need to be held accountable and responsible for their children, and if parents choose to not expose their children to nudity until a certain age or maturity level, I think that's ok. In this case, the parents don't have a choice. Is it London's job to force parents to have certain conversations with their children before the parents and children are ready? It was actually the Academy of Arts that used this portrait for their posters, but looking over Cranach's artwork, most of them do contain a nude Venus, so what choice would they have?
I know intellectual freedom does entail artwork, also. But, at the risk of sounding anti-intellectual freedom, I think the London Transport Authority was right for at least reviewing the poster in further detail, putting it into the mind's eye, and letting the public decide for themselves.
Who am I?
My name is Lucille, but people call me Lucy. I'm a 33 year old female. I'm a pisces. I'm a SLIS student, and I will be graduating in May. My husband and I own and operate our own tattoo shop. I am interested in reading, anime, libraries, manga, writing, foreign languages, foreign cultures, and music.
Sound familiar? It is all material copied from my fellow students profiles with the exception of Jo and Jamie, who have nothing on theirs. I, too, left mine blank. Not because I was afraid that someone would steal my identity or profile, but because I have dated at least one freak and have a loco sister out there somewhere.
A recent article in Indy.com discussed this issue, citing this Wall Street Journal article. Maybe some of you that use social networking already knew that this happens. I'm not surprised, but as much time as some of our patrons and my brother spends on MySpace, wouldn't one think that people would come up with their own material? I mean, if you're spending time going through profiles and learning about people, but you're one of those people who use other people's profiles, why would you even bother investing time in MySpace knowing that half of it might not be true anyway?
So, if Intellectual Freedom is freedom of the mind, do we feel free when our personalities are borrowed or stolen? Do we need to put a copyright on our personalities, too?
Sound familiar? It is all material copied from my fellow students profiles with the exception of Jo and Jamie, who have nothing on theirs. I, too, left mine blank. Not because I was afraid that someone would steal my identity or profile, but because I have dated at least one freak and have a loco sister out there somewhere.
A recent article in Indy.com discussed this issue, citing this Wall Street Journal article. Maybe some of you that use social networking already knew that this happens. I'm not surprised, but as much time as some of our patrons and my brother spends on MySpace, wouldn't one think that people would come up with their own material? I mean, if you're spending time going through profiles and learning about people, but you're one of those people who use other people's profiles, why would you even bother investing time in MySpace knowing that half of it might not be true anyway?
So, if Intellectual Freedom is freedom of the mind, do we feel free when our personalities are borrowed or stolen? Do we need to put a copyright on our personalities, too?
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Rockin' in the Free World
The Sundance Film Festival happened last month in Utah. A January 25, 2008 USA Today article stated that a concert film closed the festival. The group was Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young. CSNY fans may know that they set off their "Freedom of Speech" tour in 2006. Their Sundance film "focuses less on the band than on the people who come to see them play" (Breznican, 2008). The film captures fans as well as the band. The band is well known for their anti-war songs of the Vietnam era. Their 1972 anti-war hit, Ohio, was about the Kent State shooting of unarmed protestors. These days they're still singing out against the war and those who wage it.
We all know that Freedom of Speech is our right, but not all of us take it. Sometimes it's difficult to express views without offending someone. I once had a patient who'd been married for a long time. He told me his secret to keeping such a long marriage was to never talk about politics, religion or money. We all might do well to avoid these topics in order to avoid controversy. CSN & Y don't avoid these topics, they express their beliefs quite openly. According to their website http://www.csny.com, they have tables before their concerts manned by Iraq Veterans Against the War and Vietnam Veterans Against the War.
I respect CSNY for expressing such a controversial opinion.
We all know that Freedom of Speech is our right, but not all of us take it. Sometimes it's difficult to express views without offending someone. I once had a patient who'd been married for a long time. He told me his secret to keeping such a long marriage was to never talk about politics, religion or money. We all might do well to avoid these topics in order to avoid controversy. CSN & Y don't avoid these topics, they express their beliefs quite openly. According to their website http://www.csny.com, they have tables before their concerts manned by Iraq Veterans Against the War and Vietnam Veterans Against the War.
I respect CSNY for expressing such a controversial opinion.
Sunday, February 10, 2008
Don't people have anything better to do?
I got an email recently from a friend titled "Freedom of Religion." The email went like this:
Removal of Joel Osteen, Joyce Meyer, and other pastors. An organization has been granted a Federal hearing on the same subject by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in Washington D.C. Their petition, number 2493, would ultimately pave the way to stop the reading of the gospel of our Lord and Savior, on the airwaves of America. They got 287,000 signatures to back their stand! If this attempt is successful, all Sunday worship services being broadcast on the radio or by television will be stopped. This group is also campaigning to remove all Christmas programs and Christmas carols from public schools. You as a Christian can help! We are praying for at least 1 million signatures. This would defeat their effort and show that there are many Christians alive, well and concerned about our country. As Christians, we must unite on this. Please don't take this lightly. We ignored one lady once and lost prayer in our schools and in offices across the nation. Please stand up for your religious freedom and let your voice be heard. Together we can make a difference in our country while creating an opportunity for the lost to know the lord.
There are then instructions for forwarding the email with a request to send it to "Lisa Norman" at electric_yello@hotmail.com when the signatures reach 1000. There were 159 signatures by the time it got to me.
I didn't sign it nor forward it as I wanted to do some research and possibly use it for this blog first. I did have some thoughts about the email. First, I did question its validity as I couldn't see it being legal to illegalize broadcasting religion. Besides questioning the email's validity, I did think it completely wrong for the FCC to consider such a notion. Then I thought maybe it would be OK to not allow Christmas programs in public schools. Or, if this was a true consideration, perhaps a better approach would be to have multicultural programs.
So, on to the research. I found http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/Religious.html. The FCC actually had a page dedicated to debunking this rumor! If anyone should be banned here, it should be the people generating these emails. This email is libel, which is not protected by the first amendment.
Removal of Joel Osteen, Joyce Meyer, and other pastors. An organization has been granted a Federal hearing on the same subject by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in Washington D.C. Their petition, number 2493, would ultimately pave the way to stop the reading of the gospel of our Lord and Savior, on the airwaves of America. They got 287,000 signatures to back their stand! If this attempt is successful, all Sunday worship services being broadcast on the radio or by television will be stopped. This group is also campaigning to remove all Christmas programs and Christmas carols from public schools. You as a Christian can help! We are praying for at least 1 million signatures. This would defeat their effort and show that there are many Christians alive, well and concerned about our country. As Christians, we must unite on this. Please don't take this lightly. We ignored one lady once and lost prayer in our schools and in offices across the nation. Please stand up for your religious freedom and let your voice be heard. Together we can make a difference in our country while creating an opportunity for the lost to know the lord.
There are then instructions for forwarding the email with a request to send it to "Lisa Norman" at electric_yello@hotmail.com when the signatures reach 1000. There were 159 signatures by the time it got to me.
I didn't sign it nor forward it as I wanted to do some research and possibly use it for this blog first. I did have some thoughts about the email. First, I did question its validity as I couldn't see it being legal to illegalize broadcasting religion. Besides questioning the email's validity, I did think it completely wrong for the FCC to consider such a notion. Then I thought maybe it would be OK to not allow Christmas programs in public schools. Or, if this was a true consideration, perhaps a better approach would be to have multicultural programs.
So, on to the research. I found http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/Religious.html. The FCC actually had a page dedicated to debunking this rumor! If anyone should be banned here, it should be the people generating these emails. This email is libel, which is not protected by the first amendment.
Saturday, February 2, 2008
Dr. Death?
The Friday, January 25th issue of The New York Times describes a situation in Sweden where a man was expelled from medical school after the school learned that the man was convicted in 2000 of shooting another man 7 times. The man expelled served 6 1/2 years in jail and was released on parole. He had taken classes while in jail and then enrolled in medical school. The shcool did not have any policies regarding felon students, but did expel him after the licensing agency said they would not give him a medical license even if he did complete the degree.
This is the flip side of intellectual freedom. "Intellectual freedom is our right to seek, receive, hold, and disseminate information from all points of view, without restriction, including those ideas that might be highly controversial or offensive to others" (www.ala.org/oif/basics/intellectualfreedom.htm). Usually it's the good guy wanting the bad material that we're talking about, but in this case, it's the bad guy wanting the good material.
So should he be allowed to go to med school? According to ALA's definition of intellectual freedom he should. According to a study by Copenhaven, Edwards-Willey and Byers based on former felons at Ball State, "The stigma, real or perceived, which inmates encounter once released is enough to keep many from developing social, professional or educational ties and seeking life enhancing opportunities" (2007). They also go on to write, "When the university community learns to accept this population, they can then see that former inmates can contribute to the community and are not to be feared."
But, what about a murderer? My personal opinion is that sure, he should be able to attend classes. It's the clinicals that are tricky. Considering hospitals perform criminal record checks prior to employment, chances are he wouldn't be allowed to do clinicals by the hospitals standards.
Altman, Lawrence K. "After an Expulsion, Swedes Ponder Whether Killers Can Be Doctors." The New York Times 25 Jan. 2008: A6.
Copenhaver, Anna, Tina L. Edwards-Willey, and Bryan D. Byers. "Journeys in Social Stigma: The Lives of Formerly Incarcerated Felons in Higher Education." The Journal of Correctional Education 58.3 (2007): 268-283.
This is the flip side of intellectual freedom. "Intellectual freedom is our right to seek, receive, hold, and disseminate information from all points of view, without restriction, including those ideas that might be highly controversial or offensive to others" (www.ala.org/oif/basics/intellectualfreedom.htm). Usually it's the good guy wanting the bad material that we're talking about, but in this case, it's the bad guy wanting the good material.
So should he be allowed to go to med school? According to ALA's definition of intellectual freedom he should. According to a study by Copenhaven, Edwards-Willey and Byers based on former felons at Ball State, "The stigma, real or perceived, which inmates encounter once released is enough to keep many from developing social, professional or educational ties and seeking life enhancing opportunities" (2007). They also go on to write, "When the university community learns to accept this population, they can then see that former inmates can contribute to the community and are not to be feared."
But, what about a murderer? My personal opinion is that sure, he should be able to attend classes. It's the clinicals that are tricky. Considering hospitals perform criminal record checks prior to employment, chances are he wouldn't be allowed to do clinicals by the hospitals standards.
Altman, Lawrence K. "After an Expulsion, Swedes Ponder Whether Killers Can Be Doctors." The New York Times 25 Jan. 2008: A6.
Copenhaver, Anna, Tina L. Edwards-Willey, and Bryan D. Byers. "Journeys in Social Stigma: The Lives of Formerly Incarcerated Felons in Higher Education." The Journal of Correctional Education 58.3 (2007): 268-283.
Sunday, January 27, 2008
Children, Know your Rights
The February 2008 issue of Library Sparks has a small section on intellectual freedom with a link to a four-page brochure, written for children in fifth grade and up. http://www.ala.org/ala/alsc/alscpubs/KidsKnowYourRights.pdf The brochure is great for educating a young person about their rights. Moreover, I think it educates them that there are times when their rights are infringed upon. I doubt that most middle school aged kids ever consider intellectual freedom.
When I had a display last year for banned books week, I discussed the idea of banned and challenged books with a few of our young patrons. They hadn't seemed to have heard of the idea that some books were removed from school and public libraries because some parents thought the material was questionable. You know what? I'm so very glad that they hadn't heard of such a crazy notion.
I think talking to kids about intellectual freedom is a great idea. I think it might be like talking to kids about drinking, sex, cigarettes or drugs. Have the talk earlier than you need to so they'll have an idea of what to do when the situation arises.
The First Amendment is printed on the brochure and there are suggested titles for further reading. There are both fiction and nonfiction titles listed. I don't think leaving the brochure laying around in my public library would produce any results. However, programs (with food included!) might be a possibility to discuss intellectual freedom with kids.
When I had a display last year for banned books week, I discussed the idea of banned and challenged books with a few of our young patrons. They hadn't seemed to have heard of the idea that some books were removed from school and public libraries because some parents thought the material was questionable. You know what? I'm so very glad that they hadn't heard of such a crazy notion.
I think talking to kids about intellectual freedom is a great idea. I think it might be like talking to kids about drinking, sex, cigarettes or drugs. Have the talk earlier than you need to so they'll have an idea of what to do when the situation arises.
The First Amendment is printed on the brochure and there are suggested titles for further reading. There are both fiction and nonfiction titles listed. I don't think leaving the brochure laying around in my public library would produce any results. However, programs (with food included!) might be a possibility to discuss intellectual freedom with kids.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)