Au-vnt223.docx

Page | 1

Should the Government and the Universities Monitor Email? [Writer] [Institute] [Date]

Page | 2

Should the Government and the Universities Monitor Email? Introduction In past, internet censorship has brought a great deal of controversy. In fact, there are numerous arguments in favor and against censorship. Some needs to be censored, but the government typically is responsible for censorship, although it has no right to intervene with everyone’s rights. Thus, it is important to take into consideration that the arguments and opinions on this issue are divided. In case of students, the belief of some is that the government and universities should monitor their emails and other usage of the internet, for some benefits of society, whereas many people are upset and feel that their rights are at great risk. However, instead of the universities and the government, parents should be responsible for monitoring their children and students. Discussion It controls email and social media accounts, uses thousands of surveillance cameras to track behaviors and activities, and is funded primarily by the federal government, known as "the most influential institution in the United States." When Harvard violated school policy by secretly searching for Dean's email account, the entire world witnessed the intrusive movement of schools to monitor employee online activities (Iaboni & Ford, 2013). According to Harvard University dean Evelyn Hammond, they want to protect students (Iaboni & Ford, 2013). The Dean approved the study in response to an information leak about the disappointing scandal of the Ivy League. However, school and university administrators across the country use similar intrusive monitoring tools to control everything from off-campus behavior to online presentations. University lawyers and managers believe that such surveillance programs are necessary to “protect” stakeholders, but in practice, these behaviors are often just a difficult strategy for universities to control the public image, and students must do so. In 2007, Hayden Barnes, a student at Valdosta State University, was deported for lack of procedural safeguards (The Fire, 2015). The university's principal, Ronald Zachary, plans to spend $30 million to build a parking lot at the school. Zaccari did his best to calm Barnes's

Page | 3

critics: he looked at Barnes's Facebook page, asked the university staff to investigate his health, and finally placed an expulsion order at his doorstep (The Fire, 2015). Controlling students' lives is not limited to what they do online. In order not to lose students leaving the computer, the University of Kentucky (UK) leader has launched a program to install 2,000 surveillance cameras on campus and provide students with new information (Blackford, 2013). ID card, including: follow the student's records inside and outside the building. In an interview with the Lexington Pioneer, the British Police Commissioner Joe Monroe said the program would provide schools with the unique ability to monitor campus crime and protect students, employees and visitors (Blackford, 2013). However, as the California ACLU spokesperson told Pioneer Leaders, the program is mature because the misuse of information depends on how it is used and when it is backed up (Favate, 2012). For universities like the UK, these new security measures can be a real attempt to protect the campus, not just under the guise of campus security language. After all, after the 2007 Virginia Tech Holocaust and other activities, the focus on campus safety is understandable. However, many critics believe that the National Security Agency's espionage program sacrifices too much freedom to improve security. Organizations such as the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) in education believe that the supervision of students in some schools and universities is not only free, but may also be unconstitutional (Hall, 2012). The settlement agreement between the Department of Justice and the Department of Education and the University of Montana defines sexual harassment as any unwelcome sexual act or behavior, including “verbal behavior” (reading: speech), and encourages the reporting of sexual harassment (FIRE, 2013). However, the federal government's new definition of sexual harassment can include a large number of online and offline protected claims. And the federal government may no longer need to report subjective crimes, but is constitutionally protected, such as "harassment," rather than a "non-patriotic" statement calling for treason. Conclusion As universities increasingly focus on the potential threats of the surveillance community, the entire campus security industry continues to evolve, attracting the attention of civil liberties advocates. Disputes over government oversight in the name of national security naturally raise

Page | 4

questions about the degree of supervision needed to protect a country from the security problems it faces. However, during the discussion, we should not think that we are invading us.

Page | 5

References Blackford, L. (2013). University of Kentucky spending $5 million on security system with 2,000 cameras. Retrieved from https://www.kentucky.com/news/local/education/article44441643.html Favate, S. (2012). California Senate Passes Social Privacy Bill. Retrieved from http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2012/08/22/california-senate-passes-social-privacybill/?mod=WSJBlog FIRE. (2013). Federal Government Mandates Unconstitutional Speech Codes At Colleges And Universities Nationwide - FIRE. Retrieved from https://www.thefire.org/federalgovernment-mandates-unconstitutional-speech-codes-at-colleges-and-universitiesnationwide-3/ Hall, A. (2012). Transformational Multicultural Spiritual Framework for Educating Youth: Spiritual Development for Children and Adolescents. Religion & Education, 39(2), 159-171. doi: 10.1080/15507394.2012.684016 Iaboni, R., & Ford, D. (2013). Harvard College dean steps down after e-mail scandal - CNN. Retrieved from https://edition.cnn.com/2013/05/28/us/massachusetts-harvarddean/index.html The Fire. (2015). Eight Years After Student’s Unjust Expulsion from Valdosta State U., $900K Settlement Ends 'Barnes v. Zaccari' - FIRE. Retrieved from https://www.thefire.org/eightyears-after-students-unjust-expulsion-from-valdosta-state-u-900k-settlement-ends-barnes-vzaccari/