Ted Stevens Is Writing His Own Wikipedia Legacy With This One

Preston Gralla tries to take the centrist line on the absolutely retarded efforts of Ted Stevens -- the moron who characterized the Internet as a series of tubes -- to ban Wikipedia, MySpace and other sites from schools and libraries:

[from U.S. senator: It's time to ban Wikipedia in schools, libraries]

[...]

Early in January, Stevens introduced Senate bill 49, which among other things, would require that any school or library that gets federal Internet subsidies would have to block access to interactive Web sites, including social networking sites, and possibly blogs as well. It appears that the definition of those sites is so vague that it could include sites such as Wikipedia, according to commentators. It would certainly ban MySpace.

The bill is, in part, a rehash of a similar bill introduced last year, the Deleting Online Predators Act, also called DOPA. That bill passed the house, but got bogged down in the Senate.

Many people are calling this year's bill "Son of DOPA" because of its similarity to last year's bill.

There are so many things wrong with this bill, it's hard to count them all. But its greatest irony would be banning Wikipedia -- perhaps the most widely used reference resource in the world -- from libraries and schools. I have plenty of problems with Wikipedia, including how easily it can be manipulated, and the way that student rely on it far too heavily. [emphasis mine] But ban an educational resource merely because it's interactive? If true, it's bizarre beyond comprehension.

It's easy to characterize Stevens as little more than a buffoon. He's certainly a buffoon, but he's a dangerous one. A law like his passed the House of Representatives last year. We're coming up to a presidential election, which always unleashes a kind of madness among candidates, especially when it concerns anything to do with children. So don't count this law out.

I agree that the man is dangerous: he's living proof of the adage that Americans will continue to get the leaders they deserve. Who is voting for these fools?

But I completely disagree with Gralla and others that a/ Wikipedia is easily manipulated, or full of inaccuracies, and b/ that kids rely on it too much. That's like saying that they rely on computers too much, and should go back to typewriters.

There is no real alternative -- in many cases -- to Wikipedia: when you are trying to find something authorative on new, highly specialized, or rapidly changing information. Also, many school systems and libraries are scrambling to stay afloat, let alone buying new research materials. No, what the US should be doing is pouring money into the Wikimedia foundation, perhaps devising a version especially designed for school children.

But no, of course we have nitwits like Stevens arguing about witholding funds from school and libraries teetering on the brink instead of offering actually help through the application of the Web.

By the way, in Ted Steven's Wikipedia entry, the crtiticism section already includes discussion of the Son of DOPA bill, which of course wouldn't be in any conventional encyclopedia for years:

Ted Stevens has taken criticism for a wide variety of positions and actions taken in the Senate. This includes placing a secret hold on a bill that would allow easier accountability and research of all federal funding measures, describing the Internet as a "series of tubes" when taking a strong alliance with the telecommunications industry against network neutrality[3], and supporting perceived pork barrel projects such as the Gravina Island Bridge (known as the "Bridge to Nowhere" to its opponents) and the Knik Arm Bridge. He threatened to resign from the Senate if the federal earmark for the Alaskan bridges was sent to help repair Louisiana in the wake of Hurricane Katrina damage.

Additionally, he received criticism for introducing a bill in January 2007 that would ban social networking sites from public schools and libraries. The bill would ban sites such as MySpace, Facebook, and even Wikipedia.

This entry also includes a link to the Preston Gralla article: it's completely up to the minute.

[Update: Preston Gralla did not include a link to the text of the bill, and it looks like the bill is targeting commercial social networking sites -- like MySpace -- not a non-profit like Wikipedia. So, many folks (see here, are using the over-reaction to to the bill as an indication of how unhinged the Blogosphere is. Actually, I think it's just that we are over sensitized to stupidity in Washington, and as a result, are quick to believe that something like a banning of Wikipedia in schools and libraries would happen. And if it were a for-profit enterprise, that's exactly what would be happening right now. (pointer from Seth Finkelstein in the comments section.)]

tags: small+mindeded+nitwits+on+capitol+hill, ted+stevens, dopa, son+of+dopa, preston+gralla, wikipedia, wikimedia+foundation

Comments

[Neil]

Schools struggle with truancy, and libraries are losing popularity. Take the most popular web sites away from schools and libraries, and students will have even fewer reasons to use them. And it's only a matter of time before mobile devices can provide a fully fledged browsing experience - at which point Senate bill 49 will no longer matter, even if it is passed.

[Mike McGrath]

Michael Stephens posts about a similar library ban on Social Media sites in the state legislature in Illinois. (http://tametheweb.com/2007/02/what_huh_illinois_bill_to_ban.html)

:Section 10. Prohibition. Each public library must prohibit
1 access to social networking websites on all computers made
2 available to the public in the library. Each school must
3 prohibit access to social networking websites on all computers
4 made available to students in the school."

This is worse than the mass parental hysteria that swept through my son's middle school last year.

[Seth Finkelstein]

Ironically, that the entry is completely up to the minute with Gralla's article shows that "Wikipedia is easily manipulated, or full of inaccuracies" - because that article is sensationalized and wrong! See:

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/02/fear_and_loathi.html