Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Civil Liberties

NIU Says Crazy Internet Policy Doesn't Apply to Students, But It Does!

Robby Soave | 8.21.2014 5:40 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
Large image on homepages | Alex Baumgarner / Wikimedia Commons
(Alex Baumgarner / Wikimedia Commons)
NIU
Alex Baumgarner / Wikimedia Commons

Earlier today, I reported that Northern Illinois University maintains a restrictive Internet use policy that warns students to avoid websites deemed harmful by the administration. Web surfers at NIU are not supposed to use the internet for social media, advertisement, or politics. This policy violates free speech law, according to the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education.

NIU responded, issuing a statement disputing that students were being turned away from certain websites:

"I want to assure students that — contrary to some Internet reports — they will have access to social media websites such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Pinterest, and others," said NIU Vice President and Chief Information Officer Brett Coryell.  "NIU is wholly committed to allowing free and open access to information and only considers blocking network traffic that constitutes a well known threat as determined by the broader IT security community."

A spokesperson for NIU told me that my reporting was "totally false and cites unreliable sources." He also said there was no harm in simply warning students not to visit certain websites. Finally, the NIU statement claims that certain problematic aspects of the policy—like the social media restriction—only apply to employees, while others—like the politics restriction—are unenforced.

As FIRE's Susan Kruth notes, these clarifications from NIU do not assuage the fears of civil libertarians:

Characterizing that ominous notice received by students attempting to visit such "Illegal or Unethical" websites as Wikipedia as simply "portions of NIU's longstanding acceptable use policy" is an impressive exercise in damage-control spin, but it certainly doesn't fix the problem. The bottom line is that a firewall maintained by NIU, a public university, is telling students that clearly protected content, like a Wikipedia page, is probably "Illegal or Unethical" and students risk punishment by going there. That's a problem. And that kind of bizarrely threatening and heavy-handed warning will likely achieve the same result as simply blocking the website, at least for students who value their academic careers.

Furthermore, NIU's assertion that portions of the policy are only aimed at employees is simply untrue:

The text of the policy emphatically does not support the claim that the policy addresses employees and not students. It states that "all individuals, including, but not limited to, employees, students, customers, volunteers, and third parties, unconditionally accept the terms of this policy." (Emphasis added.) The policy does not indicate that certain provisions apply only to employees. If parts of the policy concern only employees, they should be clearly labeled as such. They aren't. If NIU wants to regulate staff use of the Internet, it should write a separate staff policy—making sure that it applies only to non-academic staff, of course, since professors also shouldn't have to receive warnings when trying to visit Wikipedia!

I would second Kruth's recommendation that NIU rewrite its internet use policy so that students and professors again feel free to use the internet for whatever Constitutionally-protected purposes they so choose.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: No Global Warming For Maybe Another Decade

Robby Soave is a senior editor at Reason.

Civil LibertiesScience & TechnologyInternetEducationFree Speech
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (18)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Fist of Etiquette   11 years ago

    He also said there was no harm in simply warning students not to visit certain websites.

    One day I envision everyone's home page will be a catchall trigger warning.

    1. sticks   11 years ago

      A group called SKITTISH, the Society of Kindhearted Individuals Terrified of Trauma, Icky Stuff, and Heartache, has issued a manifesto calling for even more extreme measures:

      1. Free Society   11 years ago

        Is there some way we can round up all these buzzkilling nannies and 'concentrate' them in certain locations outside of the rest of society. Has that ever been done?

        1. Pl?ya Manhattan.   11 years ago

          Some kind of camps, perhaps?

    2. MegaloMonocle   11 years ago

      I'm waiting for TRIGGER* to issue their manifesto.

      Totally Repugnant Information Grievance Group Eliminating Rudeness

  2. Dweebston   11 years ago

    Er--what business has NIU in censoring Wikipedia content, amidst I'm certain other academic resources, for employees if not for students? That wouldn't seem to make much more sense than a blanket ban on all computer access.

  3. MegaloMonocle   11 years ago

    To be fair, when NIU accused you of using unreliable sources, they had a point.

    Since one of your sources was NIU.

    1. Robby Soave   11 years ago

      Ha! Good one.

  4. userve32   11 years ago

    Sounds like some pretty serious business. I like it.

    http://www.AnonCrypt.tk

  5. Ken Shultz   11 years ago

    "Finally, the NIU statement claims that certain problematic aspects of the policy?like the social media restriction?only apply to employees, while others?like the politics restriction?are unenforced."

    If the rules are unenforced, then why not get rid of them?

    1. Carl ?s his ? for ?s   11 years ago

      For selective use against people that piss off the administrators.

      1. Ken Shultz   11 years ago

        Oh, well that explains it then.

  6. Migrant Log Picker   11 years ago

    The mask has fallen off and exposed these thought policing educrat fuckheads for all to see...and what there is to see is not pretty.

  7. Rev-Match   11 years ago

    He also said there was no harm in simply warning students not to visit certain websites.

    The students might learn things about stuff! THE HORROR!

  8. Sevo   11 years ago

    "A spokesperson for NIU told me that my reporting was "totally false and cites unreliable sources." He also said there was no harm in simply warning students not to visit certain websites. Finally, the NIU statement claims that certain problematic aspects of the policy?like the social media restriction?only apply to employees, while others?like the politics restriction?are unenforced."

    A spokesperson said they really didn't do that and even if they did, you're a poopyhead for saying so, and they won't do it again unless they really want to!
    So there!

  9. Rich   11 years ago

    From the statement: As an educational and research institution, as well as a state funded agency, it is important to protect data and people from external threats.

    However, Because NIU has been behind in the adoption of standard security practices like border protection for its network, the system is still in its early phases of tuning.

    NIU seems like a real piece of work.

    1. Swiss Servator, spare a franc?   11 years ago

      They have been an enthusiastic participant in the race to the bottom for the past 10 years or so.

  10. userve32   11 years ago

    Slap daddy says that aint gonna happen.

    http://www.AnonCrypt.tk

    1. Swiss Servator, spare a franc?   11 years ago

      Ah, Slap daddy is on the Board of Regents?

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Are the News Media in Their Onion Era?

Joe Lancaster | From the June 2025 issue

Alton Brown on Cultural Appropriation, Ozempic, and the USDA

Nick Gillespie | From the June 2025 issue

James Comey's Deleted '86 47' Instagram Post Is Obviously Protected by the First Amendment

Billy Binion | 5.16.2025 4:48 PM

New Montana Law Blocks the State From Buying Private Data To Skirt the Fourth Amendment

Joe Lancaster | 5.16.2025 4:05 PM

Trump's Tariffs Are Sapping Small Business Optimism

Autumn Billings | 5.16.2025 12:00 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!