Today, NPR's All Things Considered ran a report on policies in the workplace regarding restrictions on employee use of the internet. As I listened to the "expert" from the ePolicy Institute (TM) (for which I don't seem to find a website more current than 2004--someone help me out here--and which has a relatively unclear relationship to the American Management Association), I thought about what it might mean if my fellow Composition instructors and I were, as many Americans laboring in the vineyards of non-academia are, limited in our access to the internet.
It would mean, for example--and, admittedly, in the particular, rather trivially--that one of our faculty could not have hunted up the top 20 blogs for posting on the site for her cool new blog course; none of us could have checked out the latest YouTube that all our incoming freshmen are talking about; and I couldn't have spent time in my office on campus yesterday hunting around to find this google video, so that I could have my students watch it so that they could think (and write) about what "false educational video" might mean--or what, for that matter, "false education" might mean. Or, say, "false employment." Or "false being." Or real anything else.
It would mean I could not have, say, read, on office time, Juan Cole's blog, or related pieces about how, in blogging, Cole may have lost himself a position at Yale--the other New Haven school (TM). According to a July 28 Chronicle of Higher Education account:
After two departments recommended him for a tenured position at Yale University, a senior committee decided last month not to offer him the job after all. Although Yale has declined to explain its decision, numerous accounts in the news media have speculated that Cole's appointment was shot down because of views he expressed on his blog.
Naturally, one wants to check out Yale's policy regarding blogs, which especially notes, regarding "appropriate use" of Yale's computer network that:
IT Systems may be used only for their authorized purposes -- that is, to support the research, education, clinical, administrative, and other functions of Yale University. The particular purposes of any IT System as well as the nature and scope of authorized, incidental personal use may vary according to the duties and responsibilities of the User.
So then, one wants to see what is appropriate on a Yale blog, since Cole's incisive, topically spot on, and historically informed critiques are not. One is happy to find that Beth has consummate fashion taste and Kevin is working out very hard indeed (their "incidental personal use" obviously varying according to their responsibilities):
Welcome to the web log server at Yale University. The contents of this server do not represent official publications or policies of the University. The materials hosted by this service reflect the personal views of the authors. Use is governed by the IT Appropriate Use Policy and other applicable University policies.
Recent Weblog Entries How are you preparing?
The Preparedness Blog | General | Aug 23, 2006 1:38:19 PM | By lvb7
Governmental agencies are recommending that households keep a disaster kit handy in case of an emergency or disaster. T... Really Cute Rainboots!
Beth Castle's Weblog ... | General | Aug 22, 2006 9:15:43 PM | By ecastle
Some really cute rainboots! A little out of my current price range, to be sure, but, my, aren‘t they are cute? What we did on our summer vacation
Ken @ Yale | Personal | Aug 21, 2006 3:29:45 PM | By kjh27
Our summer project -- which was SUPPOSED to be a springtime project except that it rained incessantly from March thru Ju... Photos from Timberman Triathlon
Kevin's Training Diary ... | General | Aug 20, 2006 12:00:00 AM | By klg22
The morning started very early with me showing up before 5am and carry by belongs into the transition area wrapped ins...
One discerns from this IT usage that that a key educational purpose of Yale is to let you know that if it rains incessantly on your summer vacation you may want to purchase some "really cute rainboots" and to update your disaster kit to include a poncho.
The 2006 Workplace E-Mail, Instant Messaging & Blog Survey by the AMA and ePolicy Institute tells us that:
Increasingly, employers are fighting back by firing workers who violate computer privileges. Fully 26% of employers have terminated employees for e-mail misuse. Another 2% have dismissed workers for inappropriate instant messenger (IM) chat. And nearly 2% have fired workers for offensive blog content—including posts on employees’ personal home-based blogs.*
"Priveleges," "misuse," "inappropriate chat," "offensive content": interesting how this rhetoric is wielded so effortlessly in certain contexts, and how when transparency suffers, Diogenes rolls over in his barrel.
---
*Sample size here is 416 companies, ranging in size from 100 or fewer workers (35%)to 5001 or more (20%).
On Experts
After reading your post the ePolicy Institute had me wondering so I did some brief looking around using Devon and Domain Tools, check out this link, which suggest some limited information. And in looking around looks like the policy institute is pretty much a one woman show, supported by the American Managmenet system. I wonder if your "expert" is Nancy Flynn as she is the only name I can find anywhere associated with the institute.
"100,000 Writer"
Good sleuthing,dave! The Domain Tools site gives "Nancy Flynn Public Relations" in Columbus, Ohio as the WhoIs Record for the ePolicy Institute. A google of that phrase yields a site for Nancy (The $100,000 Writer) Flynn, who, for only $19.95 (plus $5.00 s&h. OH residents add .0575% sales tax) will send you the book that will tell you how to earn six figures as a writer (and you get the "quick-start audio tape" for free).
Note, tech-savvy compositionists, this kind of income is only in the stars for "freelance business writers." As a former staff writer for a major media company based in NYC (back in the velociraptor era), I only edged into the medium five figures, and for sure as a freelancer, I was generally in need of resources that didn't then exist like, for instance, these helpful instructions. As a writing instructor, my income has been, well, let's just say modest and leave it at that. So perhaps for all of us who take writing gigs from even--to pull a bizarre example out of a hat--made up Swedish universities, this could be a way toward the light at the end of the tunnel.
Beyond NPR's Shame... The Topic
I do think it is essential to slap NPR for using "experts" from fake think tanks. If anyone wonders why we don't trust the media, just consider how many guests on shows are frauds. Actually... how many of the hosts are frauds, too.
But, on the topic:
It is hard to compare some jobs to others. If you are a tech reporter, then reading blogs and rumor sites is part of your job. An academic researching culture is certainly learning while exploring. But a bank manager sending 400 jokes a day is not exactly using time or bandwidth wisely.
Many years ago, I had to fire an employee for adult content on his computer. It violated a clear company policy. And yes, we monitored usage after streaming content was choking the network. It is easy to forget how expensive it is to setup a secure network, only to have some jerk turn off the firewall so he can use his subscription to ESPN Video Plus.
If employees respect the network, then you never have a problem. We had clear written policies and never anticipated an issue. We assumed there was a hardware problem when the network slogged along.
My point is that while at work, you are using resources that cost money. More importantly, you should be doing your job -- not watching the Final Four or Playboy videos. We never cared who e-mailed a note home or who was chatting a little here and there, until we had to care.
Of course, federal rules now require the saving of e-mails and chats in some environments, so things are even messier. SO regulations mean a corporation cannot take chances that an employee might be discussing finances, new products, or anything with a material affect on the stock. Now, you have to limit what is happening or risk an SEC violation.
Usually, people think protecting the public means the silly DHS rules. Actually, "protecting" takes many guises and is often responsible for the nonsense you experience in a private sector job.
gender bias in Internet restriction policy
This post got me thinking about a recent experience I had. Last week, I was at a major car dealership. The receptionist was playing solitaire. I'm interested in how people are using computers for non-work related activities in the workplace, so we started talking:
"So I guess you probably get on the Internet?"
"Well, they've got most of the Internet blocked, and I get bored reading just the news sites."
"Really? You can't access anything else?"
"No. Some of the sports sites are not blocked, but I'd really like to look at Babies R Us. We are getting ready to have a baby, and I'd like to look and read reviews on various baby products."
*******
Now I could see how many businesses might implement Internet filters to avoid inappropriate content (esp for legal reason) and discourage constant Internet use, and then maybe add back in a few sites to allow some extracurricular use. However, as far as I know, sports sites are not necessary for automotive sales and maintenance and seem to be oriented more towards the interest of the men at the dealership more than the women. It would be interesting to examine whitelists used in the workplace in other instances and see whether there are other instance of gender or cultural bias in the choice of unblocked websites.
-----
Charlie | cyberdash