TSA Blocks Employee Access to 'Controversial Web Sites'

July 6, 2010 -

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is apparently blocking certain websites from the federal agency's computers, including Internet sites that contain a "controversial opinion," according to an internal email obtained by CBS News.

The email, which was sent to all TSA employees from the Office of Information Technology on Friday afternoon, said that as of July 1 TSA employees would not be allowed to access websites that have been deemed "inappropriate for government access" in five different categories. These categories include chat or messaging, "controversial opinion," criminal activity, extreme violence (which apparently includes cartoon violence) and gaming.

The email doesn't apparently define what a lot of this content is in particular and it most certainly doesn't mention web sites by name, though I would imagine sites with strong opinions about the government are on that list. The email did say that some of the restricted web sites violate the "Employee Responsibilities and Conduct policy."

Source: CBS News

Posted in

Comments

Re: TSA Blocks Employee Access to 'Controversial Web Sites'

This is news?  Corporate America has been doing this for over a decade.  About time government kept up.  The internets can be very distra...

...sorry my boss just came by, gotta go!

Re: TSA Blocks Employee Access to 'Controversial Web Sites'

Well I don't mind they do this.  People who work sometime get a little lazy by going to website at time when they are supposed to be doing work not having playtime on your job.

 

 

Re: TSA Blocks Employee Access to 'Controversial Web Sites'

For some reason, I don't feel sorry for them. Maybe it's because now, instead of spending time surfing the Internet at work, they might actually have to do the damn jobs my taxes pay for. I actually have to work to get that money, so I don't feel too sorry for someone losing his forum access at work.

Re: TSA Blocks Employee Access to 'Controversial Web Sites'

I staunchly support the rights for people to use their own bandwidth as they wish (part of why I'm so against the Australian gov's net filter program) but when someone else is not only paying you to work but paying for the bandwidth, you follow their rules.

I don't disagree that the rules seem draconian but the staff really do have complete freedom here.  They can choose to work for another organisation that will let them browse to wherever (or, ya know, buy a smartphone... = )

I would have thought that with all the threats being fretted about (little old ladies carrying large bottles of hand cream and all that) that the TSA wouldn't have enough time to scratch themselves let alone sit around browsing the web... ; )

Re: TSA Blocks Employee Access to 'Controversial Web Sites'

Freedom dies a little more...

Re: TSA Blocks Employee Access to 'Controversial Web Sites'

What is this nonsense? This has nothing to do with freedom. These people can still access whatever websites they want from their own computers on their own time. What this is about is stopping employees from wasting time and taxpayer money fooling around online when they're supposed to be doing their jobs. There's no right to be on your favorite Internet forum when you're supposed to be working.

Re: TSA Blocks Employee Access to 'Controversial Web Sites'

I'm sorry.  I didn't realize the Constitution protected the rights of government employees to do things WHILE AT WORK that have absolutely nothing to do with their jobs.

---

With the first link, the chain is forged.

--- With the first link, the chain is forged.

Re: TSA Blocks Employee Access to 'Controversial Web Sites'

Personally? They're at a government job and they don't need to be doing that kind of stuff at work.

 

unless its a really slow day :P

 

seriously though they shouldn't be needing to do that stuff while at work.

╔╦═╣Signature Statement╠═╦╗

If you don't like something I said in a post, don't just hit the dislike, let me know your thoughts! I'm interested in knowing everyone's opinions, even when they don't mesh with my own.

Re: TSA Blocks Employee Access to 'Controversial Web Sites'

I wonder what website are under then controversial option. Also why does the article give me the impression that they aren't banning pron sites from TSA computers.

http://www.magicinkgaming.com/

Re: TSA Blocks Employee Access to 'Controversial Web Sites'

I'm sure porn is covered under their "Employee Responsibilities and Conduct policy."

===============

Chris Kimberley

===============

Chris Kimberley

Re: TSA Blocks Employee Access to 'Controversial Web Sites'

I'd like to see a list of some of those 'controversial opinion' websites, if only to determine if the list is a blanket, stifling both sides of the political spectrum, or if it's following someone's agenda - liberal or conservative.  If either, it better be the former.

---

With the first link, the chain is forged.

--- With the first link, the chain is forged.

Re: TSA Blocks Employee Access to 'Controversial Web Sites'

I'm sure that websites teaching efficient methods of goose-stepping are not on the banned list.  What's interesting is that gaming and "controversial opinion" are listed, but not porn?  I guess we all know what they're REALLY looking at on that "x-ray monitor"!

***Homicide-free video gaming since 1972!***

***Homicide-free video gaming since 1972!***
 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Will Target Australia sell the next GTA game upon its release?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
MechaCrashNo, IP is trying to dehumanize you, I'm just pointing out that you're a hypocrit who makes bad faith arguments.08/01/2015 - 11:56am
Andrew EisenAnd I'm off too. Play nice, y'all!08/01/2015 - 11:33am
Andrew EisenIn short, discussions of ethics in journalism? Totally fine. Said indie dev's sex life? Not okay.08/01/2015 - 11:31am
james_fudgeTry talking when you have hundreds of people tweeting at you at the same time :)08/01/2015 - 11:30am
Andrew EisenAnd yet, when 30-seconds of research showed that there was no relevance to said indie dev's sex life, many people kept talking about. Hell, still do to this day. I had a guy on Twitter pester me about this nonsense for an entire day last weekend.08/01/2015 - 11:30am
james_fudgeWhatever dude, you're here posting. No one's stopping you.08/01/2015 - 11:30am
Goth_SkunkBe advised: In approximately 30 minutes I'm heading out of town for an obligatory family reunion. This is being stated so that none can interpret my upcoming 24 hour hiatus as a tail-tucking turn from discussion.08/01/2015 - 11:28am
Goth_SkunkEven now, IronPatriot, MechaCrash, and Craig R. continue to attempt to shout me down and dehumanize me.08/01/2015 - 11:25am
Goth_SkunkWhat transpired afterwards was a concerted effort to shout down and dehumanize those trying to bring these matters out into the open. I remain utterly convinced of this to this day.08/01/2015 - 11:24am
Goth_SkunkAnd yet the sex life of this indie developer tied right into the matter of journalistic ethics, as investigations uncovered a great number of breaches of ethical conduct, both related & not. That scandal is the orifice from which the balloon is inflated.08/01/2015 - 11:20am
MechaCrashI am reminded of the saying about playing chess with a pigeon.08/01/2015 - 11:13am
Andrew EisenThis is supported by, well, what actually happened, but also the text of the actual leaks. That was Tito's question and what he and a few (four total, I think) were discussing.08/01/2015 - 11:11am
Andrew EisenNo, it's not. What was generally prohibited was not discussion of journalistic ethics or other GamerGate topics, but threads that were, for example, discussing the sex life of an indie developer. THOSE are what were locked and removed.08/01/2015 - 11:10am
Goth_SkunkI don't believe you. Not for a second. Every major site with the exception of the Escapist prohibited discussion of GamerGate in its early stages. That is a fact.08/01/2015 - 11:04am
Andrew EisenNo, that's a fact. Don't believe me, read 'em yourself. No one was trying to censor discussion of GamerGate.08/01/2015 - 11:02am
Goth_Skunk@Andrew: That's your opinion.08/01/2015 - 10:57am
Goth_Skunkfuture? I'd compensate you for your time, of course.08/01/2015 - 10:57am
Goth_Skunk@IronPatriot: Congratulations on a sweeping statement to remove the agency of people supporting GamerGate for their own individual reasons. Since you're so good at painting in such broad strokes, are you free to paint my apartment sometime in the near08/01/2015 - 10:57am
Andrew EisenWhich, as you can tell by actually reading the snippets that were leaked, is a shamefully disingenuous telling of what was actually said.08/01/2015 - 10:56am
Goth_SkunkAdditionally, to quote William Usher, "[s]ome of the members on that list actively used their platform to support and propagate a wide-sweeping media narrative based on lies and factual inaccuracies."08/01/2015 - 10:54am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician