Dear President Gilbertson, I write you today to appeal the results of my freedom of information act request submitted on June

30th. I believe that the records I sought were withheld, and that the response I was given may have arisen out of confusion regarding the exact documents I was searching for. I hope to clarify what I am searching for, to explain how the response I received is problematic, and to make the first step towards working together to bring this information into the public domain. In my original letter I requested any and all internet web sites, content, or IP addresses blocked by SVSU or any entity contracted or otherwise engaged in the practice of restricting access on behalf of SVSU. I further requested records concerning any and all programs, initiatives, or similar instruments of monitoring, tracking, or recording the websites visited by students, faculty, and members of the general public while using the SVSU network. I believed that the wording of my original request was clear, as did the proofreaders who viewed the letter. Nonetheless, I am willing to believe that there was confusion regarding what exactly I was looking for as indicated by the statement that I was required to describe the records sufficiently for the public body to find the public record. I think what likely occurred is that I tried to give too much guidance, and it resulted in a much narrower interpretation of responsive records than I intended. After submitting the request I sent a follow-up email giving additional guidance on what I was searching for. I stated I specifically am looking for a listing, or similar documentation containing a reference to blocked content and not the content of the restricted websites, or addresses themselves. Do not read this clarification as limiting the request in any way. My reasoning behind the follow-up was to rule out a response that my request would require a massive fee as the contents of all the blocked websites may have been deemed to be responsive. If the request was construed that way it could have resulted in hundreds, if not thousands of pages of responsive text, and much of it would be adult content (I didnt wish to condemn some unfortunate employee to the task of viewing and copying porn for hours on end). In short, I attempted to craft a request which was sufficiently narrow to serve my purposes while ruling out the possibility of an excessive response which would be burdensome to all involved. To put it in the simplest terms possible, I want to know which websites are blocked. I have attached a screenshot of a blocked webpage, the page reads that the web page you were trying to visit has been blocked in accordance with company policy. I want to know all the websites which are blocked in that fashion. Its one thing to create a block of forbidden content, its quite another to forbid students from knowing what is forbidden.

If users on the campus network are to be denied access to certain web pages, we ought to be able to know which web pages we will be denied access to because they have been blocked in accordance with company policy. One wonders what exactly this policy is, and an exhaustive search of all technology related webpages on the SVSU website has failed to turn up anything descriptive or related. However that is a separate issue to be addressed at another time. The blocking of certain websites is of concern to the academic community, and there can be no denying that web pages containing adult content are within the scope of valid research and scholarly pursuits. I therefore make the claim that the blocking program/policy as it currently exists limits academic freedom within this institution. There are entire majors, journals, and individuals who have devoted their career to the study of pornography, the depictions of males and females, and the obscene (just to name a few of the areas affected). As the Supreme Court said in Tinker "It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom or speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate". Further, the United Nations has made it clear through a human rights resolution that "the same rights that people have offline must also be protected online, in particular freedom of expression, which is applicable regardless of frontiers and through any media of one's choice". I filed this request so that I might exercise my first amendment rights and engage others in a meaningful dialogue about a matter of significant importance academic, social, political, and (of course) recreational importance. No meaningful discussion can take place unless we know the details of the blocking program/policy. As Edward Snowden recently stated The consent of the governed is not consent if they are not informed. I believe I submitted a perfectly reasonable request, which unfortunately may have resulted in confusion over what exactly I was searching for. I apologize and hope that this appeal has helped to address any confusion. I believe that the records are within the scope of FOIA, and cannot be reasonably sheltered under any of the exemptions in the act. I ask for redress of these grievances in the form of an amended response which would contain the records I have previously described. This would include all web pages which are blocked in accordance with company policy, or any web pages which display the message that appears in the screenshot included in this email. Lets not play word games with this information, SVSU has blocked certain websites or web pages and I simply want to know which websites or web pages are blocked. To avoid unseemly delays in the process of obtaining the documents I seek, I have filed a new FOIA request for the documents described in this appeal. Should either this appeal or the new FOIA request result in the disclosure of the documents I seek, I shall withdraw the other outstanding request. Thank you for your time and for your staffs cooperation in this matter. -Daniel Chapman