Community resourceWorksheet

OCR H446 1.5.2 Censorship, monitoring and the Internet

Part 4 of 9 · H446 1.5.2 · Moral and ethical issues

Blocking content can protect people and can silence them, often by the same mechanism. Covering OCR H446 1.5.2, this worksheet has students evaluate censorship and monitoring by asking who controls information, for what purpose, by what means and with which safeguards, across a school discussion board, remote-staff monitoring and emergency health moderation.

Students will:

  • describe the mechanism by which content is controlled and who sets the rules
  • separate a protective aim from its effect on lawful expression
  • explain how narrow rules, notification and appeal reduce over-blocking
  • evaluate workplace monitoring in terms of benefit, risk and proportionate safeguard
  • recommend a moderation policy and justify it against the competing interests

Inside: 5 explanation cells, 1 multiple-choice question, 2 fill-in-the-blanks cells and 2 written answers. 26 marks, about 30 to 50 minutes.

Series: H446 1.5.2 · Moral and ethical issues, part 4 of 9.

Shared by Coding PathwayVerified teacher

  • 10 cells
  • About 45 minutes
  • CC BY-SA 4.0
  • Shared 31 Aug 2026
  • Updated 3 Sept 2026

Preview

The whole resource, exactly as a class sees it. Answers and marking are held back.

Censorship, monitoring and the Internet

This worksheet examines censorship and monitoring on the Internet. When judging a policy, ask who controls information, what they block or record, why they do it and how people are affected.

Protection, access and freedom of expression

Censorship balance and safeguardsask who sets the rule, why, and how people are affectedPROTECTIONlimit abuse, illegal contentor serious harmEXPRESSION / ACCESSparticipation, informationand challengeways to reduce unfair decisionsclear limits • evidence • explain decisionshuman review • appeal

Censorship can block, remove, hide or restrict access to content. It may protect people from illegal content, abuse or serious harm. It may also hide lawful criticism, useful information or minority voices.

Monitoring records or checks activity. A person might choose it, as with a fitness log, or it might happen in the background or be required by an employer or government. These examples create different concerns about awareness, choice and power. They are useful contexts to compare, not special terms to memorise.

Worked example: school discussion board

A filter blocks direct threats and tells users which rule was broken. This may protect students from harm. However, it also removes every post containing a political keyword. Lawful debate and coursework may disappear because the filter does not understand context.

A better design could use narrower rules, human review, a notice explaining each removal and an appeal. The final judgement depends on the users’ age, the level of risk, the error rate and the effect of mistakes.

Multiple choice1 mark

Which policy best reduces harmful content while allowing mistakes to be corrected?

  • AUse a secret list of broad keywords and remove every match without telling the user
  • BAllow automatic removal but assume that every flagged user intended to cause harm
  • CRemove all moderation and rely on users to avoid every harmful message themselves
  • DUse clear, limited rules, tell users when content is removed, provide human review and allow an appeal
Fill in the blanks4 marks
When judging monitoring, ask what activity is gap 1 and whether people know about it. Check whether they have a real gap 2, who can see the records and how long the data is gap 3. The amount collected should be suitable for the stated gap 4.
  • recorded
  • choice
  • kept
  • purpose
  • copyright
Written answer8 marks

An employer records every keystroke and takes regular screenshots from all remote staff, saying this prevents data loss. Explain one possible benefit and two possible harms. For each harm, suggest one safeguard.

Use the details given. Consider privacy, sensitive information, trust, stress, mistakes and who can see the records.

Students type their answer here.

Apply the ideas independently

The next task uses a new censorship context and gives you less support. Compare protection with access and expression, including the effect of mistakes.

Written answer9 marks

During a public-health emergency, a social platform automatically removes disputed health claims. Discuss the moral and social issues raised by this policy.

Use details from the scenario. Consider protection from harm, access to information, freedom of expression, incorrect removals, missed harmful posts and ways to review decisions. Finish with a supported conclusion.

Students type their answer here.

Fill in the blanks4 marks
Censorship rules may protect users from serious checkpoint gap 1, but broad filters may remove lawful checkpoint gap 2. Clear rules, human checkpoint gap 3 and an accessible checkpoint gap 4 can help correct mistakes.

Review your responses

Check that you explained both possible protection and possible harm. Make sure your conclusion responds to the exact policy in the question.