Information Filters and Filtering

The original instructions required were these: Format: 7-10 page paper, double spaced, 10-12 point font. References Must be included and don’t go toward your page count. You must have outside references to make your case. You will identify an issue within the broad umbrella of intellectual freedom (aside from the banning of any particular book because you’ve already done an assignment for this course on that) and you will essentially give me a history lesson on the issue, especially as it relates to libraries as applicable. You will then describe contemporary/current considerations, moral dilemmas and events related to your issue. After you have provided the historical setup and explained the current implications of your intellectual freedom issue, then it is time to discuss and hypothesize on what the future may hold.

So this begs the question: where does student input/opinion fit into this versus just the facts? Well, your historical setup will likely be just the facts. Think of it perhaps as a literature review that is used to set up the context of what is relevant for today and for the future. As you discuss the present and the future, you can and likely should supply your takes/insights/perspectives and your analysis of the literature you’re citing. So ultimately, this is something of an opinion piece, but one that depends heavily on analyzing what is already written, known or suspected. When it comes to what the future may hold, this might include a lot of opinion and analysis of what you came across in your historical reading, but there are likely articles and writings about trends that you can also use to inform your views on future outlook.
Please use subheadings and make sure your paper has a logical flow.

P.S: The original writer used so many words to say the same thing and I am guessing that was so that the page count could meet the instructions. But the issue is that it is so repetitive and starts loosing meaning . I would appreciate looking through the paper and switching up some words to make sense. Also the writer did not do a good job of including enough citation while references the articles so some of the words lack citation and that is key when referencing articles.