It is also used by libraries, schools, and other public entities to regulate access to the Internet. As such, it deserves much greater scrutiny and has in some ways received it. If Cyber Patrol did not restrict access to known nuisances, for example, or accidentally restricted access to groups that actively contribute to free speech issues, such as the ACLU or NOW or religious groups, then this would be a cause for public concern and debate. We see all the issues in IST play out in this case. Users, technology, information, each possible pair-wise interaction, and implications for organisations and countries extending all the way out to the entire web.
Users are of interest here.
Parents reserve the right to restrict what their children do, and perhaps more importantly but not tested here, are responsible legally for what their children do on and with the net. And parents often feel morally responsible for what children become. Users in libraries and schools deserve access to information and accountability from those who restrict access to information. Both want systems that are easy to use, and at least those being restricted would like and deserve accountability of those restricting. Information is also of interest here.