Fight to Maintain Freedom of Speech on the Internet


Length: 1401 words (4 double-spaced pages)
Rating: Excellent
Open Document
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Text Preview

More ↓

Continue reading...

Open Document



Fight to Maintain Freedom of Speech on the Internet

 

 

Imagine yourself trapped inside another world, a world where your essence is made entirely of words that can say whatever you desire. You could be young or old, male or female or neither, you are only as limited as your imagination. Now Imagine that someone wants to have a say in what can be said, seen, and done in this brave new world, what would this change, and more importantly who decides what's 'good' and what's 'bad'?

 

In the ordinary and mundane world of real life people have always fought for the pursuit of happiness, free speech, etc. They are subjects which have always shouted in the hearts of our nations heroes, and rightfully so. What would our world be like if the government controlled what we were allowed to see and to say? It seems that George Orwell described it best in his book 1984 when he gave the scenario of a society in which people who committed the heinous act of thoughtcrime, the act of thinking something that goes against the party line, mysteriously disappeared into the night never to be seen again. Thankfully, the hordes of would be 'thought police' members have been staved off throughout history and we have achieved a relatively liberal society where people are, for the most part, able to speak their minds openly. Well, even in today's world there are still people who get pissed off when they think that free speech goes to far and they say something about it. This brings me to my main point.

 

The Internet. A land made possible in 1968 by the Dept. of Defense with the idea that if all other lines of communications were destroyed in the advent of war then at least we'd have computers, (I don't know, maybe they thought the electricity might magically produce itself after the bombing stopped). Any ways, thankfully the Internet has evolved beyond that into something which encompasses just about every possible human interest out there. A hodgepodge of political ideals ranging from big business capitalism to the gender erasing equality of the socialist mindset make the Internet a place where conflicts of interest often arise.

How to Cite this Page

MLA Citation:
"Fight to Maintain Freedom of Speech on the Internet." 123HelpMe.com. 20 Jul 2017
    <http://www.123HelpMe.com/view.asp?id=16174>.
Title Length Color Rating  
I Have a Dream Speech by Dr. Martin L. King, Jr. - Essay on the speech ”I Have a Dream” by Martin L. King, Jr. August 28, 1963 was a day that will never be forgotten, in particular not by the citizens of Washington, DC. The city where the great Lincoln memorial gazes across the reflecting pool. Where Lincoln himself, recreated in stone, is looking at the visitors of the city as a president who will never leave his position. At exactly that day and exactly that spot Martin Luther King, Jr. delivered his most famous speech “I Have a Dream”. Martin Luther King is known for his fight for freedom and his work in Civil Rights....   [tags: freedom, civil rights movment]
:: 1 Works Cited
1144 words
(3.3 pages)
Strong Essays [preview]
Essay about Should The Government Effectively Censor the Internet? - ... As a democracy we should have no censorship lest we follow Chinas example and start dropping the hammer on any poor Joe who has the guts to question the government. As a democracy the government has to have the people on its side because we are the ones who give them the power to make decisions that affect all of us. But if they start to pass bills into law that allow monitoring of citizens on the web. That would allow agencies to spy on anyone because they might do something. One example of this is the recent Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act that was passed by the House of Representatives in April 2013....   [tags: reducing privacy, freedom of speech] 1037 words
(3 pages)
Strong Essays [preview]
Essay Religious Freedom at School Events - ... For example, the school did not let a student display a religious flag or hand out Bibles or tracs and public events the school would be going against the law of the land. Our Constitution was not drafted to be interpreted however nonreligious people want to interpret it. It was a guideline to show them how to run a country that provides freedom of religion and not to pick one religion over another they are all equal under the law. Religion is a good thing and we should not deprive a person of that right and when it is a free country even more so....   [tags: Constitution, Right, Education]
:: 1 Works Cited
699 words
(2 pages)
Better Essays [preview]
Political Correctness or Freedom of Speech - The term political correctness (PC) has infringed on our freedom of speech by assuming that the populace is too ignorant to realize what appropriate speech is. This term is now as common in our society as the term, ‘freedom of speech’. It is incomprehensible how these two words have had such an effect on the manner in which our society communicates. The trend casts a negative view on our society by letting political views determine what is appropriate in our social sector. Political correctness, as applied in today’s society, seeks to control freedom of speech and poses a true danger to a free society....   [tags: Freedom of Speech]
:: 11 Works Cited
1460 words
(4.2 pages)
Powerful Essays [preview]
Freedom of Speech: A Double-edged Sword - Freedom of speech has been a topic of discussion for many years. Since democracy was established in many countries to provide safety and rights, freedom of speech has been one of the most important rights in any constitution. Freedom of speech constitutes a human right that all people should have and one that must be respected. As individuals, we are entitled to express our opinions, write, publish or communicate, and such expressions must be, if not shared, respected. Different countries have certain level of tolerance at the moment of executing this right....   [tags: Freedom of Speech] 807 words
(2.3 pages)
Better Essays [preview]
Comparing the Dystopian Elements in Suzenne Collins' The Hunger Games and George Orwell's 1984 - ... Oceania depends on a sort of informational isolation that in 1948, the year “Nineteen Eighty-Four” was published could be employed. Such isolation is now impossible. Panem, conversely has no outside factions with which to engage in warfare other than District 13, meaning that the restraints acting upon the population are internal. As much as micro-sociological control in “Nineteen Eighty Four” is arguably more effective, the infrastructure for the internal, militaristic control Panem conveys is already in existence....   [tags: freedom, rebellion, survival]
:: 2 Works Cited
1391 words
(4 pages)
Research Papers [preview]
Gay Marriage: Why Equality Matters Essay - ... Usually, our constitutions expand liberties, they don't contract them [Barack Obama; 4].” In other words, if we respect others for who they are instead of judging them for who they love, we would be setting an example for those who cannot acknowledge the one’s personal life. Furthermore, by exposing children to different family settings, it will provide a broad perspective on how these children perceive normality in those built upon different families than themselves, as well as teaching them how to respect the rights of others....   [tags: society, love, freedom, right, choice]
:: 6 Works Cited
618 words
(1.8 pages)
Better Essays [preview]
Hate Speech is the Price We Must Pay for Freedom of Speech -      Living in the United States we enjoy many wonderful freedoms and liberties. Even though most of these freedoms seem innate to our lives, most have been earned though sacrifice and hard work. Out of all of our rights, freedom of speech is perhaps our most cherished, and one of the most controversial. Hate speech is one of the prices we all endure to ensure our speech stays free. But with hate speeches becoming increasingly common, many wonder if it is too great of a price to pay, or one that we should have to pay at all....   [tags: Freedom of Speech Essays]
:: 5 Works Cited
2303 words
(6.6 pages)
Powerful Essays [preview]
Freedom of Speech: Missouri Knights of the Ku Klux Klan v. Kansas City - The articles "Freedom of Speech: Missouri Knights of the Ku Klux Klan v. Kansas City" and "Freedom of Religion: Lyng v. Northwest Indian Cemetery Protective Association" both engage in conflicts pertaining to the First Amendment in the Bill of Rights. "Freedom of Speech: Missouri Knights of the Ku Klux Klan v. Kansas City" is an article about the KKK's attempt to spread their beliefs through a public access cable television channel. Dennis Mahon and Allan Moran, both of the KKK, asked to be broadcasted on air in 1987, and the whole situation led to a major problem....   [tags: Freedom of Speech] 1532 words
(4.4 pages)
Better Essays [preview]
Essay on Freedom of Expression in Canada -      The right to freedom of expression can be described as a war. It is a war that has lasted for centuries and may last for centuries more. It is a war between freedom of expression and social intolerance. In this war there are many battles. The battle on which this brief essay centers itself is the battle between freedom of speech and laws limiting that freedom; more specifically the ability to spread hate propaganda and the "hate laws". Included in the essay is a brief outline of one skirmish that has taken place (Keegstra)....   [tags: Freedom of Speech] 1923 words
(5.5 pages)
Strong Essays [preview]

Related Searches




These conflicts are what I'm going to concentrate on in this essay, I hope to show you that, although I don't believe that kids need to be looking at stuff like drug pages or cyberporn, I don't believe that censoring it so that no one can take a peep is the answer that we need. The answer that I am going to try to present will focus more on increasing the level of awareness on the part of the Internet user instead of black listing offensive material. I will also talk about the increasing debate on the ethics of canceling someone who is writing offensive material. The question that we must address on this issue is do we, as Internet users, have the right to decide what others can say on the net?

 

For years now the Internet has played the role of 7th heaven for those who want to get their hands on information of any kind. Sometimes, however, it becomes the 'any kind' part that scares parents who don't want their young son 'accidentally' catching his first exposure to the birds and the bees on the family's PC, or their daughter looking at the latest news on the Cannabis Cup results. Parents have every right to be alarmed by the material that their children see because that's part of being a parent, looking after your kid. However, does being a parent extend to someone who wants to look at such material? First you have look at the availability of objectionable material, in this case pornography. The following excerpt is by James Herrington from his essay "Beware of Chilling Freedom of Expression" which is in CyberReader,

 

The Internet also can be a conduit for obscenity, and for children who know how to find it. Not that obscenity is new to human existence, even for minors. Nor is salacious and vulgar material easy to locate on the Internet; ferreting it out requires a certain adeptness, even for seasoned Internet surfers. Its availability alone should not set the stage for cybercensorship.

 

Although Herrington suggests that the availability of pornographic material on the net requires "a certain adeptness" this is olny a temporary solution to the problem. Kids are becoming more familiar with the Internet due to its increased use in schools and, because of this, it won't be long before it becomes easier for kids to find things on the net. However, the limited knowledge that kids posses as of right now gives us some time before the problem amplifies, this is where the parents come in. Parents today must no longer look at the Internet with apprehension, there is software available to block out offensive sights using key words and the Internet providers also have the right and power to enforce morality codes on their users. The responsibility to initiate this software falls upon the shoulders of concerned parents. There doesn't have to be an outright ban on "salacious and vulgar" material, people have the option to in effect create an Internet which is tailored to their needs without restricting the type of material which is presented on the entire net.

 

Parents aren't the only ones who are calling for changes on the net, regular users have often complained of 'flaming', the act of sending verbally abusive messages. In reaction to flaming netizens have begun utilizing the 'cancelbot' function, in other words, destroying offending messages. There is a danger in this however, where do we draw the line between canceling someone because they're offensive and canceling them because you don't want to hear what they have to say? Here's what Daniel P. Dern, author of The Internet Guide for New Users, has to say about canceling.

 

There is a danger of the cancel wars shifting from inappropriate resource use to canceling somebody based on 'I don't like your opinion. At what point does somebody say, 'I don't like this person, and I'm going to cancel them? (Lewis, "No more "Anything Goes" Cyberspace Gets Censors")

 

The question that we face now is, should the cancel command be continued or another system be imposed. One idea is to reduce the whole thing to majority rule basis, I do not believe this is the right choice, the whole idea of free speech is to allow the minority the right to voice their opinions. So, what answer can we turn to? A system in which a complaint is lobbied through a committee would slow the process to an intolerable length for the petitioner. I offer this idea, that the system remain the same, minus the cancelbot. There isn't any need to cancel someone is to take the out-of-sight out-of-mind approach which only ignores the problem. As Clifford Stoll, author of Silicon Snake Oil: Second Thoughts on the Information Highway 220, Internet users have the capability of self redemption.

 

I suspect that the main reason why we see so few law suits is that the network provides an ideal system for rebuttal. Whatever someone says against you online, you can reply to within hour, with the same distribution, and to the same audience.

 

The Internet is a land where people may defend themselves by the verbal sword, a land of freedom wherein its peoples should be able to speak freely. This is the code by which the Internet should live. People must become educated in the areas of software advances and the Internet itself otherwise the Internet might never live up to its potential greatness. It is the users themselves who decide what freedoms remain on the net and so I implore you to become more responsible netizens and up hold the edicts and ethics of the net to stop the invasion of would be 'thought police'.

 

 

Bibliography:

"Beware of Chilling Freedom of Expression" James Herrington CyberReader, Allyn & Bacon, 1996)

 

"Internot[sic]," The New York Times Magazine, Dec. 19, 1993, p. 18)

"No More Anything Goes: Cyberspace Gets Censors" Peter H. Lewis CyberReader, Allyn & Bacon, 1996)

Silicon Snake Oil: Second Thoughts on the Information Highway 220 Clifford Stoll New York: Doubleday/Anchor, 1995

Anne Wells Branscomb. "Cyberspaces: Familiar Territory or Lawless Frontiers."

 


Return to 123HelpMe.com