The topic I'm going to be talking about is to what extent does the government, state, and local have the duty to monitor internet content. This is a hard topic because as many people say they have the right to their privacy there are also a lot of reasons to monitor the internet. I think that too many bad and illegal things happen over the internet to not have it be monitored, but, I do also think we deserve the right to our privacy. I think there was a time where it wouldn't of had to be monitored but now days there is too much inappropriate and illegal content online If there is reason to believe that you are doing something illegal or dangerous over the internet your school, the state or local police should have the ability to access it so the problem can be addressed. It would be way too easy to get things away if they didn't have that authority they would simply …show more content…
People can post mean and untrue things about other people or even harass them. This is really hard on people and it's hard to get away from it because as soon as something gets posted, it is on there forever and anyone can see. This would be difficult to control if schools and local police did not have the ability to monitor it.
I think another reason someone's internet should be monitored is if there is reason to believe they are suicidal, in today's generation people tend to post suicidal comments on the internet which could be one of two things a cry for help or someone just wanting drama or attention and I think they are both very serious.
This also can influence other people to take those same actions, like the newest thing is the tide pod challenge. People would think it's a great idea to eat tide pods and share the idea on social
I agree with Coben when he says that he is okay with the monitoring of your teenagers use of the internet. I especially agreed when he said “Trust is one thing, but surrendering parental responsibility to a machine that allows the entire world access to your home borders on negligence.” It’s true you can’t just let your teen roam on the internet with no boundaries. The internet is a dangerous place and your child would not go through life unharmed by it if you let them handle it them it alone. Teenagers make mistakes and it’s parents’ jobs to fix them, prevent them, or teach them the correct ways. If you don’t monitor your teenager with spyware they will make a mistake and get hurt. Coben is only trying to persuade parents to do the right thing in the article so why don’t more people listen.
I immensely agree with Coben because there is so many dangers that the internet has to offer that we don't know about. In the article, “As Kids Go Online, New Tools For Parents To Spy” a child who has a love for sports was watching the game on YouTube and an advertisement pops up and shows a man smoking, and a woman dancing provocatively. Your child may be searching innocent and kid-friendly videos, but the ads are not as kid-friendly as your child’s search history. This situation was merely a rough experience because there are many other situations where it is way worse. On the internet, there are stalkers, impersonators, scammers, and so much more. Criminals also create innocent looking websites and communicate through that using keywords to notify each other. The internet can expose your home to many online dangers such as “Pedophiles” or “Beheadings”. The internet is a source for everyone which makes it a danger to everyone as
For instance, create effective anti-drunk driving communications can be created on Twitter and Facebook through the use of hash tags. This will encourage continuous conversations based on experience and exchange of existing and new knowledge concerning the dangers of heavy drinking in the selected population. For instance, popular social media campaigns like "Friends Don 't Let Friends Drive While Drunk," will be used to encourage college students to embrace the need for a designated driver before embarking on drinking sprees (Glascoff et al.,
Technology has spread like a virus throughout the world. Almost everyone has access to technology. Technology, though it is a blessing has it’s dangers. Harlan Coben writes of parental monitoring. He is in great favor of parents putting spyware on their children’s devices to have access to all the devices information, in and outgoing message, and so forth. The article titled, The Undercover Parent, informs parents of the dangers of the internet and that monitoring is necessary. I agree with Coben, parents should monitor their kids internet use, be it on a phone, computer, and gaming consoles. Many teens do not know of the internet’s dangers that are lurking around corners ready to ensnare them.
Censorship of the internet is a very important topic. There is quite a bit of things shown on the internet that man people think little kids and premature adults should not be able to view. Many people view things every day that they should not be aloud to in my others people eyes. This is becoming a growing topic in teens life’s today. Things such as pornography and violent attracts on people such as murder and many other things are viewed every day as a threat to society. People are very much outraged and very concerned.
According to a web source titled “Students Use of Social Media As Free Speech and its Impact on PK-12 Public Schools,” a supreme court ruled that “...rights are limited where disruption and subversion to the good order of schools are at stake.” In other words, freedom of speech should be kept limited to avoid disruption and to keep the school operating in a more orderly manner. Disruption would come into play in the event of a student posting something online and it affecting someone or something during the school day. For instance, if someone posts something negative about a student, that student may continue to think about it all throughout their day and this would cause a disruption in the way that the student is concentrating and it could potentially affect learning for that particular student. Therefore, if social medial is limited these disruption can be avoided and it would help keep school more of a safe and orderly environment. Though, freedom of speech is important and it should be practiced it should be kept to a limit where the school system checks and balances out and no one or anything is being disrupted. In the case that this does happen, schools should take
The FBI should monitor what were doing. This is a point that needs emphasizing since so many people believe it’s all about their privacy. When people found out the u.s government surveillance program, granted the NSA access to data held on private citizens, they didn’t like the idea of it. I get that people would disagree with this because it is a violation of civil rights. On the other hand, by security taking this justifiable measure it will ensure the safety, therefore; the FBI should be monitoring online content when it comes to our well being.
It allows teacher and student interactions, group discussion, and student collaboration, but it provides an outlet for cyber bullying, a distraction in class, and students are missing out on face-to-face communication skills.
The internet has been one of the most influential technological advancements of the twenty-first century. It is in millions of homes, schools, and workplaces. The internet offers not only a way of communicating with people around the world, but also a link to information, shopping, chatting, searching, and maps. This freedom to be anyone and to "go" anywhere right from the comfort of home has become a cherished item. However, there is always a down side to every up. Because of the freedom to post anything and access anything on the internet, the issue of regulation has arisen; for example, what should and should not be allowed on the internet? Who has the right to regulate this space that we cherish for its freedom?
The need to remove controls over Internet-based and related forms of communication and to ensure that the Internet cannot be shut down for political purposes
as people should have their privacy when surfing the internet. Alternatively, the evidence suggests that the government can help tackle terrorism and stop bullying. After examining this issue closely, surely society could not argue that we should protect our country and our children by monitoring social networking sites? Works Cited http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/aug/09/cyberbullying-mother-fight-askfm http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/aug/19/ask-fm-cyberbully-hannah-smith-death http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/facebook/5046447/Facebook-could-be-monitored-by-the-government.html http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/aug/08/askfm-advertisers-cameron-boycott-cyberbullying http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=catfish
" As Americans, we have certain unalienable rights. Some of these rights include our freedom. We have the freedom to do and say as we please if we do not break the law. So some people think that the government should not be able to see what exactly we are doing on the internet while some think the internet should be monitored heavily by the government. Which is the best solution for the safety of our citizens?
These individuals feel that it is an invasion of the teenagers’ right to privacy and the development of their trustworthiness. Kay Mathieson states “only by giving children privacy will they come to see their thoughts as something that belongs to them – to which they have an exclusive right.” In the United States and according to the law, monitoring the internet usage of a minor does not break any laws and is a moral obligation of the parent. Trustworthiness is an important development of a child to learn in order to develop genuine relationships with others in the lifetime. “Not only does monitoring have the great potential to undermine the trust of the child in the parent, and thus to undermine trust in others more generally, it also has the potential to undermine the capacity of the child to be worth of trust” (Mathieson). If the parent has not already had conversations with the teenager about monitoring internet usage and the parent is not telling the child about the monitoring, there is already an issue with the development of trustworthiness in the teenager. There was already a failure of development of this skill before the internet or internet monitoring was introduced.
I do not believe that the government should be able to monitor our Internet or social media content because what people do in their free time should be up to them and not the government. When a person creates a social media page, they should be given the freedom to do and say what they would like, as stated in the First Amendment. This could also be seen as an unnecessary violation of privacy, as stated in the Fourth Amendment which says that people have the right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects as well as safe from unnecessary searches or seizures. Putting regulations on what people can or cannot find on the Internet creates a gray area of deciding what should or should not be censored in our everyday lives. If someone can make an
Teens should be monitored online sometimes, but it is extremely important for teens to have privacy. This argument is thriving, and will continue to for many years, for there are both sides presented in this quarrel. The teens can build a sense of trust from the parents not watching over them at all times; on the other hand, if the guardian does not watch their child at least periodically it could lead to the teen feeling free and starting to do wrong. Some people are in agreement with being able to monitor teens; for example, Jim Beeghley, an instructional technology coordinator and Ed. D, challenged this belief of privacy by implying, “We pay for the phone, it’s not really yours, and if I want to look at the text messages, I can…