Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Conclusion on internet censoring
Conclusion on internet censoring
Conclusion on internet censoring
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Conclusion on internet censoring
Internet Censorship
There is a growing debate about censoring the internet. Some people think that the
internet is protected under the first ammendment and cannot be censored. Others think
that some of the material that is on the net needs to be filtered and regulated. The word censorship is defined as examining any material and prohibiting what is objectionable, according to Webster’s II dictionary. Censoring the internet is a violation of the first ammendment rights of every citizen in the United States. There are two general truths that some people feel are attitudes towards censoring the internet. The first is that very few people admit to favoring it. The second is that no matter who you are, in a matter of minutes spent surfing the net almost anyone can find something that they find to be offensive. In fact, some web surfers feel that the truly inappropriate things are inspired by one’s own religion. For example, the Nurenberg Files website showed pictures of mangled fetuses with the photograph, name, and address of some abortion clinic doctors.
If someone were to kill one of the doctors then an ‘X’ was put over their picture. This site may not harm a child, but it seems that the focus today is on what is inappropriate for the child to see. What about the adults? A site like this “clearly acts to corrupt and deprave the adults who take it seriously” (Brown 48).
Another reason for not censoring the internet is the psychological effects that it can have on a child. The filtering of the internet can tell a child that adults do not trust them to surf the net on their own. This can lead them to believe that they can not make their own decisions, and that a computer determines what right and wr...
... middle of paper ...
...night Ridder/Tribune News Serivce. February 12, 1996. 212.
Knight Ridder. “Time to stop push to Censor Cyberspace.” Knight Ridder/Tribune News
Serivce. December 14, 1995. 214.
Lewis, Peter. “Quixote’s Network.” Home Office Computing. May 1996. 114.
Lloyd, Steve. “Privacy and Human Rights.” (Manchester University Press, 1968).
Nellen, Peter. “Internet Censorship is both a Menace and a Nuisance.” Technology and
Learning. November 1998. 53.
Quittner, Joshua. “Free Speech for the Net: a panel of federal judges overturns the
Communications Decency Act.” Time. June 1996. 56.
Ratcliffe, Mitch. “Instead of Net censorship, let users control access.” PC Week.
January 22, 1996. A16.
Sjoerdsma, Ann G. “Internet Censorship, trying to make sense of it all.” Knight
Ridder/Tribune News Serivce. March 1, 1996. 301.
The type of content usually censored is sexual or violent things but Ballaro states, “Some bans (and the filtering software used to enforce them) eliminated access not only to pornographic materials but also to legitimate health and medical information” (Ballaro 1). If someone were to become sick, looking up symptoms on the internet is not the most efficient way to go about finding out what sickness they have, or what kind of treatments there are. Going to a professional would ensure that they get the correct diagnosis and treatment. Everything on the internet can be changed and not knowing the accuracy of a source is going to make the search more or less accurate. Children are also a big part of why things are censored. In the same passage, it is explained,“Opponents of Internet Censorship argue that education, not censorship, represents the best means of protecting children…” (Ballaro 1). Telling someone not to do something will just make them want to do it more. Educating kids on the dangers of the internet will not stop them from going on the internet. Protection children from all scammers and hackers, not just to mention explicit material, would also be challenging considering the internet is changing rapidly each day. Why not just block websites that are bad so even if children are tempted, they can not go to
...Kids Points of View: Internet Censorship." 2011. Points of View Reference Center. Web. 21 March 2012.
Tears begin to fall down a child’s face. Her body goes into shock out of fear. Her mother warned her about watching inappropriate content, and there it was, right on her computer screen. This could not have happened though. All she was doing was casually browsing the internet before a pop-up appeared. Although it may seem hard to believe, the major cause of events such as this is the lack of censorship on the internet. Internet censorship relates to the removal of offensive, inappropriate, or controversial content published online. The current problem with the internet is that there are few restrictions on what can be published or viewed. Several sites on the internet only offer a warning about inappropriate content that can easily be bypassed by agreeing to the terms. Other websites provide access to private or military information. More dreadfully, however, are websites that use their explicit content as a promotion. These factors bring the conclusion that anybody of any given age can view and publish inappropriate or dangerous content. The current problems with the internet serve for clarification as to why the United States should create a nonpartisan assembly to censor the internet in order to protect its citizens from the mental, emotional, and physical harms the internet creates.
In mid March of 1998, a scientific break through occurred for the engineers at NASA. The space probe that they sent to Mars came back and, for the first time, contained readable and usable photographs of the planet's landscape. Full of pride over their latest achievement, NASA posted the information on the Internet. This allowed astronomy enthusiasts, students, and other interested individuals to take a first hand look at the, never before seen, Martian Landscape. (NASA)
From music to television, censorship has played a major role in how the public is exposed to certain material. Now that our world is entering into a new technology era, the Internet is now in the middle of the censorship issue. Internet access is now one of the fastest ways to communicate with others, obtain information on virtually anything, and purchase items without having to leave your home. As more and more people get connected to this cyber superhighway, concern for the content of material has become a big issue. Since so many children are exposed to the Internet, some material should not be accessible with a simple click of a mouse. In order to protect our younger people from being exposed to mature and explicit material over the Internet, these sites should have a warning posted before one can go into the site.
The common image that comes to mind on the topic of censorship is that of book burning. Dating back to ancient times, the easiest way to deal with unwanted writings has been to get rid of them, usually by heaping them into a blazing pyre. In his most famous science fiction novel, Fahrenheit 451, Ray Bradbury warns of a futuristic society where all literature is destroyed under a kerosene flame and the citizens' freedoms are kept in check by the lack of written information. In fear of this kind of totalitarianism, many bibliophiles have fought against all manners of censorship, wielding the first amendment and the rights recognized by our fore-fathers. But with the technological advances of this the last decade of the twentieth century and the up welling of a new informational medium comes a new twist to the struggle for freedom of expression.
"Internet Censorship." What does this mean to us? What is restricted? Censorship is summarily defined as the suppression of objectionable material. That means that material such as pornography, militant information, offensive language, anti-religion, and racism would be restricted in use. Freedom would not only be restricted to material placed on the web, but also what you could access, and where you could explore. Should the right of Freedom of Speech be taken away from us on the Internet? Having stated this, should there be any restrictions and if so, what's the limit of censorship?
On 16th of December 1949, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was signed. Although we want governments and regimes to abide with the articles not all do. Our government is formed to protect us and to provide every citizen, infrastructure in order to make the person able to live. However our governments also care for themselves as well. They want to stay in power thus they have to protect their reputation. This is where internet censorship steps in. Although censoring some sites is reasonable, some are not. If a site on the internet criticizes the government and if this happens in a country where the government is somewhat oppressive, the site is blocked to access. I believe the level of tolerance towards criticism of a government can be found by the internet censorship in that country. We can categorize these types of governments into five: No or few censorship, normal amounts of censorship, above normal, high amount of censorship and extreme amounts of censorship. I am going to focus about the last three levels. For these levels Republic of Turkey, People’s Republic of China and Democratic People’s Republic of Korea are examples I am going to talk about. These examples would be coinciding with the levels respectively.
Censorship is Necessary to Protect Children from the Internet Do you want our future generations being exposed to violence, hate, sexuality, illegal substances, and false information, and then one day think it would be cool or alright to try these things? The internet is filled with dangerous information, that children should never have the freedom to access. Children learn from example, and if they search, watch, or read something on the web that could be potentially dangerous, they could be influenced or curious and think that it would be alright to imitate one day. If our children now are viewing these things, it could mean that future generations could grow to be more violent and our world could become more dangerous than it already is today. Censorship is necessary if we plan on having our kids grow up in the safest environment possible.
"According to go-globe.hk, 60% of citizens with internet access in North America are concerned about the government censoring the internet.†That means that approximately 215,724,686 people who live in North America are concerned about internet censorship. Why are more than half of North American citizens concerned about their freedom on the internet?
This world has become immersed in online media from socializing on networking sites to seeking information on search engines. People of all ages have become reliant on online media, but the most engaged users are the younger, more easily impacted generations. Although there are many positive uses for online media, there are many negative uses as well. Unfortunately, it is all too easy for these negative effects to impede upon the perceptions of adolescents. Some countries have been trying to reduce this effect by expelling the inappropriate content of online media ("Influence on Children Media...”). However, in the United States, children are thrown in the waves, expected to stay afloat in this massive sea, but many are being dragged under the surface by the nefarious temptations media creates. Content that is not appropriate for the young, growing minds of children are easily accessible; a myriad of devices may be used to access this material, all at the click of a button. Without adult content filters on online media, adolescents of various ages are exposed to dangerous conceptions. A world of pornography, violence, and public humiliation lay in the user’s fingertips.
The Internet has affected our lives in a considerable way. We use the internet in order to connect with society, look up information for work and educational purposes, shop, handle daily errands such as paying bills and so on. Children are not excluded from this, in fact they are capable of using internet more effectively than adults. The reason for this being that chıldren are able to learn to use new technology faster than theır adult counterparts. It is wıdely accepted that having internet connection can be very useful for children, teachers and children consider internet as a powerful tool to access to academic sources to research for theır classes and homework (Ofcome, 2007). Also having the internet is perceived as an good opportunity for children to meet new people and keep up with their friends. This is true if children use internet in a proper way. However, there is a possibility that they can encounter inappropriate materials even while searching for educational information or trying to relax with games. Violent scenes and uncensored sexual material cause serious damage for childhood development, as they can cause children to be aggressive and lonely adults. The first solution for protecting children from these harms is internet blocking and filtering programs. Although they come to forefront by means of their easy usage properties, most of the time filtering programs cannot provide an overall coverage from the internet’s harm. Therefore, parents should have involved in this process by monitoring and helping their children. Moreover media lessons which inform students about the internet’s harm can be very helpful for children.
Although, it is unfair to blame technology because of the content people put on it. Greenfield, Patricia, and Zheng Yan put it best when they say, “Just as we cannot ask whether a knife is inherently good or bad, we cannot ask whether the Internet is good or bad; we can simply document how it is used.” So, as much as some may blame the Internet for its problems, the real war is against the substance within the Internet (Greenfield, Patricia, and Zheng Yan 390-93). And thus comes the main argument against the Internet, is the composition of the Internet harmful to children?
“Parents play an important role in the psychosocial development and well-being of their children” (van den Eijnden). Undeniably, the quote makes a bold declaration that all parents in today’s technologically advanced society should understand and follow. With 90% of teenagers between the ages of 12 and 15 using the internet (Sorbring), it is important for an adult to monitor their daily usage and behavior. “Only 39 percent of parents report using parental controls for blocking, filtering, or monitoring their teenager’s online activities” (Dell’anotnia). Parents should monitor their teenagers’ daily internet use and behavior by engaging in meaningful conversations and dialogue that allow for fostering a healthy relationship.
There are two real issues at stake when looking at this controversial topic. The first issue is finding a way to protect our children from potentially damaging material. There are advocates to censoring the Internet and removing this type of material because it will help shelter our children from this type of content. On the other hand, Free Speech advocates believe that it is the individual citizens right to have access to this typ...