Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Pros and cons of censorship
Pros and cons of censorship
Need for internet censorship
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Pros and cons of censorship
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”- Benjamin Franklin.
Technically speaking, internet censorship is difficult to achieve. Proponents of this measure seem to have neglected the fact that putting in place a system of surveillance requires the establishment of clear, unalterable rules. But often, such a task can be almost unfeasible since it is quite problematical to define precisely the information that is supposed to be blocked. In the context of hate speech for example, it is important to acknowledge the existence of a line between criticism, whether it is constructive or not, and pure animosity.
How can we know for sure that the server will identify accurately these boundaries? Similarly, the matter of child pornography is not as obvious as it may seem; are sexually implicit contents considered as pornography? Should nudity be banned completely from the internet? If this were the case, we would find ourselves in a situation where famous artworks should apparently be prohibited (give examples). Therefore, censorship measures demand complex and nuanced judgments, which is why their effectiveness cannot be complete. As a result, internet surveillance would probably lead to an abuse of control and restriction of some content, even if they are perfectly legal.
Moreover, proponents of censorship can be contradictory in their philosophy. It is worth mentioning that as an opponent of censorship, I certainly do not encourage the violence and aggression that can be found online; big digital companies in particular are an arena for demonstrations of offenses, provided that they enable anyone to post their thoughts publically while hiding behind their computer. I...
... middle of paper ...
...e are matters that should never occur in a child’s life. While some people claim that censorship completely solves these issues, this is not the case. It is the parents’ job to make sure that their kid is not exposed to these kinds of websites. Besides, it is possible for them to use browsers that will edit out offensive and inappropriate material for young users. This is why cyberspace surveillance should start and end at home. Extensive censorship will not directly help stopping the acts; it will not help find the criminals. As a matter of fact, it makes it even harder for them to get caught. Indeed, often data contained in the content such as the IP address is crucial for establishing the identity of the offender. Blocking the content removes the possibility to use such information. Therefore, censorship makes the problem less visible but in no way less real.
Pornography is considered by many to be an unwelcome and distasteful part of our society. However, I argue that it is necessary to voice the unpopular viewpoints, under the Constitution. This paper is a defense of pornography as a constitutional right of free expression, under the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights. In illustrating this argument, I will first define pornography as a concept, and then address central arguments in favor of pornography remaining legal and relatively unregulated – such as the development of the pornography debate throughout modern US law, and how activist groups address the censorship of adult entertainment.
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
Everyday we have the chance to make her own opinions and give reason to our own voice. We have the chance to live in a country that encourages freedom in society, which separate ourselves from any restrictions imposed upon by authority, actions or any political views. liberty is the power we possess to act as we please through freedom and independence. But what happens when we choose to give away our basic liberties for temporary safety? Benjamin Franklin once stated, “They who give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Those who decide to give away their personal freedoms for something that is temporary do not see the value in the long-lasting gift called freedom. In
Witherbee, Amy and Cushman, C. Ames. "Counterpoint: Sometimes Censorship is Necessary." 2011. Points of View Reference Center. Web. 21 March 2012.
"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759
There are over 2,405,518,376 internet users on a global scale. More than 50% of the world have a form of Internet censorship, and of those countries China, North Korea, Iran, and Vietnam heavily restrict its citizens. This recent topic has reached new heights in the US with the growing number of access to internet. More and more people are debating whether the internet should be censored. Internet censorship is the control or suppression of what can be accessed, published, or viewed on the internet. This would affect everyone and me. I specifically use the internet to read about controversial view and other information that gets ignored by the media or isn’t circulated anymore. Most of these sites would fall in the black list of censoring. A small percentage of users post conspicuous posts, graphic material, and infringing copyright links. Although inappropriate it shouldn’t demand internet censorship, because it goes against the individual rights of the people. Freedom of speech and press will be restricted by the government. To a point where people would be scared to express themselves, or spread information for they might be punished. Even if their opinion is erroneous and maleficent, it’s still that person’s opinion and he’s entitled to it. Same can be said for the common good everyone should be able to voice their opinions without censorship anywhere. Everyone should also have the access to any information on the internet. If anyone is offended by what is said on the internet, then they can remember to not visit the webpage next time and hold themselves accountable. This paper will examine the issue of internet censorship constituting a violation to the American people individual rights, common good, and the constitution.
Since their founding, computers and the Internet have become a tool that nearly every man, woman, and child in the World have been able to use. E-mail has become one of the Worlds fastest growing ways of communication and the Internet has become one, if not the largest source of information available today. You can find just about everything you wanted to know about anything with the stroke of a few keys on the keyboard. However, along with these positive aspects of the Internet, there lies much negativity surrounding the internet and its use. Access to teenage pornography, bestiality, brutal murder pictures, XXX stories, and other un-ethical sites is extremely easy. In fact, the pornography industry has grown 63% since the Internet was first available for use.(Bishop 91) It is one of the leading industries on the Internet and has become quite a controversy in the United States. Censorship of such sites has done very little due to the fact that most parents feel that these sites are not accessed by their children. We have currently found no solution that has worked and many government officials see the problem only getting worse. Pornography on the Internet though should not be banned, but rather better controlled and censored due to its availability and graphic nature.
The United States decision to drop the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 is undoubtedly one of the main factors in ending the Second World War. Whether or not this operation was simply to end World War II or to start the Cold War with the Soviet Union is a controversy that is still being argued today. Historian Gar Alperovitz, the author of The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb and the Architecture of an American Myth, is more supportive of the fact that the United States ulterior motive for dropping the bomb was to provoke the Cold War with the Soviet Union. Robert James Maddox, author of Weapons for Victory: The Hiroshima Decision Fifty Years Later, dismisses the Cold War theory as nothing but a myth, and believes that the atomic bombs were utilized to accomplish Allied war goals and attain their policy of unconditional surrender from Japan. By analyzing Alperovitz and Maddox’s works, the idea that the atomic bombs were solely used to end World War II is more plausible than the Cold War theory.
...iterate culture’s root metaphor, for the human mind"(pg. 11). Print-thinking’s boundaries cannot control digital thinking as print technologies regulations cannot control digital information. Hate and shock sites must be left uncensored because they defend a principle. They are one of the ugliest parts of that principle but they are still a very important and vocal part of it. Total freedom of speech is inevitable, as digital thinking will not tolerate boundaries because they are contradictory to its very nature of constant dynamic change.
The Internet distributes more information than any other medium in the world. There are several problems that have emerged along with the Internet, “As soon as the public began to use the Internet, people began to express concern about its use” (Clark 1). Some groups feel that the World Wide Web is dangerous because of it’s open accessibility, whereas other groups see that the Internet is something that can be used to share knowledge globally. The Internet should not be censored because censorship would restrict Americans’ first amendment rights; regulations have been tried and have failed in the past, and there are better methods of education and protection than censorship.
Technology has provided our society with numerous innovations that have been created to improve the quality of life on a daily basis. One such innovation is the Internet. The access to a wide variety of information is perhaps the most valuable tool, as well as the most important tool, that we have entering the twenty-first century. There are virtually no limits on how much can be achieved through the use of the Internet. This is not, however, necessarily a good thing. Most people find that offensive material such as child pornography and hate-related propaganda can be viewed by people too easily via the Internet. While child pornography is a detestable subject, it does not have the sort of appeal that a hate group website does in that there are stricter guidelines preventing individuals from attaining child pornography material from the Internet. These stricter guidelines include the Communications Decency Act (1995), which forbids the use of the Internet for such purposes as attaining material of a child pornographic nature (Wolf, 2000). This law can also be used to monitor the hate group websites, but since the law is too broad, it is rarely held up in court. The hate group websites do, however, have a large enough following that there is legislation being formed to specifically target the material on the sites. Despite the highly offensive nature of hate group websites, the sites should not be censored because the right to free speech must be preserved. In this paper we will define what is considered to be hateful content; why this hateful content should be protected; what else can be done to monitor this material on the Internet; and when are the people cr...
...pornography with such ease, parents are going to have to figure out a way to keep their children off these sites. The only other option is coming home and finding them looking at something they shouldn't. Because some children, given the opportunity, are going to seek out these sites, even if you ask them not to. After all, children will be children.
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.
Internet is a powerful tool that allows users to collaborate and interact with others all over the world conveniently and relatively safely. It has allowed education and trade to be accessed easily and quickly, but all these benefits do not come without very taxing costs. This is especially true when dealing with the likes of the Internet. Countries in the European Union and Asia have realized this and have taken action against the threat of net neutrality to protect their citizens, even at the cost of online privacy. Internet censorship is required to protect us from our opinions and vices. Every country should adopt Internet censorship and regulation since it improves society by reducing pornography, racism/prejudice, and online identity theft.
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...