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.
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
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
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 has 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 internet access. 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.
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 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...
...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.
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.
Pornography on the Internet is available in different formats. These range from pictures and short animated movies, to sound files and stories. Most of this kind of pornographic content is available through World Wide Web pages. The Internet also makes it possible to discuss sex, see live sex acts, and arrange sexual activities from computer screens. There are also sex related discussions on the Internet Relay Chat channels where users in small groups or in private channels exchange messages and files.(Akdenis, 1997) There are millions of different pornographic sites on the internet, so there is almost no way of regulating every site unless there was some type of a universal censorship required for every site. Nearly every one of these millions and millions of sites is accessed daily. Men, women, and children of every age and race are on the Internet looking at inappropriate sites every day. Over 2/3 of Americans who have access to the Internet have accessed pornographic or other un-ethical sites, and the numbers are only growing.
...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.
The most critical concerns regarding the regulatory strategies revolve around the fundamental freedoms of expression and the right to personal autonomy which includes interference with a user’s right to the Internet. There is also the generic fear of the Internet being covered by political censorship. The creation of regulatory bodies and their mechanisms slowly encroached upon several Member States in the EU (France, Italy, UK, etc.) and sporadically across the world (Middle East, Australia, China, etc) and inevitably led blocking of different types of content (also known as ‘mission creep’). This invoked a fear amongst members of society especially those concerned with safeguarding their fundamental rights, and this led to the creation of several anti-censorship organisations. Having researched these organisations, there are a number of important issues that have been proposed.
In light of the controversy surrounding the possession of child pornography, it has been suggested that criminal prohibitions against possession should be removed. In other words, it would not be a crime to possess child pornography (Zekas, 2009). The logic behind this is that mere possession of child pornographic material is a completely different crime com¬pared to the same possession of child porno¬graphic material when there is an intention for further actions to commit crimes against children (Hessick, 2016). Current legal and social responses are not able to address the real issues concerning children as they are focused more on preventing harm and future risks. As such, it should no concern of criminal law for an individual to simply possess or access the material (Hessick, 2016).
One of the unique challenges to regulating or settling on the appropriate way to regulate is that there is no concrete definition of pornography. While law enforcement bodies such as the police, prosecutors and judges, are accustomed to dealing with issues that are exclusive to the United States, the Internet is a worldwide community with servers and members coming from hundreds of countries. Defining "pornographic content" on a global level has not been easy because of different moral and legal variations. In the United States one type of act may be defined as being "hard-core porn", however, another country could see this act as much less offensive. So while the United States may try to regulate one level of pornography, a person could go find it on a website launched from another country. This is one the problems that is being acknowledged when trying to find a way of dealing with the pornography on the Internet.