Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The importance of internet censorship
Internet censorship children
The internet censorship controversy
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The importance of internet censorship
The Internet is a worldwide network of computers and databases that has evolved rapidly in recent years. Tremendous amounts of information are transmitted and are fairly easy to obtain. Although in the past the information available was for the most part educational and business oriented, in recent years it has become much more diverse and questions have been raised as to the appropriateness of the content being viewed and consumed. Another issue is whether or not the government should take an active role in censoring it, especially when it comes to pornography, or cyberporn, as it is more commonly referred to when it is displayed on the Internet.
Should cyberporn be censored? If so, who is responsible, parents or the government? Is Internet censorship the solution, or a violation of the first amendment? The citizens of a democracy must make these kinds of decisions while simultaneously maintaining freedom and responsibility on the Internet.
BACKGROUND OF THE PROBLEM
Pornography on the Internet and the ease at which it can be accessed has been a very controversial issue, especially in the last ten years. The Internet was largely unregulated until 1996 when the Communication Decency Act, a portion of the Telecommunications act, was proposed. The Communication Decency Act, or the CDA, made it illegal to make or solicit any image or message that was “obscene” or “indecent”. (Wekesser 106), But how do we define terms with an ambiguity such as these. The Court in Miller-constructed the modern definition of “obscene”: The basic guidelines of the trier of fact must be must be: (a) whether “the average person, applying contemporary community standards” would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient...
... middle of paper ...
... a democracy must achieve a happy medium. I agree that much of the cyberporn that is attainable is inappropriate, especially when it involves children in even a remotely sexual manner. However, censorship is not the answer. We must find a way to practice freedom of expression while maintaining decency and assuming responsibility, as individuals, for our children.
Bibliography:
Works Cited
Elmer-Dewitt, Philip (1995) “On A Screen Near You: Cyberporn.” Time, July 1995
Ford, Marrin, Esposito, Witmeyer & Gleser, Can Congress Censor The Internet? L.L.P., 1996
Simon, Glenn E. (1998), “Cyberporn and censorship: constitutional barriers to preventing access to Internet pornography by minors.” Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, v88 n3 p1015-1048.
Wekesser, Carol. (1997). Pornography: opposing viewpoints. California: Greenhaven Press, Inc.
In her essay “Let’s Put Pornography Back in the Closet,” Susan Brownmiller, a prominent feminist activist, argues that pornography should not be protected under the First Amendment (59). Her position is based on the belief that pornography is degrading and abusive towards women (Brownmiller 59). She introduces the reader to the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment, and explains how it relates to her beliefs on censoring pornographic material (Brownmiller 58). In addition, she provides examples of First Amendment controversies such as Miller v. California and James Joyce’s Ulysses to explain how the law created a system to define pornographic material (Brownmiller 58). She described the system that used a three-part test as confusing (Brownmiller 58). Regardless of whether or not the First Amendment was intended to protect obscenities, she and many others believe that the legislatures should have the final say in the decision of creating and publishing pornography (Brownmiller 60).
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
Ashcroft vs. ACLU, 00-1293, deals with a challenge to the Child Online Protection Act (COPA), which Congress passed in 1998. The law, which is the subject of this essay, attempts to protect minors from exposure to Internet pornography by requiring that commercial adult websites containing "indecent" material that is "harmful to minors" use age-verification mechanisms such as credit cards or adult identification numbers.(Child)
Imagine a place where you have access to anything and everything one could want. Some would say that is only existent in a utopia, and some would say that describes the Internet. Many adults go on to the net and access pornographic material that would be unsuitable for children. This is called cyberporn. The controversy lies in the fact that children are accessing these materials also. Government, activist groups, and concerned parents are fighting to regulate obscene material found over the Internet to protect children. The first amendment is the only thing protecting adults from losing their rights to obtain pornographic or indecent material on the net. Under the first amendment the government must not regulate cyberporn. Online sex has been around since the first bulletin boards were available over the computer in the early 1980's. People would pay to down load pornographic pictures and talk dirty to each other. Usenet groups took control of porn after the Internet came about. They did not charge people to down load picture and to interact with others. In result, Internet porn grew (Rosen 16). Things have changed drastically since then with over a million different sites available to access porn. Now it is not just for adults. Children are accessing the obscene materials. This brings rise to issues of how to protect them from problems that can arise. The materials they view, could influence children. They could also be subjected to cybersex in a chat room full of people that could be three times their age. Worst of all pedophilias could influence children to meet with them outside of the computer. The government and the United States citizens must now figure out how to protect our children from the effects of cyberporn, and y...
When deliberating over whether access to pornography should be prohibited, four areas of contention must be elaborated upon and evaluated critically to provide a sensible basis on which a judgement can be made. Firstly, it must be concluded whether pornography can be classed as a form of speech, and whether it enjoys the same protections as art and literature under the principle. Secondly, works such as those of Catherine MacKinnon can be drawn upon to offer a feminist perspective of the effects of pornography on the treatment of women within modern democratic society. Moreover, the principles of Devlin and Feinberg offer relevant acumen regarding the criminalisation of pornographic media. Overall, this essay will argue that whilst access to pornography should not be entirely prohibited; publications that depict ‘extreme’ situations should be subject to regulation and restriction.
Since the internet has been available in schools and libraries in this country, there has been a debate about what should be accessible to users, especially minors. The amount of information disseminated on the world wide web is vast, with some sources valuable for scholarly and personal research and entertainment, and some sources that contain material that is objectionable to some (ie. pornography, gambling, hate groups sites, violent materials). Some information potentially accessible on the internet such as child pornography and obscenity is strictly illegal and is not protected under the First Amendment. Some information available on the internet that may be valuable to some is at the same time perceived to be worthless or potentially harmful to some. For libraries serving the public, there has been controversy on the issue of providing the internet, free of censorship or filtering, to users. While some librarians and their professional associations align with ideals of free and unfiltered access to all information provided by the internet, some feel that filtering internet content to exclude possibly objectionable materials is a reasonable measure to prevent potential harm to minors.
Freedom of speech is a cornerstone of democratic political and social institutions. It is responsible for the free flow of ideas and information to anyone who wishes to listen. Freedom of speech supports freethinking and sharing of thoughts, but along with these good characteristics there are also harmful ones. With the positive aspects such as art, journalism, and the pursuit of truth come negatives aspects such as pornography, gambling, and hate and shock sites. To continue with free speech people, must accept these negative aspects such as The Blackplague shock site, "The Blackplague", http://www.blackplague.org/. The contents of this site are repulsive, disturbing, and offensive to the majority of the population. There are countless pictures, texts, and videos of sex, death, and the most evil human behavior imaginable. No matter what is included in the site though, it is still a reflection of society and paints a picture of reality because of the people who maintain and contribute to the site. The creators of this site use digital methods to spread their message and raise some questions about free speech and the Internet as a whole. Should the Internet be regulated and more government control take place or should the Internet not be regulated and allow disturbing material such as "The Blackplague" to be accessible to everyone including little children? These are major social questions that are being raised with major implications for the future attached to the answers. Technology has changed the issue of freedom of speech because it has changed the amount of access and overall information people have available to them today. Technology, such as the Internet, ha...
McCarthy, M. (2005). THE CONTINUING SAGA OF INTERNET CENSORSHIP: THE CHILD ONLINE PROTECTION ACT. Brigham Young University Education & Law Journal, (2), 83-101.
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.
Regulation is an issue that has formulated mostly because of how easily any child can access the internet. The thought is that if adult related material is easily accessible, then our children can view it also. People want to protect their children from items such as pornography, hate speech, violence, and gambling. All of which can be reached at the click of a button. So is regulating the internet the correct way of protecting our children?
Free speech on the Internet is a very controversial subject and has been the key problem surrounding the Internet today. The attempt to regulate and govern the Internet is still pursued by government officials. This subject has been intensified due to terrorist attacks against the United States and around world within the past years. The government believes that by regulating the Internet, it will protect the general public from criminal actions and eliminate the exposure of children to pornography or vulgar language. Senator Jim Exon of ...
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...
Many opponents say that Internet censorship can protect their children from accessing bad websites which have a lot of violence and sexual content. Also, they believe that these materials can be harmful to teenagers and make them addicted. However, parents are the ones who should be completely responsible to prevent their children from accessing bad websites, such as pornography, and it is not the government’s responsibility. According to Opposing Viewpoint reporter Adam Thiere, “parents should be the ones to impose censorship on children, not the federal government.” Besides, some websites, which have educational information about safe sex or disease awareness, were blocked. Everyone has the right to use the Internet to find answers to private questions. In addition, teenagers can educate themselves. For example, when I have some questions about sex or sexually transmitted diseases, I cannot ask my parents because of my embarrassment. Thus, the Internet is the best choice for me. Nevertheless, when I searched those questions on the Internet at home, they were restr...