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 …show more content…
All in all, I fear that if we begin to give the government the right to watch over our social media pages and Internet content, their power over our personal lives will only spread. Reverting to censorship to stop cyber bullying does not get rid of the underlying problem, which lies in the attitudes of individual children and should be dealt with at the source of the issue. Also, many people argue that the government should be able to monitor the Internet, namely our search history, in search of any illegal content, but again, I believe that this would not put an end to illegal activity but rather push the activities elsewhere. As for putting regulations on what President Trump tweets, I do not believe that would solve anything. Taking away the freedom of speech, especially from the President, would cause a ripple of other conflicts with social media regulations. Not to mention how it would look to other countries if we suddenly had to censor our own President from saying what he wishes, especially because he could easily express his feelings in other
...rk with us. This can have a major impact on the economy, and may eventually lead to a weakened nation overall. However, it can be argued that the United States is not acting hypocritical through mass surveillance over the internet. While there's some overlap of the issues, the existence of surveillance does not cut off the freedom of speech on the Internet."One can recognize... there is a very large difference between censorship and spying... On some level, we know that spying and espionage is going to take place. This still doesn't mean we promote censorship." (Verveer, 2013) Undoubtedly, the censorship by the agency over the internet may make users think twice about what opinions to express, but as long as no major crimes are being planned, then the agency will not really care about what is said online, and internet users are free to say whatever they would like.
Imagine a society in which its citizens have forfeited all personal liberties for government protection and stability; Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, explores a civilization in which this hypothetical has become reality. The inevitable trade-off of citizens’ freedoms for government protection traditionally follows periods of war and terror. The voluntary degradation of the citizens’ rights begins with small, benign steps to full, totalitarian control. Major methods for government control and censorship are political, religious, economic, and moral avenues. Huxley’s Brave New World provides a prophetic glimpse of government censorship and control through technology; the citizens of the World State mimic those of the real world by trading their personal liberties for safety and stability, suggesting that a society similar to Huxley’s could exist outside the realm of dystopian science fiction.
And the problem the social media sites are helping the NSA when we have put all of our trust and that easily it could be revoked. According to Rob D 'Ovido “Having traded our freedoms for a phantom promise of security, government eyes” (D 'Ovido). For example, Cameron Dambrosio, a teenager from Massachusetts posted a video online a rap he made about the Boston marathon bombing, the rap had references to the white house and the bombing itself, which resulted in his getting arrested in May 2013, and charging him with communicating terrorist threats, which could land him a twenty year sentence. One cannot argue that he used foul language, and said words that were ill-mannered, but that does not give the right to officials to arrest people on a basis of rap. What happen with freedom of speech? People out in the middle east are uprooting entire regimes, because they are not giving them the basic human right, like freedom of speech or privacy. For an example, look at Egypt, they have over thrown an regime that ruled for 40 years. I am not comparing those awful regimes to our government, all we need is to calculate our choices more, and the government should have more faith in the citizens. We live in an era where we are being watched by surveillance cameras 24/7, and also having our calls being tapped. Even with all the peeping toms, censorship, and the spying, freedom of speech
Many say that censorship limits what people can do, but others think differently. Censorship in the United States limits the freedom of what some can do and does not allow teens to read about important situations that could happen in life, listen to positive or negative music, and watch certain shows for them to experience. Many people think that censorship is not necessary and that what is produced to the public, the parents should be alright with it.
Censoring knowledge is unconstitutional. Censorship had been going on since the beginning of the written word. This means that is not hard to say that it has been used as a manipulation tactic since the first man, or woman, placed their coal to a piece of dried goat skin. So does this make it wrong?
Many people die a year from infection. Infection is one of the leading causes of death. There are many different precautions to prevent infection that are well known. However, anyone is susceptible to infection, healthy or not. I am healthy person physically and mentally. However, a healthy person can still be susceptible to infection. I was infected by the bacteria Escherichia coli, more commonly known as E. coli. While infected by a pathogen my body went through all of the periods of illness because the bacteria had made it through four out of five components that made it lethal. It led to a major kidney infection.
The government should not control the content of television shows and limit the amount of weekly violence shown. The responsibility of controlling the viewing of television shows expressing acts of violence should specifically be in the hands of parents. Parents are becoming too reliant upon governmental provisions with respect to raising their children and television violence is becoming an excuse for criminal acts. Children, especially younger children, are impressionable, but with proper guidance from a parental source in regards to television viewing, kids are not likely to act out violent television images.
Is Censorship Justified? Ever wondered the reason behind racial discrimination, sexual discrimination, children committing crimes or violence? The main reason is that censorship is not properly imposed or there is a need for censorship in the society. Censorship is the suppression of ideas and information that certain people, individuals, groups or government officials find objectionable, offensive or dangerous to others. There are varieties of other definitions, but all have in common the concept of withholding information and/or resources from those who seek it.
It is the year 2014. The growth and advancement in technology and innovation lead to the birth of new channels of media. Back tracking to the 1950s, the primary source of media would have been printed such as newspapers, articles and magazines. The introduction of the televisions and cinemas in the late 20th century resulted in the production of masterpieces such as movies and dramas alike. Currently, the internet is the unified source for all kinds of media which gives allows us to freely express and exhibit our perspectives and ideas. On the other hand, this revolution in the media industry saw the production of certain media that are unsuitable for certain audiences. Thus, government bodies such as Malaysia’s Multimedia and Communication Commission are set up to selectively evaluate and censor contents to ensure that media would not be harmful to the public. Therefore, this essay strives to prove that censorship is sometimes justified.
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
The desire for knowledge abundantly roams within an individual’s mind. The inclination is natural, and people continue to explore their environments in order to satisfy curiosity. The question arises though. Since the world possesses both harmful and beneficial material, who should be responsible to choose what is exposed? Some argue that censoring protects the well-being of citizens.
Censorship has been around since B.C. times and originated in Rome. Censorship was enforced to protect our society by not allowing explicit content to be viewed in the media. It also protects child pornography and secret government information leaks. The problem is in some cases are hard to determine on what should be censored because even though something might be explicit content it portrays the point the publisher is trying to make. On the flip some people believe that these extreme crime scenes seen in media have caused people to commit these crimes in real life. Although the article, Broadcast Decency Rules delivers a somewhat convincing and effective argument, I disagree that the media should be censored.
Censorship affects our society in many different ways, it affects the music we listen to, the movies we watch, the books we read, and many other aspects of our everyday lives. Even though many might argue that censorship doesn't really have a place in a society that emphases freedom of speech and the freedom to express oneself, but censorship is an essential and needed part of our growing society, it's needed in the television industry, the Internet, and the music industry. Censorship helps to make our world a better place because it creates a better environment for us to live in.
Media has become a powerful source of knowledge, and a great breakthrough in human history. Who can regret that media is a daily need in our lives. Media has the ability and control to adjust to all levels of knowledge in people. Media helps us to escape from our daily lives and our problems in times of stress. Thou Media as proved to be beneficial by educating, entertaining and informing us, it has also have its downfall, to cause many bad influences to the younger audience. Media has influenced us to conduct bad behavior, breed violence among teens and fear to the public, thus causing a lot of negative conflicts among ourselves. Television, Music, Internet, and more, are just some of the media exposure that needs to be censored and controlled. Media needs to be restricted, so that it doesn’t expose certain content to the wrong audience. Therefore media should be censored, so that we are able to protect our children from certain media exposure.
As new technologies evolve and become a part of our daily lives, so do television shows and what people are allowed to view on a regular basis. Censorship, a word that seems to be causing quite some controversy over certain people may not be such a bad idea. As America has seen, a countless amount of people have been known to complain about censorship on television. Although this seems to be a problem to some, maybe the real question to be asked is, is there enough censorship of television? Many families agree that certain rated R movies should not be shown to young children and only certain shows