In Support of Internet Censorship Essay

Most who argue against censorship believe that it goes against a person’s right to freedom of speech. Within this argument, most people wonder “just when, and on what grounds, the state is justified in using its coercive powers to limit the freedom of individuals” (West). When thinking in this mindset, individuals tend to antagonize the government, because they come to believe that it suppresses their individuality and fail to consider the fact that it unites people who share its similar beliefs. As a result of the recent spike in technology and use of the Internet, the public must continually alter its definition of freedom of speech and expression. As the media offers more and more methods of communication, many of which are relatively self-regulated by users, more methods of expression develop, which may render other forms of expression obsolete, or even socially unacceptable (Qazi). Without understanding how much freedom of speech one is entitled to, one may never hope to defend that freedom if it ever comes under attack. Because technology develops so quickly that one definition will hardly suffice for a short period of time, people will find it increasingly difficult to understand how much right to expression they are allowed and will therefore fight for any and all that they may attain, never considering the benefits of censorship in the slightest. In America especially, people idealize the idea of democracy, the investigation of truth, and independence (Fieser). In

Censoring the internet would also protect the minds of citizens from corrupt propaganda. Propaganda that is placed by the government is generally misleading and discourages deep thinking. An example is Obama’s campaign in 2008. “People loved [Obama’s campaign], but many did not understand what type of change he was talking about. Such propaganda stirred passions and made people feel good, but it did not allow people to think critically about the issues. Rather, Obama smartly played off anti-incumbent sentiment that was sweeping the nation” (Snowball 71). Other times, the government will place propaganda on the internet to influence citizens to take a certain action. According to John Turner, “voters are being misled by the propaganda of think tanks and the Coalition.” Propaganda serves as part of government coercion. The propaganda seems to be an encouragement of action,

Internet expands more each and every year. Although this is a good thing because we have way more resources now. It becomes way too progressive that humans get to into it. The government takes advantage of this. Humans have emotions and sometimes a way to let them out is to have the internet. People believe everything they post is safe but the government owns some of these websites we use. The government withholds a lot of our information, so it is questionable ton ask if what we put online is safe. The author extensively explores the role of internet censorship in the right to decide what art, or entertainment tool we use (1). This shows that not only do we think everything we post is safe but in the end it is our fault. We document part of our life and post on social media to make our life better or cooler in some ways. It is good to believe that most of the time the government will not do anything but it is also scary to know that they can track where someone is at any

Censorship in China has gained much attention recently because of the conflict between Google and the Chinese government’s self-censorship policies. In fact, censorship has been practiced since ancient China and the intensity only increases by the years. Nowadays, the most notable measure of censorship is being done on the Internet. More and more restrictions have been put into actions by the Chinese government, which make the life of Chinese Internet users, the Chinese netizens, very inconvenient. With the intensity of censorship increasing and the censoring technology improving, Internet censorship has mainly negative effects on Chinese society.

    In June of 1998 the country was horrified to learn of the death of James Byrd Jr. He was a 49-year-old black man who had been found horribly mutilated after being dragged to death. Authorities have charged three men with murder and violation of civil rights ("A Fatal Ride in the Night" 33). Obviously, if convicted, these men are guilty of a horrible crime, but what if this crime had been committed after viewing a racist website? If a person reads an emotionally charged, hate-filled website and then commits an act of violence, can the creator and owner of the website also be found guilty?

Laws, enforcements, and censorship have been developed since the beginning of civilization. With freedom, comes responsibility, and with responsibility comes common sense. In a society or nation of few, laws and restriction tend to be smaller, and less complex. This is contributed by the fact that in small groups, their will be less diversity amongst them. In larger society ranging in millions to billions, the need for a more complex, organized government begins to form. No human is in fact alike, each person possess their own form of will, and much their own point-of-view. In a large mass society, it becomes tedious, and complex to try and rule by anarchy. The need for a common law amongst this

The Internet has incurred a tremendous amount of growth and opportunity for the country as well as the world; elevating communication, information, and commerce to a new level. With all this unprecedented innovation, the Internet has also brought controversy that challenges the very foundation of rights that countries like the United States were founded on. With countless websites containing unregulated and objectively offensive content, and the public having an ease of access to this content will result in severe damages to the development of the youth if no censorship is put in place for them to view this content. Additionally, markets are being exploited by piracy which has resulted in billions of dollars being lost by the domestic economy

Censorship is the removal of material from public viewing or the ability to withhold any material from being released. Using this definition, this issue of pornography seems to be in the grey area of the censorship debate. On the one side there are the people who want to protect their children from pornography and violence, and on the other people state that the Internet is the only medium which still openly accepts freedom of speech. Censorship is always wrong, no matter how unpleasant the material being considered.

In the United States, every child, teenager and adult uses Wikipedia, YouTube and Facebook, among numerous other sites, regularly. The internet is open and uncensored for the most part, other than parental controls. In China, most, if not all of those types of sites are or have been blocked. As in, you could not go to them, unless you found some way around the web filters and firewalls the Chinese government runs in their country. While China defends their practice of internet censorship, based on “protecting” the people, heavy internet censorship is a block to free speech and impedes economic and social development in the 21st century.

These days the internet has become an essential part to living for almost everyone but one of the controversial topics that people bring up is that whether or not the government should regulate information on the internet. Both sides have valid points which form a reasonable argument. Some people would say that they need to because of the dangers lurking around in the cyber world but the reasons for why the government shouldn’t regulate the Internet outnumber the reasons for why they should. The federal government should not regulate or censor information on the internet because doing so violates the first amendment and citizen’s right to privacy, degrades the educational value of the web, prevents the promotion and facilitation of

The freedom of speech that was possible on the Internet could now be subjected to governmental approvals. For example, China is attempting to restrict political expression, in the name of security and social stability. It requires users of the Internet and electronic mail (e-mail) to register, so that it may monitor their activities. In the United Kingdom, state secrets and personal attacks are off limits on the Internet. Laws are strict and the government is extremely interested in regulating the Intern et with respect to these issues.10 Laws intended for other types of communication will not necessarily apply in this medium.

Remember the day when you could say anything you wanted without worrying about someone telling you, “That’s not correct”or “don’t say that.” Yes? Everybody does. Many long to live in that era once more; they long to be able to speak their mind in public without anyone thinking they are weird or crazy. Lately it seems as though you have to retain your thoughts inside your mind and not say anything. Many college campuses and websites have started to establish rules which prevent people from saying what’s on their mind and writing or saying something which may harm others.

It is obvious that for years, the government has been trying to regulate this type of content but has seen very limited success. Part of the reason for this is because certain regulatory actions intended to protect only a small group, such as children, should not require the prohibition of material that adults have access to in other arenas. It is for example, legal for people to rent pornographic movies or buy nude magazines, so distribution of this type of material on the Internet should not be completely limited. People shouting out for protection of their 1st Amendment rights have made a good point when arguing against complete censorship. What seems more feasible is a sort of multi-layered approach to regulate illegal and harmful content on the Net. This would make it possible to form some sort of insulation for children

Some people wonder who came up with the idea of internet censorship. Other people want to know which countries use it. Some ponder over the idea of what really is internet censorship. Internet censorship is controlling what can be viewed, and which sites can be used on the internet. Some things about internet censorship are countries that use it, and who started the idea of it.

Internet censorship is developing far and wide and influences us, regardless that as United States citizens, we have additional technological opportunities than what many other nations do. Numerous Americans underestimate the opportunities that living in the United States permits us. Whether we are sending electronic mail, posting on our social media pages, or seeking out the latest news, we are ensured the opportunity of self-expression and an inexhaustible amount of information right at our fingertips. Censorship takes control of people's expression, and many countries, governments, and leaders support it for this reason. Internet Censorship in the United States in comparison to different nations brings to light the global and ethical issue regarding the basic human rights of education, communication, and freedom.