Internet Censorship Essay

Just as we have laws against dumping garbage on the interstate, we ought to have similar laws for the information superhighway"[3]. The content that individuals can post on the Internet should be filtered and monitored to protect our children which make people feel uncomfortable. The dispute against this claim is that it takes away from the rights of adults which was concluded by the federal courts that "it violates the free speech rights of adults by broadly prohibiting the knowing transmission of 'indecent' messages to minors and displaying 'patently offensive' sexually explicit images in a manner available to children"[4]. Some believed that restricting the content on the Internet will be problematic because "it will only stifle the free flow of information, discourage the robust development of new information services and make users avoid using the system" and "Banning on-line anonymity would go much too far, stifling the 99 percent of legitimate speech in pursuit of the 1 percent of criminal speech"[5]. The controlling of content on the Internet will disrupt the flow of information which will discourage individuals to use the Internet and oppress content that is truthful and valid.

Tears begin to fall down a child’s face. Her body goes into shock out of fear. Her mother warned her about watching inappropriate content, and there it was, right on her computer screen. This could not have happened though. All she was doing was casually browsing the internet before a pop-up appeared. Although it may seem hard to believe, the major cause of events such as this is the lack of censorship on the internet. Internet censorship relates to the removal of offensive, inappropriate, or controversial content published online. The current problem with the internet is that there are few restrictions on what can be published or viewed. Several sites on the internet only offer a warning about inappropriate content that can easily be

Did you check your Facebook today? How about your E-Mail? If not, you may be missing something even now! In today’s fast-paced world of instant information, if you aren’t on the internet, you’re almost certainly uninformed. Networks and the internet make up an alarmingly large part of our life. We get our news (both personal and public) via the internet, we talk to friends, shop for things, pay our bills… but how vast is the monster that does all of this? This question, along with many others, is essential in the debate that rages on today: censoring the net. There are governments, not excluding our own, who believe in to some extent controlling who can access certain websites, and which are available to the general public. The very idea

The issues raised by Bennett illustrate that the Internet is still in its infancy in terms of how it is best-integrated into society and regulated by the same ethical, social, and legal principles as traditional forms of communications. It is likely that the solution lies, not in the evolution of regulations or in limitations on free speech; rather, the solution is likely to evolve naturally as subsequent generations develop a better and more nearly comprehensive understanding of how to integrate their offline and online identities in ways that maintain their privacy. Meanwhile, the deeper explanation of the contemporary digital communications

    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?

Dority, Barbara. "The USA PATRIOT Act Has Decimated Many Civil Liberties." Homeland Security. Ed. Andrea C. Nakaya. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2005. Current Controversies. Rpt. from "Your Every Move." The Humanist 64 (2004). Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 3 Sept. 2015.

“See you in court” has been the mantra often cried when a person feels their privacy has been violated, or their free speech infringed. When people take a legal cause of action against a party, they feel wronged them and sue them in court for damages, this is known as a tort (p. 110). Current laws seem to favor free speech above privacy rights. These complex legal issues are often viewed through a libertarian or authoritarian lens. When the internet came along it compounded the difficulty of these matters. In 1996, Congress passed the Communications Decency Act (CDA) in response to growing issues sprouting from the new medium, the internet. Privacy expert and law professor, Daniel J. Solove addresses these complex legal issues in chapters

Fisher, W. (2001, June 14). Freedom of Expression on the Internet. Retrieved July 14, 2015, from http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/ilaw/Speech/

"Internet Freedom, Human Rights and Power." Ebscohost.com. Australian Journal of International Affairs., Nov.-Dec. 2013. Web. 11 Nov. 2015.

  Abstract:  The issue of free speech has been around since the founding fathers first ratified the constitution of the United States.  With the emergence of new technology, especially the Internet, freedom of speech has been redefined and its limits tested.  What are the limitations of free speech on the Internet, and how can they be enforced?  These are the constitutional questions for the digital age.

Individuals are prohibited from using the Internet to: harm national security; disclose state secrets; or injure the interests of the state or society. Users are prohibited from using the Internet to create, replicate, retrieve, or transmit information that incites resistance to the PRC Constitution, laws, or administrative regulations; promotes the overthrow of the government or socialist system; undermines national unification; distorts the truth, spreads rumors, or destroys social order; or provides sexually suggestive material or encourages gambling, violence, or murder. Users are prohibited from engaging in activities that harm the security of computer information networks and from using networks or changing network resources without prior approval ("International Debates”).

Public access to the Internet is available at over 50% of the public libraries in the United States. Library patrons can access the limitless information available that the Internet offers. With this many libraries allowing access and many more each day adding access a new dilemma has been created. The dilemma is to support the American Library Associations Bill of Rights and the First Amendment Right of Free Speech or to limit access to the Internet by censoring or blocking out undesirable information, and thus going against the right of free speech. On July 2, 1997 the American Library Association (ALA) adopted a resolution affirming that "the use of filtering software by libraries to block access to constitutionally protected speech violated the Library Bill of Rights." An earlier statment by the ALA titled "Access to Electronic Information, Services and Networks" in January of 1996 stated "users should not be restricted or denied access for expressing or receiving constitutionally protected speech."

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

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.

The ACLU has been at the bleeding edge of ensuring on the web opportunity of articulation in its horde frames. We acquired the main case which the U.S. Preeminent Court pronounced discourse on the Internet similarly deserving of the First Amendment's authentic insurances. All things considered, Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, the Supreme Court held that the legislature can no more limit a man's entrance to words or pictures on the Internet than it can grab a book out of somebody's hands or conceal a bare statue in an exhibition hall.