Internet Censorship Essay example

Should all government censorship be resisted? I believe that not all government censorship should be resisted. Internet should be censored such a way that gives an opportunity to collect important and effective information and filter the harmful information. Internet censorship is one of the best examples of government censorship that helps to make the society better. The Internet is a very helpful source for collecting information and learning new thing. However, the internet has positive and negative things equally and negative content has a heavy impact on children lives. Base on age website or application access limitation of harmful material that protects our children from abusing internet and censorship also helps to stop

My reality was shattered as all my aspirations of making my life easier with the internet suddenly tumbled down into my stomach as it sank. I went back to working on my group project about an imaginary amendment being added to the constitution to strip the electoral college of its power. We were using google drive to streamline the work and I sank even lower to the ground. Google drive could be gone if a fat cat CEO decided something was wrong with google drive. This caused me to despise censorship. At this very moment I defined the scourge of humanity known as censorship as the denial of any piece of information or content to any person or persons who seek to find them. I was envigorated by this gut punch and starting to tell my family, friends, and teachers. I became so furious, but I also found out the rest of the internet was too. Huge companies such as Google, Wikipedia, and Mozilla were furious at the notion of limiting people's free speech and access to the internet. They organized an internet blackout out day where thousands of websites blacked out access to protest SOPA. This caused so much pressure and backlash on congress that they were forced to stop the bill. All my worries were washed away following this

In a perfect world, student publications wouldn’t be censored, but as many people know, the world is far from perfect. Censorship is an unfortunate reality for many student publications across the nation and although it is perfectly legal for them to be censored, many advisors and publications staff members are unhappy.

    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?

Since there has not been a ruling in this case, the supporters of the censorship laws had to try and find a way to get the internet censored to children. So in the year 2000, Congress passed the Children's Internet Protection Act, which is aimed at the computers in the schools and libraries that the children would have access to. This law was limited to "only the schools and libraries that participated in certain federal programs such as, receiving federal money for technology". The schools and libraries that received this money were required to "install filtering software on all internet terminals to block access to sites with child pornography, obscene material, and material that is harmful to minors". My opinion on this law is that it is even better than the firs one. They are very similar, as you can tell from their names, there is very little changed in the names of the laws. I think that the sites that a minor can look at should be filtered. This way they cannot look at things that can be harmful to them.

Censorship may be protection from inappropriate materials, but it also limits free speech. For the limitation of free speech, it is reasonable why people are emphatically against censorship. It is understood that there is a need to filter some of the materials released in today’s society, but too much is being done by people who have no right meddling with everyone’s rights. Civilization has always been plagued by a never ending battle being fought over what is deemed right and wrong. In today’s culture, censorship oppresses everything in the media. From movies and music to television and even news stories, most of the content viewed today has been filtered one way or another. Restrictions have been in place since early societies have been

School internet filters take away the students ability to effectively choose their own sites and as a product, provide a disadvantage to the students in the form of an inability to practice internet safety for themselves. Schools ban websites frivolously, even going so far as to ban sites that are linked with sites that are deemed inappropriate(D). Students will have difficulty later in life such as in college where they are unable to determine if a source is inaccurate as they have never been given the opportunity to see inaccurate sources due to restrictive school internet filters. This disadvantages the students by removing choice and critical thinking from internet use and website selection, this further shows that school internet filters are too

Congress made an attempt to place content-based restrictions on school and public library internet use in the Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA) of 2000. This act requires the use of some type of internet filtering software for all public libraries that attain funds from the Federal government (in the form of E-rate discounts or Library Services and Technology Act grants). Should a library refuse to comply with CIPA guidelines, that library would have to maintain its technological services without the government discount or LSTA grants. Holding to the CIPA guidelines, both the E-rate and LSTA stipulate that filters may be disabled or ‘legitimate’ sites unblocked by adults who request it, but it is unclear “whether libraries ‘must’ provide for such disabling” (Anten 79).

The aim is to tighten political control and get Internet users to censor themselves by bringing them face to face with their censors or their agents.”(Anonymous)

There are many pros and cons of censorship some of them are very bad in the long run. Some examples are that sex-related topics being censored can be harder to teach about the dangers of Sexually Transmitted Diseases to teens. Others can completely manipulate innocent people, like the Taliban. Basic rights and freedoms are violated. Censorship may intrude someone's personal privacy or even make bad people seem good. Things can be seen as unlawful from the public. Censorship doesn’t promote any kind of creativity for young minds. Every person has their own thoughts and opinions on moral rights. People should have the right to be informed.

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.

Many students, parents and teachers may think this is a bad thing but they don’t understand that censoring some things may have some benefits rather than being all bad.

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.