Internet Censorship & Libraries 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

Censorship is a concept with several different meanings. To each individual censorship has its own meaning. Is it a violation of our rights or is it a protection for our well being? Censorship in the generic sense refers to the suppression of information, ideas, or opinions. It occurs in all forms of communication from technological media to print media. Each society, culture, or individual's belief is violated by the codes of censorship that our society instills.

The American Library Association promotes the freedom to choose or the freedom to express one's opinions even if that opinion might be considered unorthodox or unpopular, and stresses the importance of ensuring the availability of those viewpoints to all who wish to read them. Free thought and expression are rights protected by the first amendment of the United States constitution however there are people that continue to fight to censor and ban materials that they find offensive. Banning books robs people from learning and forming their own opinions people who challenge books usually have good intentions claiming that they want to protect children from suggestive content, dangerous opinions and profanity. The Office of Intellectual Freedom reports the top three reasons for books to be challenged are that material is sexually explicit, contains offensive language or is unsuitable to any age group. Although we need to be aware of what we choose to expose our children and ourselves to banning and censoring does more harm than good. It is wrong to ban books, everyone deserves access and exposure to different perspectives so that they can expand their thinking and form their own opinions.

The first side of this debate claims that banning books is for the good of the students, and parents should be happy that the school cares about the students and what they are reading. Robert P. Doyle shares his opinion about books and how they are banned because of the mild use of language, sexual content, and text against the government (Doyle). “So, in 1939, they wrote the “Library Bill of Rights,” which begins to articulate the library community’s philosophical position regarding censorship” (Doyle). ”For the book community, it wasn’t political content so much as sexual content that created censorship challenges and ultimately brought the issue to the attention of the courts” (Doyle). Doyle is the author of an article entitled “The American Experience”, he expresses his opinion for Pro banned books using statements such as above. Banning books is always for the benefit of the students, schools don’t ban them because they want to, there is always a reason for banning the book.

    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?

Kolderup, G. (2013). The First Amendment and internet filtering in public libraries. Indiana Libraries, 32(1), 26-29.

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

At the beginning of 2012, a series of coordinated protests occurred online and offline against Stop Online Piracy Act Bill (SOPA) that expands U.S. law enforcement’s ability to combat online copyright infringement. As this protest involved many influential websites like Google and Wikipedia, it certainly draws national attention on SOPA. Whether censorship should be used online against online materials infringing property rights, as included in SOPA, is the controversial issue. Even though SOPA eventually was terminated by the Congress, things behind SOPA cause further debates. The relationship between censorship, free speech and copyrights in this bill is worth discussing. In SOPA,

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.

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.

Freedom of speech and access to information within our public libraries is protected by the bill of rights of many national and international human rights organizations. These freedoms are specifically protected within our First Amendment rights in the United States Constitution and by the American Library Association’s Bill of Rights. It is written by both that all citizens should have the freedom to write, publish, and read what they wish, without fear of a government or other person persecuting or restricting them. However, the Children’s Internet Protection Act of 2000 made it American law that public libraries must use Internet filtration software to censor access to information deemed inappropriate for children. These regulations are meant to protect the innocent American youth from content considered profane, sexual, or violent; however, what has proven more dangerous than what children discover on the internet at their library is the misapplication of the law by the libraries themselves. Due to differing cultural contexts, political and economic climates, and contents of constitutionally protected information, different communities throughout the United States have different levels of freedom to information. While the government of the United States has the final say on what information can be accessed in federally funded public libraries in America, several libraries throughout the

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.

1a. It is very important to draw comparison between the internet, library, television and public places as a result of the fact the internet can also be considered or viewed as a public place where information can be obtained freely at any point in time, and this makes it very important to know what the law says about this disseminating information to the general public with respect to the first amendment.