Should The Government Regulate The Internet

Living in the twenty first century we are all exposed to things we wish we were not or things our parents wish we had not been exposed to. Things like porn, cyberbullying, and invasion of privacy are a very real thing of today even more than it has been in the past years because our society is very technology based and as consumers we can get our hands on anything we desire as long as we have a connection to the internet. Does this mean that the federal government should be allowed to regulate information on the internet?

The United States Government has control over how a citizen lives, whether he realizes it or not. To what point are laws and amendments allowed to be taken into effect? Trial and error has consistently been used in the United States government. Depending on what issue or topic is being argued, the government has different limitations on how far they can go to censor or control content. The government should not be permitted to censor the internet in the United States due to the history of ineffective rulings. Acts to prevent obscene video content were attempted but failed due to non descriptive language. Other times the government has tried to speech minors from harmful information but was ineffective due to uprises against limiting valuable

Because of the first amendment, our government can not mislead citizens into believing information that can only be used to benefit the government. For example, The Soviet Union spread false information in order to control what it citizens were aware of. The purpose behind spreading false information was to mold the citizens thoughts into the ideal Soviet Union mindset. However, the government would also be able to regulate the information on the internet for the citizens own good. Information on the internet can be inaccurate and can mislead many people into believing something that is entirely untrue, however, and because government cannot intervene and delete this incorrect information, citizens are susceptible to learning information that is not true, therefore regressing the intelligence of society. Although there are both positives and negatives to both sides of the argument, our federal government should continue to be restricted from regulate information on the internet for the safety of the citizens of the United

While the United States has very little government regulation over the Internet compared to other countries, such as china, the United States government has made it a requirement for schools and libraries to use an intermediary software to filter the content available to minors. While these intermediaries restrict access to websites regarding child pornography, which is not a protection of the first amendment, there is also legislation pending to restrict access to social networking websites, which are considered protected by the First Amendment (Kreimer 22). White refers to the case United States v. American Library Association, which refers to the requirement of a software on computers prohibiting children from viewing anything that is harmful to them, such as pornography. The court ruled, adults still have the ability to view such sites if they ask a library official to remove the website from the blocked list, and therefore does not go against First Amendment liberties. However, the judge also said, “until a blocked site or group of sites is unblocked, a patron is unlikely to know what is being hidden and therefore whether there is any point in asking for the filter to be removed” (White 2009). White believed due to this statement alone, the individual’s rights of speech have been restrained prior to their knowledge (White 2009).

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

Internet censorship is the control or suppression of the publishing or accessing of information on the Internet. This can include blocking entire websites, blocking parts of certain websites, prohibiting certain search engine keywords, monitoring individual internet use, and punishing individuals for this use. On a smaller scale, companies censor access to certain websites to increase productivity in workers or decrease chances of a sexual harassment lawsuit. Parents may block certain website on their family computers in an attempt to maintain their child’s innocence. On a much larger scale, entire governments can censor or track the Internet use of its constituents.

When discussing internet censorship, one of the major concerns is what children can see on the internet. Internet censorship was a huge deal during the 1990’s and early 2000’s and it still is to this very day. The internet back then was much different than it is today. Back then, we could only access the internet from a computer and most people didn’t own one back then. Nowadays, most people have multiple computers and a cell phone that can access the internet. It was easier for parents to control what their children could have access to back then. Now, parents can still put restrictions on the router settings and set a timer for when the internet shuts off but kids can always just go somewhere else that may have internet access to view any

The internet is a place where people from all over the world can connect with others who have similar interests as well as share information on almost any topic. While the internet has brought us closer together as a global society some people believe that what is on the internet should be censored. While the content of the internet should have to comply with the laws of the country it is being accessed in I do not believe that there should be any further restrictions as to what viewed on the internet.

However, those who are against censorship on the Internet believe that it violates their right to free speech. Because the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulates radio and television, Internet users believe this is the only available forum that guarantees the open exchange of ideas. The freedom of expression is a right guaranteed to Americans and therefore should not be restricted by the government.

The Internet’s continuous advancement has produced the need for an on-going debate on whether or not the government should have the power to control the Internet. The idea of the government having control over what each country’s citizens can see on the Internet is also called Internet Censorship. Internet Censorship “is the control or suppression of the publishing of, or access to information on the Internet.” Internet Censorship varies from country to country depending on each country’s current usage and philosophy of how it should be used. (toptenreviews.com) Currently, there are ten countries including

While elementary and middle schools have obvious needs for restrictions, Internet access at the high school level isn't as black and white. High school students are sensitive to their given rights, yet are officially minors under the law; teenagers are ever nearing adulthood, but are sometimes viewed as immature. So, high school administrators are challenged with designing an Internet policy that meets the educational needs of the students and the moral demands of society. Although software is being designed to "censor" the content of the Internet, student trust and responsibility might be a more reasonable route.

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 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.

I am opposed to such content on the Internet and therefore am a firm believer in