Internet Freedom And Political Oppression

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

When we think of the internet and technology we usually think of all the benefits and innovations that make up our generation. We have all the information we need right on our phones. We can also be connected with anyone or with everyone at anytime of the day, but is being connected with everyone a good thing? “The Loneliness Of The Interconnected” by Charles Seife explores this idea and shines a light on the negative effects that being connected with everyone might have. Seife’s exploration of online extremism challenge Schmidt and Cohen’s optimistic portrayal of technology by analyzing how having a voice in the ocean of the internet and being connected with everyone isn’t always positive.

There are few places on this Earth, if any, where the possibilities are truly endless. However, if you detach yourself from the physical world and emerge into the “online” world, you find that this just might actually be accurate in this realm. The World Wide Web has had so much to offer to us since the early 1990s, but with this comes controversy. Unleashed onto a plane of seemingly immeasurable freedom of anonymity, was the world ready for such responsibility? Since those early days when new emerging technology changed our lives immensely, have we at all become a better place, or have we bitten off more than we can chew, and doomed our human relations forever? Exploring these concepts are three in-depth articles, including: “Growing Up Tethered” by Sherry Turkle, “The Loneliness of the Interconnected” by Charles Seife, and “Cybersexism” by Laurie Penny. Although it is thought that the Internet brings the world together, it actually does not help us politically, culturally, and economically like one would believe, as it makes us unable to be independent, isolates us from different points of view, and encourages real-world violence against women and other minority groups.

In her call to action, The People’s Platform; Taking Back Power and Culture in the Digital Age, Astra Taylor addresses underlying social and economic forces of the internet and differential perspectives towards it. Taylor discusses the new internet in which content is king and, people are now the product, this is called Web 2.0. She discusses this topic from a couple viewpoints; those who would believe that the internet is truly the new people’s platform and that it is the golden age of sharing and collaboration, called the Techno-optimists. The counterparts of this interpretation of the internet are what she calls the Techno-Skeptics, who have a similar mindset in that of Nicholas Carr, an author about technology in the modern age, with the

Over the past few decades our generation has witnessed a communication revolution no generation has ever witnessed before. The Internet was fully commercialized in the U.S. by mid-1990s and instant communication including the World Wide Web, email, and instant messaging have all played part of an enormous impact on media, commerce, and politics during that time and up until now. U.S. scholar and activist Robert McChesney has spent the past twenty years studying and documenting the effects of this Internet revolution and its relationship with capitalism and democracy. In his 2013 work “Digital Disconnect: How Capitalism is Turning the Internet Against Democracy,” McChesney addresses the relationship between the economic power and the digital

SOPA, PIPA, and CISPA: though different, these bills were all presented with a similar goal in mind. These bills were intended to stop the digital copyright infringement of American intellectual properties, mainly in foreign countries, but the overly vague wording in the bills made it hard to decipher their real intentions (Yu). For a multitude of reasons, these bills were staunchly protested not only by American citizens, but they also received protest from numerous international groups (York). Though some may argue that SOPA, PIPA, or CISPA may have had some value, they did not have the intended result of ending digital theft, but rather invigorated a retaliating movement. The main

The internet is a powerful tool for activists, but can also be utilized by the other side by promoting propaganda and mobilizing their own supporters. Networking sites have revolutionized the way people activists approach revolutions. Moreover, the internet has connected people from across the world and has caused people in the states (like myself) to become invested in a civil war occurring in a part of the world I never knew existed. The internet has empowered and enabled people by connecting like-minded people, providing access to information, broadcasting events, and creating real connections between people. Alone, the internet is not enough to bring down an oppressive, authoritarian state; but when coupled with the power and will of the people, it can create real

This paper addresses whether we should censor or block access to websites with controversial material. It looks at the issue from several sides: The relevant US laws that are in place, how censorship is used at the university and corporate levels, how other countries are attempting censorship, and finally what I feel about the topic.

Today, society is affected by the many advances in technology. These advances affect almost every person in the world. One of the prevalent advances in technology was the invention and mass use of the Internet. Today more than ever, people around the world use the Internet to support their personal and business tasks on a daily basis. The Internet is a portal into vast amounts of information concerning almost every aspect of life including education, business, politics, entertainment, social networking, and world security. (idebate.com) Although the Internet has become a key resource in developing the world, the mass use of Internet has highlighted a major problem, privacy and the protection of individual, corporate, and even government

The Georgia Institute of Technology is a one of the top public research universities in the world. The technology and society program is one of the top-rated programs at Georgia Tech. The program aims to lead in the research and breakthroughs that drive social and scientific progress. This paper investigated and discussed the effect of the Internet on democracy over the world in the period of 1992 to 2002 by using several methods including survey, research and discovering the relationships between the Internet and policies. Numerous previous reports and tests were cited in the paragraph as well as charts. Although the data were gathered only for the period of 1992 to 2002 which means the findings may be outdated, the writers’ predictions in

In the end, while Lyon and Hafner give us an entertaining story regarding how the Internet was discovered, we are still left wondering about what effect the Internet is actually having. True, we see all of the hard work that occurred behind the scenes in the making of the Internet in this book, but now the question must be asked: where does the Internet take us? This is a very important question in the context of where technology takes our culture, and takes humanity in general. Indeed, every piece of technology has an effect on the people within the culture. There is, after all, certain political and social consequences to the progress in technology. In his essay "Do

Did you know that 25.3% of people encounter at least one form of internet censorship while using the internet and the number of people that are affected by internet censorship on any given day is 1.72 billion? (“32 Amazing Internet Censorship Statistics”).This is because of the censorship problems here in America. Censorship is defined as the act of “examining books, movies, letters, etc., and removing things that are considered to be offensive, immoral, harmful to society, etc,” according to Merriam-Webster Dictionary. However, censorship has now evolved to not only protecting, but blocking the flow of ideas. Censorship also gives companies power to fire workers for stating their opinion. Our first amendment gives us the freedom of speech. Is censorship taking that away?

  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.

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

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.