Should the Internet be Censored? 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

Their system of filtering and censorship is acknowledged as the most advanced and effective in the world. The Chinese internet system includes about thirty-thousand censors, as well as having web browsers, such as Google and Yahoo, censor their results.10 For an average citizen to publish their opinions without either an elite free speech patron or a willing government publishing house, the safest method is to publicize their thoughts through an internet bulletin board system run by the Chinese government.11 However, these electronic bulletin boards are required by the law to be licensed, the posts monitored constantly, and any posts which are found to be “inappropriate” are removed. Any forums that are free from government censorship are forbidden, since the Chinese authorities refuse to recognize the rights of the citizens to publish their uncensored opinions. Furthermore, if debates over political or other issues begin to take a life of their own, they are commonly silenced by Chinese authorities.12 The Chinese authorities only permit these monitored bulletin boards both for their own benefit and because they recognize that there must be outlets for the average person to express their dissatisfaction with the government.13 Allowing the citizens to speak their mind functions to lessen the political tension, by acting as a release for their discontentment. These boards also serve as an excuse to deflect criticism by other countries, who complain that people in China do not enjoy freedom of expression. Additionally, they allow government authorities to monitor the mood of their people and to find weaknesses, both in the government and in their support. Finally, the bulletin boards allow government authorities to track those who express discontent, keeping their expressions visible, so the authorities can trace these

Susan Jacoby's essay represents her unique image as a “First Amendment Junkie” and what it means for her in society of her times. Her belief that the First Amendment must be carried on at all costs without regarding the content, which in this case she expresses particularly in pornography. Jacoby states that allowing censorship of pornography could open up the possibilities of censoring other things if so, what could be those other things? Could we agree with her? Had we censored pornography back in the 70's would we as women be where we are now? After analyzing Jacoby's article, She does not excuse or deny that pornography can be or is vulgar,

The article advances its ideas by explaining each individual aspect of the censorship touching upon the groups and methods used to censor, the exact restrictions in each category, and the effect of the suppression on the citizens. Beina provides details about both sides of the restrictions, giving accounts from both the government and civilian side in order to give comprehensive coverage about the true situation in China. The Golden Shield Project also known as “The Great Firewall,” is the Chinese government’s way of placing immense internet restrictions on its citizens. The firewall applies methods such as keyword filtering, deep packet inspection, and blunt website blockage to ensure that western ideas do not make it to the minds of its citizens. This is comparable to the Fahrenheit 451 society where literal fire is used to block these ideas. In both societies the goals are the same; prevent values that are considered unideal from reaching its citizens. The similarities between these two societies continue into the ways that they restrict press. The CFR (Council on Foreign Relations) states, “the [Chinese] government employs a

Censorship in China has gained much attention recently because of the conflict between Google and the Chinese government’s self-censorship policies. In fact, censorship has been practiced since ancient China and the intensity only increases by the years. Nowadays, the most notable measure of censorship is being done on the Internet. More and more restrictions have been put into actions by the Chinese government, which make the life of Chinese Internet users, the Chinese netizens, very inconvenient. With the intensity of censorship increasing and the censoring technology improving, Internet censorship has mainly negative effects on Chinese society.

    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?

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.

Within the United States, the first amendment, freedom of speech includes the cyber-web. However, the government may try to examine personal information to protect its citizens from planned terroristic activities. Even so, these terrorists are allowed to say whatever they want, but it does not mean it will be ignored and not taken as a literal threat by the government. Throughout other parts the world, however, countries rely on communicating through means of the internet as ways to spread propaganda. In countries like China specifically, their government censors its citizens to prevent the spreading of propaganda or other radicalism. However, due to the fact that China’s strategy is so

In the United States, every child, teenager and adult uses Wikipedia, YouTube and Facebook, among numerous other sites, regularly. The internet is open and uncensored for the most part, other than parental controls. In China, most, if not all of those types of sites are or have been blocked. As in, you could not go to them, unless you found some way around the web filters and firewalls the Chinese government runs in their country. While China defends their practice of internet censorship, based on “protecting” the people, heavy internet censorship is a block to free speech and impedes economic and social development in the 21st century.

My research project explored the extent of internet censorship and its necessity to China as a form of societal protection. It discussed the advantages, disadvantages and impacts of censorship on Chinese society. As I researched the topic, I determined that censoring parts of the internet was more than just about protecting the young Chinese children from online predators and distressing content. My initial intention was to highlight the wrongfulness of widespread censorship however, as I researched, I was able to understand that censoring parts of the internet improved the Chinese economy, prevented cybercrimes from occurring while concurrently offering online safety. I discovered this by analysing several different websites, YouTube videos and conducting two interviews with people with expertise in the Chinese internet. My outcome, presented in the form of a feature article, explained that censoring parts of the internet benefits society more than it harms.

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.

In recent years, pornography has established itself as perhaps the most controversial topic arising out of the use of the Internet. The easy availability of this type of sexually explicit material has caused a panic among government officials, family groups, religious groups and law enforcement bodies and this panic has been perpetuated in the media.

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.