Summary Of The Controversy Of Internet Censorship

Internet censorship refers to the suppression and control of what people can access, publish, or view on the cyberspace (Reynolds, 2014). It may be done by regimes or private firms at the command of the government. It can be a government’s initiative is or carried out by regulators. Organizations and individuals may practice self-censorship for religious, business or moral reasons to comply with societal norms, out of fear of consequences such as legal impact, or owing to intimidation. The degree of cyberspace censorship differs on a nation-to-nations basis. Most democratic nations have moderate cyberspace censorship. Other nations go as far as to restrict the information accessibility; they suppress discussion among citizens and limit news. Internet censorship can also occur in anticipation of or in response to events like protests, riots or elections. An ideal example is the increased level of censorship owing to the Arab Spring events. Other censorship areas include defamation, copyrights, obscene material and harassment.

In the recent year the debate over one’s Right to Privacy has been a very controversial topic. Many individuals argue that National Security triumphs the Right to Privacy, though many others also argue that many national policies such as “Stop and Frisk” and the Patriot Act are actually unconstitutional and unnecessary to protect the country.

"Censoring the internet would take away individual or group rights. If the internet would be censored the government would band information online that is thought to be objectionable or dangerous. The remove of ideas that are available to society online would prejudge the material for everyone and take away the option of making one’s own opinions on given topics. This removal of information would take away the right to fear all sides of every issue and to make individualized judgments on those issues. These rights are protected under the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights in the United States Constitution. The First Amendment was passed by Congress on September 25, 1789 and it states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment

The internet is a free tool that allows everyone extraordinary opportunities to express their thoughts or beliefs. Being able to express their opinion to a worldwide audience, has a growing number of audience participating in the movement. This has many people worried about the kind of speech that is used by people who seized the opportunity. Though many people use the internet to enhance their learning or to communicate, then there are number of people sending hate speech or sending threats out in the open web with nothing to worry about. Therefore, I believe the content on the internet should be regulated because the internet holds a lot of power and that power could potentially be abused.

As a professional Internet publisher and avid user of the Internet, I have become concerned with laws like the Communications Decency Act of 1996 (CDA) that censor free speech on the Internet. By approving the CDA, Congress has established a precedent which condones censorship regulations for the Internet similar to those that exist for traditional broadcast media. Treating the Internet like broadcast media is a grave mistake because the Internet is unlike any information medium that has been created.

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.

With Social Media being still a relatively young form of media, governments and corporations are still attempting to find a way to bring regulations to the internet. Many times, this comes in the form of Internet Censorship. According to IPLocation, internet censorship is when a government institution or organization restricts what is seen on the internet. Wikipedia elaborates on this, stating that many times websites will self-censor. There are several reasons that this practice may take place: to uphold societal norms, to lessen hate speech, to protect from the exploitation of children, to promote a set of religious beliefs, etc. However, this obviously raises ethical questions regarding censorship, and while the government or corporate institutions may argue that these are bans with good intentions, there is no doubt that it can be a detriment as well.

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.

The Internet was first used in the 90s and became exponentially important to our life which has uncountable benefits by connecting the world, increasing worldwide security, providing an easy access to the knowledge. While the exploration of the technology can use for several wonderful purposes, it is also a double-edged sword. Today, by searching word on google, a 6-year-old kid can easily access a legal pornography website without any troubles. This caused the controversial argument that whether or not the Internet should be censored for violent and sexual content? Even though the violent and sexual content on the Internet can bring some benefits for the adults, it should have a limit access to protect minors from the disadvantages of human sexual corruption, sexual harassment, and especially child pornography. If this idea was used all around the world, it will open a fresh future for children and a big improvement for the society.

In the modern society issues of discrimination, inequality, and violation of human rights often arise. Pakistan and the United States are both an example of this act. For instance, many countries censor the internet, but few of the many countries tell their intentions as explicitly as Pakistan. Furthermore, President Trump may reshape DACA, the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival Program, which gave young people who had come to the United States illegally as kids a chance to work and study in the U.S. without the fear of deportation. Similarly, President Donald Trump and former president Imran Khan had a similar political slogan for their campaign. For example, Trump's campaign slogan was he will make "America Great Again" and Khan's slogan was that he would "Naya Pakistan" which means build the entire country anew. As a result, both want to attract the majority of the population by addressing the popular sentiment. Both the United States and Pakistan are making their countrys and citizens isolated; by Trump building the border wall and Khan and the government censoring the internet, destroying knowledge and opportunities.

Incomprehensive is the only accurate way of describing the depth of the world wide web. Billions of resources on anything are now just minute away for most North Americans. By having an open source database such as the internet, bad material, like pornography, is bound to come up leading some to want national censorship. However, Internet censorship should not be put into effect. The internet has proven to be the most user friendly, creative space and should not be handicapped in any way.

With the rise of the Internet, it has given everyone opportunities to stay better connected in the world today and to be entertained. This has led to the creation of sites like Facebook, Youtube, Twitter, Reddit, Google, and so many more. A lot of big companies have implemented the internet, making them more successful and giving them a wider reach for business. With all this freedom, however, this leads to inappropriate content being on the internet as well. There is an abundance of violent and sexual content on the internet just like with older media, like movies and music. The difference is that this unsuitable content is more accessible than before the invention of the internet. This has caused discussion about whether or not the internet should be censored, and if so, to what extent. While it is understandable why people do not want inappropriate content around them in a more accessible way, allowing the bad content lets the good content be just as accessible as well. The Internet should not be censored for violent and sexual content because this silences voices that have the right to be heard and slows creativity and originality in art and entertainment. Additionally, silencing freedom of speech takes voices away from the people and gives it to the richest and powerful.

There were 3,885,567,619 estimated internet users as of June 30, 2017. According to that statistic, that’s nearly half the world population. One would think that this unbridled access to information, news, communication and community would increase development. However, many countries, and specifically, regions, lack regular, un-monitored access to the Internet. Deibert writes that there are three overarching reasons for states to participate in filtering and censoring: advancing security, promoting politics and maintaining social norms. A few of the topics most commonly targeted by internet blocking are foreign relations, sexual and LGBT content, opposing interest sites and “controversial history” (Deibert, 2008). Meanwhile, some states choose to block certain websites as a defense mechanism, often to prevent cultural or political spillover, like in the case of China and North Korea. However, the side effects of net neutrality and Internet censorship play into uneven global development. Furthermore, among developed societies, censorship “hampers economic and social development, elevating a select number of voices and agendas that typically belong to the wealthy or elite (Deibert, 2008).” This is a multifaceted issue with many control layers and gatekeepers, typically stemming from government agencies and Internet Service Providers (ISPs) like Verizon or China Telecom.

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.