Internet Censorship- Against 95 Essay Example

form of censorship, it is imperative to address several essential questions.

One of the most important questions that has been answered is the Internet's identity: "What is the Internet's identity?"

The Internet's representation of media type remains undetermined.

Is the "Net" a broadcast system?

subject to regulation, or a communications system like phone and mail systems, which

Jones (18) emphasizes that certain elements are beyond the scope of legal regulation, while underscoring the importance of values and morals.

When it comes to parenting, there is frequently speculation regarding the individuals who should bear responsibility for specific matters.

According to both American citizens and individuals from other countries, it is the parents who are accountable for raising and educating children, not the government.

Politicians may hesitate to assume this responsibility due to the possibility of exploitation.

There are certain situations where some people exploit the power of Internet censorship to their advantage.

Many individuals have united to support "community standards." However, it is important to emphasize that these individuals

Currently, no medium has implemented standards.

Robischon (57) argues that, with the exception of television, all other forms of media are effective.

A heated debate has been sparked by the Simon Wiesenthal Center's submission of a list of Internet sites.

According to Jones (18), negative portrayals exist for Latinos, Jews, Gays, and African Americans.

Despite potentially disagreeable ideas, society still recognizes the significance of upholding freedom of speech.

As per the Constitution, a website like this would not lure a child who possesses "appropriate" values.

The primary responsibility lies with individuals, rather than computers that only transmit the information.

The lack of comprehension regarding the Internet contributes to these situations.

Many senators in the U.S. Congress have recognized and expressed their opposition to the increase.

Internet advocates

face challenges due to the limited understanding of some individuals about the internet, as stated by Yang (73).

We aim to educate Congress by arranging demonstrations on the Senate floor.

Another question that needs answering is if the current obscenity laws can be employed

Before any action can be taken, numerous questions must be answered regarding the Internet and its capabilities.

There are ways to address these questions.

Due to its vast size, it is not feasible to censor the Internet.

Chat groups and newsgroups are both types of bulletin boards that enable individuals to communicate with each other.

People have the ability to publish messages that can be accessed globally.

Regulating the average number of chats, which is 10,000, proves to be impossible.

James, a 26-year-old, states that each Internet service provider has multiple available groups.

Controlling and regulating the daily messages sent through any existing method is widely considered to be impossible.

The term "indecent" lacks a precise definition, causing confusion and ambiguity.

Complete elimination is currently the only option for screening "indecency" due to limitations in current technology.

Various values groups engage in legitimate speech, such as discussions about AIDS.

Contrary to complaints, it is not true that inappropriate content can be easily accessed by children.

The government's expert witness, who usually supports the case, also agrees.

Censorship ensures that the likelihood of coming across inappropriate content is very low.

(Robischon, 57). The primary resistance against regulation originates from the

According to the Constitution, citizens are granted the rights of free speech and freedom of the press.

Net neutrality advocates argue that the Internet should follow the same principle of equal treatment.

Advocates for free speech view the Internet as the ultimate platform for unrestricted expression.

Preserving history is important, as emphasized by

Robischon (56) in the early stages.

There are currently several obstacles that hinder the enforcement of censorship.

Advocates for freedom of speech commonly assert that the Internet is a valuable tool to exercise this right efficiently.

The court system has played a crucial role in issuing multiple significant rulings.

decisions.

The regulation of the internet began with the implementation of the Communications Decency Act.

Internet users quickly expressed their opposition to The Act, which had the backing of the Justice Department.

Initially, advocates for freedom of speech promptly deemed the Act to be unconstitutional.

The Act suffered a significant setback on June 11, 1996 when a Philadelphia court invalidated it.

Yang, a 72-year-old individual, deemed the Act to be unconstitutional. Shortly afterward, another ruling with a similar result was issued.

Both the Act and the ruling in Shea v. Reno were issued in Manhattan in July of that year.

The court declared the Act to be ineffective because of its broad scope and subsequently invalidated it.

According to Reid (11), the court rulings emphasized the significance of teachers dealing with cases concerning indecency.

Parents should be regarded as significant individuals, and the government should refrain from interfering with them.

Two important cases, namely "The Times v. Sullivan" and "The New York Times v. United States", have significantly contributed to the defense of first amendment rights.

"Sullivan of cyberspace" refers to a decision made in 1964 which protected the rights of individuals on the internet.

According to Robischon (56), journalists have a significant impact.

Operators of websites are unable to control the Internet due to the lack of current regulation.

Efforts have been made to please supporters of regulation. Almost all

Warning pages are now utilized by indecent and "spicy" sites to advise the user

about the necessity of their compliance.

Access to that site requires individuals to be at least 18 years old. It is common for multiple sites to have similar age restrictions.

Despite the fact that alternative links to more user-friendly pages are provided (Robischon, 57), this does not

While the website does not prevent access, it does show a warning message, which has sparked debate about its effectiveness.

Multiple filters make these pages currently lacking value, especially for teenagers.

Programs are available to parents that offer varying degrees of access for each child.

The major online services, such as America Online, CompuServe, Prodigy, and The

Microsoft Network and other platforms are providing parents with the ability to monitor and manage the actions of specific users on their platforms.

Blocked sites are often classified as restrictions by many programs.

While it is not allowed to delete items from this list using the program, you are permitted to add more content to the list.

The words used in emails and newsgroup messages are under scrutiny.

When programmed by the parent, the are able to contain the child's name, address, and/or telephone.

These programs possess the capability to limit access to particular newsgroups, forbid usage of specific newsgroups, and assign a priority number.

Parents have the ability to protect their children without relying on government assistance by implementing effective measures.

interference.

The future of the Internet will be a topic of discussion as we transition into

During the next millennia, the process will persist until a satisfactory solution is found. Currently, this is the situation:

Additional research and further progress by individuals are needed as the solution is currently not visible.

Without violating constitutional rights, it is impossible to restrict access to the Internet with expertise.

guarantees.

Bibliography

Curtis,

S. "Policing Cyberspace." [Programs to block out pornography.]

The article "Maclean's" was published on February 19, 1996 and can be found on pages 56-7.

Dodd, J. "Who owns the Information?" PC Novice, May 1996, pp. 73-4.

Frankel, M. "Intellectual Popcorn for the Net." The New York Times Magazine, 21 April 1996, pp. 26.

The New York Times Magazine published an article titled "This is Sex?" by J. Gleick on June 11, 1995. The article can be found on page 26.

"Grappling with the Internet." World Press Review, June 1996, pp. 14-5.

Gray, V.L. "Policing the Net." Black Enterprise, Dec. 1996, pp. 26.

Jones, M. "Censorship in Cyberspace." Home Office Computing, November 1994, pages 18.

Reid, C. "Supreme Court to Review" Net anti-smut statute. Publishers Weekly, 16 Dec. 1996, pp. 11.

The article titled "Software Filters: How Well Do They Work?" by Robischon, N was published in Time on June 24, 1996, on page 57.The article "Justice is Blind, but Net-Savvy" by Yang, C. was published in Business Week on July 1, 1996 (pp. 72+).

As the twentieth century comes to a close, a new medium and tool has emerged as the

The tool is the future of communications, business, news, education, and entertainment.

The internet is a global network of computers interconnected through phone lines.

Despite its early development, the internet is widely acknowledged for its potential as a medium.

As businesses and individuals increasingly depend on the internet for connectivity, its drawbacks should not be overlooked.

Many consider the content to be inappropriate, adult, and/or vulgar and it is abundant with information.

There is a growing concern among society and politicians regarding the impact on children and teenagers.

There has been a worldwide demand to enforce limitations in order to guarantee

equal access to this content for all individuals.

Concerns have arisen regarding online surveillance

along with

and the control of internet content

.
This demonstration has received varied responses. Individuals who Various organizations support the limitation of the Internet similar to their support for the Constitution.

Advocates for television regulation in the United States support the current regulatory framework.

The main emphasis is on values and foreign governments, particularly the latter.

does not desire for the citizens to be exposed to novel concepts, as this could potentially lead to dissatisfaction

One debate is whether the Internet should and can be censored, given the potential for both benefits and unrest in some cases.

Despite the strong arguments from both perspectives, technology has a significant impact on different aspects of the modern world.

sides, by examining evidence, it can be determined that there isn't a practical way to regulate

Currently, the Internet is used in the United States.

Before discussing any form of censorship, it is essential to tackle certain critical questions.

Determining the identity of the Internet is the primary concern that requires attention.

The Internet has not yet determined the type of media it represents.

The prompt categorization of the "Net" as a broadcasting system is a crucial decision that needs to be taken.

Subject to regulation, a communications system, such as phone and mail systems,

Furthermore, it is argued that values and morals cannot be regulated legally (Jones, 18).

There is a widespread belief in sharing the responsibility between parents, which leads many people to question who should bear it.

It is the duty of both American citizens and individuals from other countries to

raise and educate children, rather than relying on the government.

There are individuals who have a lack of trust in politicians and fear that they may misuse their authority when entrusted with such a role.

Advocates of Internet restriction exploit their power in specific scenarios.

Many individuals are working together and supporting "community standards." It is important to acknowledge that these people are united in their purpose.

Currently, there are no mediums that have implemented any standards.

According to Robischon (57), television is the only exception in terms of its effectiveness as a source.

There has been a fierce debate surrounding the submission of a list of Internet sites by the Simon Wiesenthal Center.

According to Jones (18), there are negative depictions of Latinos, Jews, Gays, and African Americans.

Even though these ideas may be repulsive to some, the right to free speech is still safeguarded.

The child with "proper" values would not be attracted to this kind of website due to the Constitution.

The responsibility for what is happening in the world lies with people, not the computers that merely relay the information.

For situations such as this, lack of understanding of the Internet is also a reason.

Opposition has increased, especially in the U.S. Congress. The majority of senators have acknowledged this fact.

According to Yang (73), internet proponents are concerned about the fact that there are people who are net-illiterate.

Our goal is to educate Congress by conducting demonstrations on the Senate floor.

Another question that needs to be addressed is if the existing obscenity laws can be utilized.

to the Internet. Before any action can be taken, these questions and numerous others need to be addressed.

These questions need to be answered.

Another reason the Internet is immune

to censorship is its immense size. The Internet

Within this platform, you can find chat groups and newsgroups that function as bulletin boards where individuals can communicate.

"Post" messages can be read globally by anyone.

There are too many chat platforms to regulate, making it impossible. On average, there are around 10,000 chat platforms.

There are groups available on each Internet service provider, according to James, aged 26. The number of groups is significant.

It would be impossible to control and regulate the messages sent each day by any current means.

The meaning of the term "indecent" has not yet been clearly defined. Therefore, the

tag signifies this lack of clarity.

There is no technological way feasible to screen for "indecency" without removing it.

Legitimate speech, including discussions about AIDS, is conducted by numerous values groups.

Concerns were raised about the ease with which children can come across inappropriate content; however, this is not always the case.

The case is supported by a government expert witness, who generally favors it.

According to the expert on internet censorship, the likelihood of stumbling upon inappropriate material is low.

(Robischon, 57) The main counterargument against regulation comes from the

According to the Constitution, citizens have the freedom of speech and press.

Supporters argue that this principle should be extended to the online realm as well.

The Internet is viewed as the greatest embodiment of free speech by advocates of this concept.

According to Robischon (56), there are those who value history and advocate for its protection from the beginning stages.

Currently, there appear to be numerous hurdles preventing the implementation of censorship.

Proponents of freedom of speech generally advocate for the effective use of the Internet to uphold this right.

The court system has provided

significant assistance by issuing numerous essential judgments.

Decisions.

The introduction of the Communications Decency Act marked the initial effort to establish regulations in relation to online communication.

Internet. The Act faced opposition soon after it was supported by the Justice Department.

Immediately, advocates for freedom of speech voiced their opposition to the Act, claiming it violated the constitution. The initial reactions were strong and determined.

On June 11, 1996, the Act suffered a significant setback as a Philadelphia court invalidated it.

Yang (72) declared the Act as unconstitutional. Soon after, a similar ruling was made.

Manhattan was the place where the Act was handed down. In July of that year, the Act was part of the Shea v. Reno case.

Similarly, the court also struck down the Act, criticizing it as being "Too broad to be effective".

(Reid, 11). According to court rulings, it was determined that teachers were the most appropriate individuals to address issues of indecency.

Some people believe that parents have the ultimate responsibility for their children and that the government should not meddle in their affairs. These beliefs were considered significant.

The Times v. Sullivan and the Texas v. Johnson cases are both significant examples in the battle for first amendment rights.

Referring to a ruling in 1964 that protected the rights of Sullivan in cyberspace.

According to Robischon, journalists (56).

Currently, there are no regulations in place for the Internet. However, website operators have control over their own sites.

Efforts have been made to please supporters of regulation. Almost all measures have been taken.

Some websites that are indecent or contain explicit content now display warning pages. These pages inform the user that they must proceed with caution.

To access that site, you must be

over 18. It is common for many sites to have multiple age restrictions, and most even require it.

Robischon (57) suggests offering alternative links to more user-friendly pages. Nonetheless, this doesn't

Instead of fully blocking a person from entering the site, it only provides a warning. Whether this is effective is a subject of debate.

Currently, these pages are not beneficial, particularly for teenage users due to the presence of numerous filters.

There are programs available that allow parents to assign varying access levels to each child.

The four major online services - America Online, CompuServe, Prodigy, and The

Microsoft Network) are implementing this strategy by giving parents the ability to control the activities of individual users.

These programs restrict the level of access and typically include a list of sites that are not allowed to be accessed.

When the program is utilized, it is not possible to delete this list. However, one can only make additions to it. Disallowing removal is also a characteristic of this program.

The inclusion of specific words in email and newsgroup messages is being analyzed.

Programmed by the parent, the content of the can include the child's name, address, and/or telephone.

These programs have the ability to limit access to newsgroups based on the user's number. Additionally, they can also deny access to specific newsgroups.

A precise illustration of how parents can protect their children without the involvement of the government.

interference.

The future of the Internet will be a subject of debate as we move forward.

The ongoing pursuit for an adequate means will persist into the next millennia, and currently, it is still ongoing.

The solution remains elusive, with no sign of it appearing.

It is necessary to conduct more research and for people to progress further.

Restricting the Internet through censorship is not possible without violating constitutional rights.

guarantees.

Bibliography

Curtis, S. "Policing Cyberspace." [Programs designed to prevent the access of pornography.]

Maclean's, 19 Feb. 1996, pp. 56-7.

Dodd, J. "Who owns the Information?" PC Novice, May 1996, pp. 73-4.

Frankel, M. "Intellectual Popcorn for the Net." The New York Times Magazine, 21 April 1996, pp. 26.

Gleick, J. "This is Sex?" The New York Times Magazine, 11 June 1995, pp. 26.

"Grappling with the Internet." World Press Review, June 1996, pp. 14-5.

Gray, V.L. "Policing the Net." Black Enterprise, Dec. 1996, pp. 26.

Jones, M. "Censorship in Cyberspace." Home Office Computing, Nov. 1994, pp. 18.

Reid, C. "Supreme Court to Review" Net anti-smut statute. Publishers Weekly, 16 Dec. 1996, pp. 11.

Robischon, N. "Software Filters: How Well Do They Work?" Time, 24 June 1996, pp. 57.

Yang, C. "Justice is Blind, but Net-Savvy." Business Week, 1 July 1996, pp. 72+.