The Internet should be monitored by the Government
The internet is a network of computer networks of global scope, linked by an array of networking technologies ranging from wireless, electrical and optical networking technologies. The internet is so far the biggest source of information in almost about anything. It gives both objective and subjective views on any public or common issue, one can possibly think of. It is also one of the greatest means of communication, especially in the formal world. It has been a source of every kind of advice with a number of websites being numerous and also a marketing platform for so many things. At a broad spectrum for a layman of 21st century internet serves as a new dimension to his life. A cyber life, where he, his community, and even mega groupings and social networks can connect, florish, have friends, enemies, and also do a number of another social tasks of his life. This is something mankind in the early 20th century could only fantasize about.
In principle agreement to the norms and ways of human living since old days, comprising of governance, control, regulations and laws. The cyber life of humans also is under a persistent persuit by organizations and governments that control other walks of life within communities and nations to be controlled and governed. However this spring’s up a debate is to whether the basic sense of freedom that triggered the social networking boom if checked and regulated would hurt the primary spirit of cyber freedom or like other disciplines of human life this also needs If said debate of internet monitoring is moved ahead, those who agree to the notion that internet; like any other social aspect of human life needs to be monitored and governed, lay down their prime argument based on the requirement of social safety i.e. to make the world a safeplace to live, for folks of all walks of life and of all ages. They link the desire for a safe living with the requirement of monitoring. This monitoring is to be done in layers starting from the monitoring of adults to check the minors from exposure of un-desired content. Followed by; monitoring of security services (police) to secure cyber business, e-governance, and commercial entities on the internet. The top of the umbrella is made of monitoring requirement for the governments (NSA, FBI etc) to keep a check on the internet for protection from mega criminal offences to protection of issues of national security. Personally said demand for monitoring to assure better security does seem realistic and stands up as a need of the hour.
In contrast to the above set of arguments, a number of people oppose said idea of internet monitoring based on the feeling of privacy invasion. When the government says we need to monitor you to make the society a safe place to live, than what is the level of monitoring desired. Do they need to monitor my personal profile and contact authenticity when I make an appearance on twitter or facebook? Do they need to go through all my family and social pictures and communication with my friends and family? Do they need to persistently monitor messenger services enabled with IP tracking on DSL/ WIFI and GSM networks, this leads then to persistently track my location and wareabouts. Through a users internet connection they can back track and tap with the webcam of his laptop on its default port and put it on! Thus invading his home privacy any extend. In recent years years a number of cases of cyber paparazzi have evolved over time, leading to a persistant feeling of mis-trust to the government laws of monitoring. In the words of a lay-man they say that they need to monitor us, then they would monitor those who monitor us, then they would monitor the monitors of the monitor. So where does it all end. What is the end vortex of this pyyramid of monitoring. The friends of internet monitoring argument play with the famous notion that internet is the biggest resource of knowledge and thus it has enabled all rich and poor to education and information, for which around 3 decades ago people were dependent on libraries, news papers, or even personal human company. However the foe to the argument state that what internet has factually achieved is that it has flooded the world with information not knowledge! Millions of users each day wakeup and scroll over there personal profiles alone on facebook, twitter or orkut, to show them what they desire to view. They see the news they are interested in and the facts that suit there mood and requirement. The diversity of information that pops up in front of view varies extravagantly, based on your region of search that is identified by your IP number, your common interests that are sorted by the cookies gathered in the history of your search engine and meta tagging of info that is arguably the one they want you to see and know. Another leap to the line of facts is that how many people among us actually strive to authenticate said information without acknowledging it. Similar facts have been shown in numerous movies and tv series as well.
To conclude the above debate, it is acknowledged that in similarity to any social aspect of human life, there is a dire need of laws and regulations that need to be set.Moreover for the successful application of said regulations a system of efficient monitoring is surely required. As no rules are complied with if left unchecked. However said monitoring system has to be made baring in mind the moral and ethical values of the society in specific. As every slip of tongue, or act of criminality initiats form sense of deviation from morality.
Get access to
Guarantee No Hidden