People need to understand the dangers of freely placing large amounts of personal information on the internet through web sites such as Facebook, which basically gives out most of a person’s information on one site alone. What most people do not understand is that, once information is placed on the web it will virtually exist forever; there will always be a way that the government will be able to track this information. People need to understand the ways that they can better protect their personal information. Several vulnerabilities come with using online sites, understanding that fact and learning how to protect pe... ... middle of paper ... ...f ever necessary. Today many people are not aware of the online dangers that exist, people placing out numerous amounts of personal information to various sites, needs to become an area of interest, so that corrections to this mindset can be enforced.
On the surface this doesn’t seem like it would pertain to information systems, but think again. Everything we do on the Internet has the risk of being watched or observed. It may be from other companies or scary enough the government. This issue is fast becoming the number one concern from users of the web. How can these people keep tabs on me?
The technological advancements made within the last decades have undoubtedly changed the way today’s society operates as a whole. People are more dependent on computers and the internet than they have ever been, so their prevalence in general life has been greatly inflated. Such an important and prominent tool could never go unregulated by governmental authority, however. Government censorship of the internet has been an extremely controversial issue, even from the point where “net neutrality” was first discussed. Governments generally argue for the use of censorship for the purpose of discouraging and disallowing the access to inappropriate material and other harmful practices, but further extend their censorship’s reach to affect many other facets of the internet; including politically sensitive material and discussions.
Monitoring the Internet has been a controversial issue regarding who should have access to the Internet, what is being put up, and what is being blocked. Some believe the Internet is a human right, while others believe it is a privilege and should be monitored by the government and businesses for their employees. There are both benefits as wells as negatives regarding whether the Internet should be monitored at all, if so, who monitors the internet and what rules are implemented. The Internet has allowed people to express ideas and communicate with each other around the world. Those that are against the government’s interference and monitoring of the Internet believe that they are entitled to privacy and the freedom of self-expression.
As technology has developed and become essential to our society, many government commissioners dread social media and its authority and power in our society – but does this give them the authority to monitor online content? This means that the government would have access to personal and confidential information that the public display on the internet. Tom Baker, a liberal democratic MP, stated that social networking sites have replied that social networking sites consist of hypersensitive exclusive details about its users and Mr. Baker troubled that the data could possibly be exposed from all government-controlled database. Another newspaper, The Independent, cited him stating related strategy to keep phone and email files threatened to be the "most expensive snooper's charter in history". "It is deeply worrying that they now intend to monitor social networking sites which contain very sensitive data like sexual orientation, religious beliefs and political views," Mr. Bake... ... middle of paper ... ...as people should have their privacy when surfing the internet.
The Internet is a vast network of computers, both public and private, which spans the globe. Recently, there has been a movement by governments worldwide, and the United States government in particular, to remove content deemed inappropriate from the Internet. However, numerous factors such as: the abundance of less restrictive alternatives, the impossibility of applying American law and community standards to an international communications medium, the active choice required to access the Internet's resources, the violation of our constitutional rights which it entails, and the fact that it is the parent's and not the government's responsibility to protect children contradict this rash and poorly thought out idea. While censorship is intolerable in all its forms, it is especially odious, inappropriate, and unworkable when applied to the Internet, an international medium of free speech, information, and communication. The Internet began as a link between major universities and government computer centers to facilitate the sharing of information and allow certain universities to utilize the few existing supercomputing centers.
With every clock of the mouse on a hyperlink, or an addition to the mailing list, someone out there might be gathering information about us. This raises the seriousness of privacy of our information on the Internet. In recent times we might consider that the right for privacy in one of our major achievements in our society. Unfortunately the same does not apply for the Internet. The Internet once considered a place for free information exchange and sharing, has the potential has becoming the biggest threat to its users.
The dependance on the internet has become of great importance in today's world, and so imposing regulations and limits to it creates a controversial polemic worldwide. Since the Digital Copyright Millennium Act, internet became more restricted. However, this wasn't so much of a problem because, firstly the internet usage wasn't as common as nowadays, and secondly because the new internet regulations are far more restrictive if not totally limiting to the freedom of the internet. SOPA and PIPA are copyright legislations that fight against online piracy by blocking access to websites judged as insecure, and seek court orders against websites "enabling or facilitating piracy" (BBC, 2012:1). It is war between individuals fighting for global freedom and authorities striving for global security against crimes of copyright infringement.
The issue of free speech on the Internet has been a topic of discussion around the world within the past years. It is a unique communication medium and is powerful than the traditional media. Because the Internet can not be compared equally to other mediums of communication, it deserves the utmost freedom of speech protection from the government. The restriction of speech on the Internet takes away from individual's rights and freedom from experiencing the Internet's benefits and uses. Information found on the Internet is endless and boundless and this poses the question, "should the government be allowed to regulate the information and content being transmitted or posted online?"
However, because of the Constitution, American government is finding it rather difficult to set up a ‘gatekeeping’ system, which will restrict content available within the United States. To allow the government to do this would completely defeat the purpose of such ... ... middle of paper ... ...of thought was easily manipulated by the corporate/government cooperative that ran (and still runs) traditional ‘old’ media in the United States. The versatility and multidirectional communication makes the Internet one of the most exciting mediums because content can be very diversified and users are not only able to receive messages, but they are able to respond as well. The Internet is an interactive medium with potential to expand even farther than it already has. The Internet defies the controlled, one-way broadcast model of information distribution and empowers the user with the capability to talk back to the sender.