Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Arguments for internet censorship
Arguments against internet censorship
Arguments for internet censorship
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Arguments for internet censorship
The Communication Decency Act: The Fight For Freedom of Speech on the Internet
The Communication Decency Act is a bill which has insulted our right as
American citizens. It a bill which SHOULD not pass. I'll share with you how
Internet users are reacting to this bill, and why they say it is unconstitutional. Some individuals disagree with one part of the bill. According to http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ query/z?c104:s.652.enr:, which has the
Communications Decency Act on-line for public viewing,: "Whoever uses an
Internet service to send to a person or persons under 18 years of age......any comment, request, suggestion, proposal, image,........or anything offensive as measured by contemporary community standards, sexual or excretory activities or organs.....shall be fined $250,000 if the person(s) is/are under 18....... imprisoned not more than two years.......or both."
The wording of that section seems sensible. However, if this one little paragraph is approved, many sites such as the: Venus de Milo site located at: http://www.paris.org/Musees/Louvre/Treasures/gifs/venusdemilo.gif; the Sistine
Chapel at: http://www.oir.ucf.edu/wm/paint/auth/michelangelo/michelangelo.creation and
Michelangelo's David @ http://fileroom.aaup.uic.edu/FileRoom/images/image201.gif could not be accessed and used by anybody under the age of 18. These works of art and many other museum pictures would not be available. The bill says these sites show indecent pictures.
The next part of the CDA has everybody in a big legal fit. We, concerned
Internet users, took the writers of this bill to court, and we won.
This part of the bill states: "Whoever....makes, creates, or solicits...........any comment, request, suggestion, proposal, image, or other communication which is obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, or indecent.......with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass another person......by means of an
Internet page..........shall be fined $250,000 under title 18......imprisoned not more than two years....or both......"
The writer of that paragraph of the bill forgot something. It violates the constitution. The First Amendment states: "Congress shall make no law....prohibiting or abridging the freedom of speech......the right of the people peaceably to assemble.....and to petition the Government.............."
This bill does exactly that. It says we cannot express our feelings cleanly. I understand that what may be of interest to me, may be offensive to others. Many people put up warning signs on their websites stating, "This site may contain offensive material. If you are easily offended you may not want to come here." If the writers of this bill would have listed that as a requirement there would have been no trouble.
Here is the way I look at it. I think that some things should be censored on the Internet. Child pornography, for instance, is already illegal, so it follows that it should also be illegal on the Internet. Besides, psychologically, it damages the children involved.
Something else that should be banned from the Internet are "hacker"
In 1978 a radio station owned by Pacifica Foundation Broadcasting out of New York City was doing a program on contemporary attitudes toward the use of language. This broadcast took place on a mid-afternoon weekday. Immediately before the broadcast the station announced a disclaimer telling listeners that the program would include "sensitive language which might be regarded as offensive to some."(Gunther, 1991) Pacifica believed that this was enough warning to give people who would be offended, but placing a warning in front of something is like placing chocolate cake in front of a fat guy. Humans thirst for the unknown, and at this time, sexual perversion was a big unknown.
...ven law into legislation. If these steps were not taken, we would risk living in a world of oppression and injustice. Many have paid the ultimate price, granting us the opportunity to live in a nation where we pride ourselves upon the freedom we value so dearly. Thus, when reflecting back on our society and the value of living in a democratic environment, it seems rather obvious that the implementation of these Charter sections is a small price to pay for our free and equal culture.
with which one disagrees. It is for precisely this reason that the government should maintain the
Social media is revolutionizing the way we communicate and interact with one another. For better or worse we are connecting in ways that simply did not exist a decade ago, and those connections are presenting schools with increasing number of challenges. School districts shoulder the responsibility for the well-being of today’s students and with the advent of social media, districts are at the center of legal issues concerning student’s freedom of speech and a school’s responsibility to provide an appropriate learning environment.
place. It should be left up to the users to decide what is broadcast. Most
On December 15, 1791, the first amendment- along with the rest of the Bill of Rights- was passed by congress. Although the amendment allows verbal freedom to the citizens of America, many argue that it also comes with great risks.The possibility of both mental and physical harm to citizens through the practice of free speech should be taken into consideration. Limiting free speech has potentially saved lives by monitoring what a person can or can not say that could cause distress to the public (e.g.- yelling “bomb” on an airplane). Others argue that the limitation of free speech will hinder our progress as a nation, and could potentially lead to our downfall through governmental corruption. In a society where the freedom of speech is a reality, one must question the risks and limits of that right.
From music to television, censorship has played a major role in how the public is exposed to certain material. Now that our world is entering into a new technology era, the Internet is now in the middle of the censorship issue. Internet access is now one of the fastest ways to communicate with others, obtain information on virtually anything, and purchase items without having to leave your home. As more and more people get connected to this cyber superhighway, concern for the content of material has become a big issue. Since so many children are exposed to the Internet, some material should not be accessible with a simple click of a mouse. In order to protect our younger people from being exposed to mature and explicit material over the Internet, these sites should have a warning posted before one can go into the site.
Kobach, Kris W. "The Senate Immigration Bill Rewards Lawbreaking: Why the DREAM Act Is a Nightmare." The Heritage Foundation - Conservative Policy Research and Analysis. Web. 10 Mar. 2010. .
Internet a bad name. There is also information on the Net that could be harmful
...ions, Facing a New Test by Justices.” The New York Times. Arthur Sulzberger Jr., 8 Oct. 2012. Web. 11 Nov. 2013.
What I believe, is that everyone has the right to live his/her life in the manner which suits them and makes them happy providing that they themselves do not in any way influence someone’s else life negatively.
This bill has many points in common with the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, the Smith Act of 1950, the McCarren Act of 1950, and the Executive Order of Feb.19, 1942 that led to War Relocation Authority. Each one of these actions were taken when fear controlled the public and an agenda controlled the people in authority. Thankfully, the American people have the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to bring them back from the edge, and to force those in positions of responsibility to accountability.
As the Internet has become more widely recognized and used by people all over the world, it has brought a new medium in which information can very easily be broadcast to everyone with access to it. In 1995 there was a projected 26 million Internet users, which has grown to almost 300 million today. One major problem with this is that everyone represents different countries and provinces which have different outtakes on certain types of freedom of speech as well as different laws about it. This proposes a new type of law that would need to be written in order to determine whether or not something is illegal on the Internet. A person in one country can express what they want to, but that expression may be illegal in another country and in this situation whose laws are to be followed? What I propose to do accomplish in this paper is to discuss the freedom of speech laws of the United States of America and those of France, China, and Canada. I will examine what about them is similar and what about them is different. The bringing of the Internet has brought many new types of businesses as well as ways in order to communicate with the world, but as with each new endeavor or invention, there needs to be a way in order to govern its use and policies. There must also be ways in order to punish those not following the new laws and policies of use, since that the country that the person is in may allow what they did, but it may not be allowed on the Internet or in a different country. In other words, there is the need for international laws governing the Internet.
should be banned is the cost to society and the financial burden on the families
Freedom of Speech in Cyberspace: Government Restrictions on Content in the United States of America