Internet Censorship - Assignment Example

Internet Censorship The internet is a global medium used for communication as well as in transferring information (McLelland 61). It is ideally a print medium. For these reasons, the internet serves as a significant tool in the daily lives of human beings. As a source of entertainment, information and business, the internet acts as a resource that serves people all over the world. The Internet is easy to access and, therefore, even children are aware of it and use it since it has information on nearly all topics in the world (McLelland 62). However, despite the vast importance of the internet, certain restrictions like censorship have been contemporarily placed. Internet censorship is the manipulation of certain information by the government with an aim of controlling some information that are likely to hurt the feelings of certain communities, or that information that are not intended to reach children. As a result, Internet censorship has become a controversial issue in the present world. In this sense, Internet censorship has attracted scholarly debates on whether internet should be censored or not. The proponents of internet censorship argue that internet exposes minors to obscene, indecent, or pornographic materials (Liang, Bin and Hong Lu 103). They maintain that internet censorship is aimed at stopping individuals, children, from accessing the unsuitable materials. For instance, explicit pornography can be easily accessed on the internet and minors are hence subjected to it whenever they use the internet. In most countries, pornography is illegal to view (Liang, Bin and Hong Lu 104). Since the internet is not a property of any state, nationwide laws cannot be applied, making it hard to ban pornography. However, the opponents of internet censorship maintain that presently, several systems that allow parents to regulate and screen what the children see have been made available (Liang, Bin and Hong Lu 105). These systems include lockout programs and website rating schemes. These internet filters have been made since parents fear that their children may be troubled should they access. They, therefore, restrict individuals from retrieving the indecent materials. The systems enable the parents to control what their children view as per their principles, without government intervention. Although the above two arguments seem to be realistic, it is more logical to argue that despite the belief that the internet is an important source of entertainment and information, some of the information that can be accessed are so deterring. This obscene information is not limited to pornographic materials, but also detailed information on how to make dangerous or deadly explosives (Liang, Bin and Hong Lu 106). It is hence the growing concern about the accessibility of such information that has provoked efforts to censor the internet. Since pornography is a serious issue on the internet, there are other materials that talk about sexual misuse, and ways of avoiding it. Children should know the sites where they are not supposed to open. Similarly, the parent should screen their internet activities in the same manner they would do in other areas. Banning the indecent may not necessarily stop sexual abuse among children. Instead, education would be more vital. Other supporters of internet censorship argue that the process will prevent the pedophiles from accessing and preying on their children via the internet (Xu et al. 13). The opponents maintain that the supporters of internet censorship should consider the fact that these pedophiles exist everywhere. They add that the pedophiles usually pop themselves into the extremely best situations such as churches and schools, where they gain the trust of the children. Stevenson (531), a challenge to internet censorship, asserts that there are undeniably a small percentage of individuals on the internet just like in the society, who are voracious pedophiles. He adds that such people cannot get satisfied and will make use of every opportunity they have to get to the children. He emphasizes the need to educate children rather than censoring internet. Although these two arguments brought forth are to a certain degree useful, they leave us with a puzzling question. The question concerns those that should be responsible for stopping the children from viewing the obscene materials from the internet. The opponent of internet censorship tends to work on the assumption that it is only the parents who have this responsibility. It is important to consider the fact that these children do not always access the materials in the presence of their parents. For instance, these children may get the dirty information in the cyber cafes, without the knowledge of their parents or teachers. In addition, in as much as the internet may be an extremely disturbing medium, it should not be assumed that the children are not aware that some materials on the Internet are meant strictly for the adults. In this scenario, censoring the internet becomes a better option than merely educating the children. This is because through internet censorship and the explicit information would be prevented from reaching the minds of the children, even if they had the intention to access them. Through censorship, the government will be able to cut some elements that are deemed age inappropriate and hence sensitive (Stevenson 533). Therefore, we believe that it would be a commendable move to practice inquiring about the age of the person who intends to visits sites like Facebook, YouTube, and Yahoo, among others in a cyber café. This step will prevent the illicit information from reaching children. Other opponents of internet censorship claim that preventing kids from accessing and hence viewing elicit materials are achievable even without banning these materials from the internet (Xu et al. 14). They believe in censorship of the internet by the children’s parent. According to them, what is needed is just a responsible parent. They maintain that if a parent is willing to give their children access to the internet, the parents should take serious precaution. For instance, the proponents argue that most parents would not allow their children to view the adult sections of a movie store. In most cases, however, these children can get access to these movies. These proponents hence question why the government has to censor the internet if these parents can take responsibility for their children. They proceed to ask whether the government has the right to dictate to the parents the nature of the magazines and books that their children should read, and the television programs as well as motion pictures they should watch while at home (Xu et al. 16). These scholars, therefore, believe that it is the responsibility of the parent to limit their children’s access to the internet. According to them, many options exist, for preventing children from obtaining illicit materials found on the internet. They argue that, parents possess access to a wide range of web contact controls compared to controls over movies and cable televisions (Xu et al. 17). In addition, these proponents show that most children living in conditions in which their parents have no access to internet security are likely to lack even the resources needed to obtain computer technology and consequently internet access. Some of the methods brought forth by these scholars include filtering and subscription to approved online access only. Filtering can be realized by creating a list of words and phrases that are obscene, or others that are related to content that appear unpleasant and then making the system to be incapable of downloading any material that contains such words or phrases. This method can also be applied in private email. Subscribing to online sites that are approved enables the content to be monitored by the internet services. Proponents of internet censorship raised the issue of the vast area that the internet reaches (Warf 4). They claim that parents may block certain websites, but it may not be possible to block all of them unless the government censors the internet. According to them, if one parent prohibits particular material on the internet, it may not validate that other parents who use the same programs on internet, and they, therefore, lose out on those materials (Warf 7). However, it is important to note that the internet does not begin and end in a particular place. Therefore, the best way a country can censor Internet effectively without interfering with the other countries access would be to control whoever gets contact to the internet. Also, they could regulate the purpose or whatever reason they are using the internet. In the contemporary society, more and more weight is being put on technology and the Information Superhighway (McCarthy 84). Consequently, more worry is arising from parents concerning the accessibility of pornography to children via the Internet. First of all, in most public and private schools as well as at homes, teenagers are being connected to the Internet websites. However, a thought needs to be paid to the safety of these youngsters on the internet. With the increase in the number of children that are acquiring more access to the Internet, a number of problems need to be put into consideration. These include the risks that these young children might be exposed to unsuitable material of violent or sexual nature (McCarthy 85). A number of internet search sites occur which allow anyone to carry out a keyword search. Executing such a search on Google, a standard search engine, provides about three hundred matches to the keyword sex. This, therefore, offers numerous links to sexually categorical materials that could be easily traced by these children. In this controversy, one side argues that it is not easy to supervise their kids at all times. As a result of this fact, there must be some other method of censoring the inappropriate material that is presented on the internet. The Internet ought not to be an area where children can have easy access to the pornographic material (McLelland 67). This claim has been justified by the fact that movies in most parts of the world have ratings, and now even the television chip is being established to censor the programs that can be viewed by children. Therefore, it would be appropriate if the Internet also had a way of censoring the sexual arousing materials. Others claim that parents are accountable for the activity of their children and hence should also be held answerable whenever their children misuse the internet. This, however, would eradicate any need for government to get involved involvement in the issue. On a fair ground, the Internet is expected to be a place where any useful material can be forwarded with easy access. It should also be accessed by anybody with a connection to it. Some concur with the argument claiming that most pornography sites possess a cover page that gives warning to all individuals who by chance stumble upon the site (McLelland 69). They add that children stumble upon these websites, but the majority cannot download them. They must have the knowledge for them to download the files and consequently view the pornographic materials. However, despite the enormous advantages that come with the internet, its disadvantages are drastic. For instance, it is clear that the majority of people in most parts of the world are vigorously marketing pornography in increasingly refined ways. Such people have inevitably found receptive customers in a wide range of internet environments. According to the pornographers themselves and the industry experts, there exist five additional factors that have caused the contemporary eruption of pornography through Internet networks besides the amplified focus on paraphilic content (Liang, Bin and Hong Lu 115). First, the audience likes the substantial privacy on computer networks. This gives the children an opportunity to avoid the possible embarrassment of visiting the adult store to access pornographic materials. The second reason that has been brought forth is the argument that most internet lovers have the tendency of downloading precisely the images that appear to be sexually arousing. Previously, such people had to buy a whole magazine for them to be able to access these desired depictions. Thirdly, the efficient and discrete keeping of these pornographic materials in the internet websites gives the audience a room to hide them from their friends, family members, and associates. Fourthly, the fear and prevalence of HIV/AIDS as well as other diseases that are sexually transmitted have assisted pornography marketers to succeed in marketing modern sex that the citizens perceive as being not only safe but also viable compared to real sex that have significant dangers (Liang, Bin and Hong Lu 117). Lastly, highly advanced technology systems have got their way into the mainstream allowing the ever increasing audience to acquire digitized pornography obtainable from the information superhighway. The results of these factors prompted by the internet are plainly enough to call for censorship of the internet in the entire world. In this way, the internet has been used as a medium of allowing unethical, extremists and immoral citizens to corrupt the society. In conclusion, censorship is an approach used by governments to keep control over their citizens by prohibiting the public from viewing any information that the state considers having the potential of inciting an insurgency. Information censorship on the internet has turned out to be a much-publicized debate that up to date has not seen any resolution (Liang, Bin and Hong Lu 119). There has been a considerable controversy over whether censorship is necessary for keeping an absolute moral standard. Considering a case where there ought to be a standard, the pertinent question that should be looked into is the kind of information available to the citizens. Despite the fact that no single answer that every person agrees to exist, the matter has been raised and is currently being assessed. However much the Internet has stretched the abilities of the citizens to acquire information on an international scale, its daily growth and expansion has resulted in various issues that are not acceptable. Such issues include exposure to pornography to school children and the issue of hate speeches in the political arena. It is these factors that have resulted in the existing massive controversy concerning internet censorship in the world. Despite all these negative effects of the internet, the primary reason the internet should not be censored, is the fact that there is the option left for the users to avoid whatever they do not want to see. Moreover, the internet users buy access to that internet. This implies that no one forces the indecent information into their minds. With these reasons, then internet censorship is incorrect since it limits people’s potential of exploring the internet. Works Cited Liang, Bin, and Hong Lu. "Internet development, censorship, and cyber crimes in China." Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice 26.1 (2010): 103-120. McCarthy, Martha. "Continuing Saga of Internet Censorship: The Child Online Protection Act, The." BYU Educ. & LJ (2005): 83-100 McLelland, Mark. "The World of Yaoi: The Internet, Censorship and the Global ‘Boys ‘Love’Fandom." Australian Feminist Law Journal 23.1 (2005): 61-77. Stevenson, Christopher. "Breaching the Great Firewall: Chinas Internet censorship and the quest for freedom of expression in a connected world." BC Intl & Comp. L. Rev. 30 (2007): 531. Warf, Barney. "Geographies of global Internet censorship." GeoJournal 76.1 (2011): 1-23. Xu, Xueyang, Z. Morley Mao, and J. Alex Halderman. "Internet censorship in China: Where does the filtering occur?." Passive and Active Measurement. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011. Read More