Proliferation of Internet Technology - Essay Example

Journalism Internet Forum Proliferation of the internet technology has led to heated debate concerning to its usage as a channelfor disseminating information. In the effort of the media to keep up with the technological pace, they have used the internet forum as a way to inject efficiency into their role in information dissemination. The reason why the internet is popular is that it helps to reach out for a greater part of the public as compared to other communication channels. Although the internet has become an efficient channel for information dissemination, it is clear that it internet forums disseminate information that is misleading or even harmful. Therefore, there is need to control the internet forums by imposing strict regulations on its usage. However, controlling the internet forum may attract criticism as people may feel that this is one of the laws limiting the public freedom, which the constitution grants. In reality, Internet forum should be more strictly controlled for the entries because internet forum can encourage harmful and misleading news. Internet forums refer to any forms of internet channels that are responsible for providing information to the access of the public. They may include any official internet news sites or even social networks that provide information to the public. The issue of controlling the internet forums is a concept that has for long drawn attention from many scholars. Controlling internet forums refers to the imposition of strict measures against its abuse in providing information. In the era of internet technology, many internet forums have emerged, making it entirely a big challenge to control the information that is relayed through these channels. While there is evidence that these forums are informative, it is clear that they can be used to relay raw information that may be untruthful, hurtful or even misleading. Misleading information refers to any material facts that may influence negatively the reaction of the people or even bring about a controversy. However, several policies have been put into place as a control mechanism for internet use. For instance, “regulations would force Internet companies to apply for a license if theyre running a microblog or forum” (Shalvey 1). Due to the sensitivity of information, it is crucial that every information that is relayed through these channels be reliable and truthful. Misleading information may have far reaching effects to the receiver or even to the world. In many occasion, the news items report different information, putting people in a dilemma of what information is believable. Misleading information may invoke wild public reaction especially when the information concerns the life of individuals forcing governments to “to keep dissidents out of view online, especially on the fast-growing social networks” (Shalvey 1). A good example of how information can be misleading is in the reporting of the lost controversial Malaysian Flight. A close examination of the news channels reveals that they reported different stories, thus keeping the public in state of tension. On 16 March 2014, internet forums such as JLA forum reported that there was the probability that the missing flight was hijacked, something that could not have happened if “increase rules covering what gets said on the countrys microblogs and forums” was established (Shalvey 1). On the other hand, other internet forums provided the information that the Malaysian Flight disappeared due to a fault in its electronic system. Other news from social media sites provided news that the Flight had been found, which gave false hope to the relatives of the missing people. The two reports were misleading and led to tension especially among those who lost their members in this tragedy. This implies that such information is dependent on the opinions of the people rather than facts. The height of this tension emerged when the people rioted in an attempt to compel the government to provide transparent information that the public can depend on. This is clear evidence that misleading information can be tormenting in some instances, and hence there is need to provide strict control. Evidently, internet forum control can be used to reduce the dissemination of controversial information within the media. One way that internet governance can be conducted is by conducting non-technical censorship. Non-technical censorship refers to the use of laws and regulations that govern the content that is released over the internet, to ensure that is rhymes with national standards of reporting. Provision of misleading information can attract a legal penalty in accordance with the law. For instance, non-compliance in China could attract “fines ranging from 100,000 yuan to 100 million yuan, or about $15,700 to $15.7 million” (Shalvey 2). Internet censorship has worked in many countries and controlled the release of certain information in the public. For instance, in the US, the communication decency Act of 1996 was a measure to control the dissemination of indecent and obscene information in the online media. This law regulated the public from posting obscene information on the media, which allowed was a superior strategy in controlling morals in the US. China operator, Sina already took a step by “verifying about 60% of its 300 million or so users under their real names” (Shalvey 2) hence enabling government to identify real people behind internet activity. Enacting laws against the dissemination of controversial information would give the responsibility of the internet forums to provide information that is more factual. However, the controversy of internet censorship makes it quite difficult to conduct total control of the information released over the internet. First, internet censorship has received a lot of criticism among many countries as one of the strategies of the government to override the right of freedom of speech. For instance, in Canada, the government has applied local laws to ensure to censor abuse of internet by people hosting personal websites. This has received a lot of criticism from the public who feel that this is suppression of human rights. Therefore, internet censorship is vulnerable to abuse by the state and hence advocating for internet control may pave way to autocratic government. For instance, Chinese government “would continue blocking "undermining" speech, including anything that would "harm national honor and interests"” (Shalvey 2). However, what counts as “national honor and interests” is a relative term eliciting further controversy. Secondly, these same internet forums are sources of business market and hence blocking them is bound to result to serious economic impact on a country. Therefore, control of internet forums is impossible as there is a concession that internet can be both malicious and beneficial. In conclusion, there is need to launch a strict plan to control the internet forums if there is any chance of preventing dissemination of misleading information. There is a lot of evidence that the internet forums often release controversial information that can hurt the feelings of the people or even affect their psychological attitudes. Since internet censorship laws that regulate the release of obscene information have worked, it is clear that designing laws to prevent release of falseful information would be of great help. However, it is clear that internet censor may interfere with human rights of speech as well as economic development. Therefore, there is need for the government to exercise caution while implementing control of internet forums. Works Cited Shalvey, Kevin. "China Acts to Beef Up Control of Internet Microblogs, Forums Proposes Blanket Regulations Impact on Sina, NetEase, Baidu Unknown; some Say Rules Aid by Bringing Clarity." Investors Business DailyJun 08 2012. ProQuest. Flanagin, Read More