Essay on "Internet Censorship"

Essay 10 pages (2943 words) Sources: 20

[EXCERPT] . . . .

Many countries like the United States treat people participating in such activities with an entirely different rule book and set of standards and practices than people who commit perceived lesser crimes. Freedom of association is generally held to be a positive but when people are conversing with the outwardly stated purpose of overthrowing government and/or committing mass murder in all ways possible, the normal perceptions about freedom of expression and speech are generally thrown out the window.

A final con to freedom of expression is lack of accountability. Whether a person uses his or her actual name or not, a lot can be said and done on the internet that is very destructive. Posting compromising private pictures and revealing sensitive information are just some of the examples. Many such activities are not illegal and that should probably remain the case because of the extreme lengths that such regulation can be taken, but some very destructive and insidious activities can be done on the internet and the fallout from such behavior can be massive and long-lasting. Consequences can range from temporary and fleeting to long-lasting and pervasive. For example, most would probably argue that people are free to join and participate on Facebook. However, posting pictures from a raucous party or a picture that is sexually explicit can have wide-reaching effects including the loss of a marriage to the loss of a job.

Freedom of expression left unchecked is perceived to be a cause of the coarsening of public discourse. Politics is a good example of this. The caustic nature of many politically-motivated posts takes many people aback and there is little to nothing that can be done
Continue scrolling to

download full paper
to stop it. Many people deride this as a sad state of affairs, but no solutions to this perceived problem are apparent as the only obvious way to address is it to make people clam up. The author of this paper has even seen people in the media advocate controls on political speech. Given the American right to freedom of the press and freedom of speech, that is quite interesting to say the least.

While one can argue, and rightly so, that people should be held accountable for their actions both criminally and ethically, the same is true of people who make assumptions and/or spread information that really should not be spread and that do not consider the consequences behind such actions. It is true that embarrassing results can be pure accidental but the results are often all the same. On the other hand, people that engage in this activity on purpose with the sole express purpose of harming others in any way possible, it is an unfortunate true that little to nothing can be done that truly provides justice to the harmed party.

Effects of Pros and Cons on Freedom of Expression

The censorship or disablement of the Internet in any way often causes a raucous and chaotic response. A sterling example of this in action was the actions taken by Egypt during the last throes of the Mubarak regime. After three days of vitriolic protests that were in large part organized through social media sites like Facebook, Egypt took the largely unprecedented step of completely shutting off the Internet (Dibbell, 2012). History has shown since then that this just inflamed the populace even more and the decision to staunch online communication was eventually undone.

Another effect that online activity restriction can have is the thought that such actions are inherently incompatible with the precepts of democracy and freedom of speech in general (Morozov, 2011). Such questions have been posed based on the restrictions placed on the online activities and speech of people in South Korea (Fish, 2009). The government has stated its need to engage in such activity. However, the country's populaces as well as observers outside of the country have vehemently condemned the behavior (Fish, 2009). A similar set of circumstances have come to be in Turkey (Ozkan & Arikan, 2009). Countries that installed such measures have been usurped by people that continue their online activities under pseudonyms (Talbot, 2009).

For all of the derision that is aimed at censorship of web materials, there are situations where it can and should be done. People that are quick to slam the restriction of online discourse always seem to limit their discussion to how oppressive it is and why it is wrong. However, research bears out that some online activity is inherently and solely insidious and/or illegal in nature and that some speech should be quashed. This is validated by the whole "crying fire in a crowded theater" routine. One can argue all day that freedom of speech is freedom of speech but if the speech is illegal, dangerous, hurts the vulnerable including children, or anything else that infringes on the liberty or the safety of another, it must be limited and/or stopped via all reasonable means.

The other side of that coin, however, is how far certain agencies, governments and people often go in the name of doing the right thing. After all, motives are not always pure and what is deemed to be proper and justifiable can vary from person to person and government to government. For example, the United States is fairly loose and forgiving with what can be posted on the internet while countries like China are very controlling and strict in their policies regarding what can be available on the internet. For example, there is no shortage of material available for review on the Occupy Wall Street movements in the United States. Information about the American movement even pervades the regular news media, not to mention all of the blogs and other sites that permeate with material about the movement. However, if one assumes the same is true about Falun Gong in China, one would be mistaken. That movement as well as the pages and activities of known dissidents in general are staunchly regulated and blocked all of the time.

One need not go that far to make the point of people going too far. As noted elsewhere in this report, sex education is deemed to be a necessary component of a child's education. However, many governments are rather conservative in nature as well as many parents, and this leads to them caterwauling when material and subjects they deem to be improper are disseminated to students in any official or unofficial capacity, and this is true of material covered in class as well as information available on the Internet. Freedom of expression dictates that the information should be widely available but many governments, parents, and other entities want this material regulated and blocked, as necessary. Obviously, there is a wide array of positions taken on the matter and there is no single web regulation solution that will placate all parties involved.

Conclusion

As has been made clear over the course of this report, the research bears out that the intentions behind censorship range from good intentions to the oppressing of populations and the verdict about such censorship tends to be condemnatory of the general behavior of censorship in all of its forms and functions. Research shows that while some censorship is probably required, it needs to be done in a balanced way and less is generally more (Peace, 2003).

References

Calingaert, D. (2010). Authoritarianism vs. The Internet. Policy Review. 160 (1), 63-75.

Dibbell, J. (2012). The Shadow Web. Scientific American. 306 (3), 60-65.

Eneman, M. (2010). ISP Filtering of Chlid-Abusive Material: A Critical Reflection of Its

Effectiveness. Journal of Sexual Aggression. 16 (2), 223-235.

Essex, D. (2009). From Deleting Online Predators to Educating Internet Users. Young Adult Library Services. 7 (3), 36-45.

Fish, E. (2009). Is Internet Censorship Compatible With Democracy. Asia-Pacific

Journal on Human Rights & The Law. 10 (2), 43-96.

Giles, J.. (2011). Piracy Bill Walks the Plank. New Scientist. 212 (2841), 28.

Greengard, S. (2010). Censored!. Communications of the ACM. 53 (7), 16-18.

Greengard, S. (2012). Law & Disorder. Communications of the ACM. 55 (1), 23-25.

Morozov, E. (2011). Dictatorship.com. New Scientist. 209 (2802), 30-31.

Nantai, S.M. & Cockerline, G. (2010). Internet Filtering in Schools: Protection or Censorship?. Journal of Cirriculum & Pedagogy. 7 (2), 51-53.

Ozkan, H. & Arikan, A. (2009). Internet Censorship in Turkey: University Stuents'

Opinions. World Journal on Educational Technology. 1 (1), 46-56.

Palfrey, J. (2010). Four Phases of Internet Regulation. Social Research. 77 (3), 981-

Peace, A. (2003). Balancing Free Speech & Censorship. Communications of the ACM.

46 (11), 105-109.

Penny, L. (2011). More Sex Education, Please, and Less Censorship. New Statesman.

140 (5075), 15.

Penny, L.… READ MORE

Quoted Instructions for "Internet Censorship" Assignment:

Following the the below essay plan I have created, as well as the annotated bibliography completed by Academon ***** ***** previously completed for me, please write a 3000 word essay on 'What effect does Internet censorship have upon freedom of expression?' (And examine the pros and cons of Internet censorship on freedom of expression). Please use the exact same sources as cited in the annotated bibliography below, as well as additional sources (up to 20) for this major essay. Please also include a full reference/bibliography list at the end of the essay and cite all sources throughout using Harvard style referencing (including page numbers, author, date of publication etc).

Section 1: Research Question

Essay Question: Examine the pros and cons of Internet censorship on freedom of expression.

Primary Question: What effect does Internet censorship have upon freedom of expression?

Secondary Questions:

Descriptive 1) What is Internet censorship? 2) What are the reasons for and against Internet censorship? 3) What are the side effects of internet censorship?

Analytical 4) How can internet censorship protect individuals? 5) How can Internet censorship limit individual freedoms? 6) Why would internet censorship be necessary or unnecessary in some situations?

Topic Words: Expression, Freedom, Censorship.

Directive Words: Examine.

Limiting Words: Internet, Expression.

Section 2: Annotated Bibliography

Kaul, V. 2012, The Pros and Cons of New Media and Media Freedom. Journal of Mass Communication and Journalism, Vol. 2, Issue 5.

In his research study, author-researcher Kaul discussed the implications of using Internet technology in launching what is called the new media, both in the context of journalistic/press freedom and freedom of expression of the civil society in general. More specifically, the author provided a comparison of the ‘old’ (traditional) versus ‘new’ (Internet/online) media, considering both as tools for freedom of expression, albeit the latter is more accessible. However, the article also discussed how the rise of the new media has not ‘revolutionised’ press freedom in some countries (namely, countries in South Asia and South Africa). What Kaul emphasised is the proliferation of new media as a replacement of old media, but without the expected improvement in press freedom. Instead, what occurred is a simple ‘transplantation’ of old media to new media, maintaining the limited freedom in expression of the press and the general public.

Merlis, S. 2005, Preserving the Internet Expression While Protecting our Children: Solutions Following Ashcroft v. ACLU, Northwestern Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property, Vol. 4, Issue 1.

Merlis discussed in his analysis of the US Congress’ failed attempts to pass the Child Online Protection Act (COPA) in the Supreme Court the issue of creating a balance between maintaining the freedom of expression online and at the same time, protecting children from pornographic content readily available on the Internet. COPA is the US Congress’ solution to ensure and monitor the flow of information and content over the Internet, particularly when individuals aged under 18 years old are using the technology. However, the Congress has failed to pass the COPA in the Supreme Court because the latter considered COPA as too stringent, bordering on curbing an individual’s right to information and freedom of expression. Merlis supported the Supreme Court’s recommendation to use filtering software to be used by parents/adults to effectively monitor the information/content that their children are able to see and access when they are online.

Faris, R., S. Wang, and J. Palfrey 2008, Censorship 2.0, Innovations, Spring 2008.

Faris et al made a compelling argument about the rapid proliferation of online-related content and exponential growth of Internet, both as a social community and a new form of economy. In discussing these benefits of the Internet, the authors also explored the ramifications of freedom to expression and information to society in general. At present, there is a need for governments to keep up with this exponential growth of the Internet. Further, there has been no evidence providing a clear distinction whether or not content and information from the Internet indeed contributes to ‘knowledge accumulation and economic growth.’ As a response to governments’ belated response to regulating online content to protect specific groups in civil society and in the community of online users, governments have explored engaging in ‘public-private transnational form of filtering.’ It is through this initiative that a balance between freedom of expression and government protectionism and regulation of detrimental online content can be achieved, according to the authors.

Hom, S., A. Tai, and G. Nichols 2004, The Rise of the Internet and Advancing Human Rights, China Rights Forum, No. 3.

The rise of the Internet as an influential and central source of information globally has even permeated countries such as China, wherein Internet content is highly regulated by the government. In the analysis conducted by Hom et al, the authors acknowledged that the Internet technology has spurred governments like the Chinese government to take radical actions to censor online content in the country, while at the same time, other countries, including developed ones in the North American and European regions, are confronting issues of ‘global governance’ online. Thus, while the authors call for ‘relaxed control’ of the Chinese government of online content as a form of recognising human rights (the right to freedom of expression and right to information), they also recognise the need for governance of online content across all countries in the world taking advantage of and benefiting from Internet technology.

Karhula, P. 2011, What is the effect of WikiLeaks for freedom of information?, International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA).

Karhula centered his discussion on the issue of WikiLeaks as a case for analyzing freedom of expression and right to information using the online platform. In discussing the specifics of the WikiLeaks incident, Karhula argued that the WikiLeaks case is compelling in that it begs the question of whether information leakage about government conspiracies, inappropriate conduct, and even corruption would be best ‘leaked’ or accessed through a public, online forum. The author questions if the WikiLeaks case actually contributes to the ‘kind of transparency which would support democracy and civil society.’ It is possible that while it gave online users the information it needed about specific political and economic issues of the world, it could also pose as a propaganda mechanism that seeks to discredit governments and public officials from various governments all over the world. At present, the WikiLeaks case remains a compelling case for governments and civil societies to scrutinise and rethink about the way information is regulated and proliferated online.

Section 3: Essay Plan

Essay question: What are the pros and cons of Internet censorship on freedom of expression?

I. INTRODUCTION

Aim / purpose: To examine the effect Internet censorship has upon freedom of expression and to argue both the pros and cons of this.

Specify limits / scope: Limited by definitions of expression, scope of research available, personal views or bias, conflicting viewpoints/arguments may not all be considered.

Key points for discussion: • Brief history of censorship in old and new media and discuss limitations on freedom of expression • Discuss where concept of freedom of expression stems from

Summary of Essay argument: Freedom of expression is a basic human right but does this give us the right to impinge upon others personal privacy? When does the public’s right to know exceed the right to privacy of individuals/organisations and what examples can we use to see where this has worked and where it may not have worked and what are the moral implications of each decision made.

II. BODY (your key paragraphs/sections within your essay) Point 1 Topic Sentence: • Discuss pros of freedom of expression in online context

Summary of supporting argument: • The pros demonstrate that there are many cases when the public or individual have a right to know as it has a direct impact upon their quality of education, understanding and interaction with the world.

Point 2 Topic Sentence: • Discuss cons of freedom of expression in online context

Summary of supporting argument: • The cons demonstrate that there are examples where without internet censorship, lives can be endangered, damaging messages can be spread and unlawful behaviour can be encouraged, putting the individual and society at risk.

Point 3 Topic Sentence: • Discuss affects both pros and cons of internet censorship have had upon freedom of expression

III. CONCLUSION

Restate main points. Make any allusions to further research / direction of topic: • Summarise all points made • Conclude with potential moral and ethical dilemmas regarding internet censorship and freedom of expression. • Briefly discuss current climate of Internet Censorship and posit a few hypothesis on the potential climate surrounding current and foreseen issues into the future.

How to Reference "Internet Censorship" Essay in a Bibliography

Internet Censorship.” A1-TermPaper.com, 2012, https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/internet-censorship-freedom-expression/4341476. Accessed 2 Jun 2024.

Internet Censorship (2012). Retrieved from https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/internet-censorship-freedom-expression/4341476
A1-TermPaper.com. (2012). Internet Censorship. [online] Available at: https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/internet-censorship-freedom-expression/4341476 [Accessed 2 Jun, 2024].
”Internet Censorship” 2012. A1-TermPaper.com. https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/internet-censorship-freedom-expression/4341476.
”Internet Censorship” A1-TermPaper.com, Last modified 2024. https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/internet-censorship-freedom-expression/4341476.
[1] ”Internet Censorship”, A1-TermPaper.com, 2012. [Online]. Available: https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/internet-censorship-freedom-expression/4341476. [Accessed: 2-Jun-2024].
1. Internet Censorship [Internet]. A1-TermPaper.com. 2012 [cited 2 June 2024]. Available from: https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/internet-censorship-freedom-expression/4341476
1. Internet Censorship. A1-TermPaper.com. https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/internet-censorship-freedom-expression/4341476. Published 2012. Accessed June 2, 2024.

Related Essays:

Censorship in America Literature Review

Paper Icon

Internet Censorship in America:

Censorship of information on the Internet has become a controversial topic that has generated huge debates, especially on whether it's a necessity for the maintenance of… read more

Literature Review 10 pages (3127 words) Sources: 10 Topic: Computers / IT / Internet


Internet Marketing in Saudi Arabia Term Paper

Paper Icon

Internet Marketing in Saudi Arabia

Today, Saudi Arabia is one of the most affluent nations on earth and enjoys a large percentage of the world's known petroleum reserves. In addition,… read more

Term Paper 28 pages (7754 words) Sources: 5 Topic: Computers / IT / Internet


Censorship and Technology in Fahrenheit 451 Thesis

Paper Icon

Censorship & Technology in Fahrenheit 451

Technology and society: Ray Bradbury's dystopia Fahrenheit 451

Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451 depicts a nightmare future dystopia where all books are burned by law.… read more

Thesis 3 pages (987 words) Sources: 3 Topic: Government / Politics


Impact of Internet on Society Term Paper

Paper Icon

Internet on society

The Internet has had a profound and far-reaching effect on society and the social construction of reality. This impact is evident on many different but interrelated levels.… read more

Term Paper 9 pages (2380 words) Sources: 1+ Topic: Computers / IT / Internet


Global Internet Censorship: Research Proposal

Paper Icon

Global Internet Censorship: Is Censorship in any Culture Ethical?

The internet has created a world information community. People of countries that are geographically remote from one another now exchange ideas,… read more

Research Proposal 8 pages (2170 words) Sources: 15 Topic: Computers / IT / Internet


Sun, Jun 2, 2024

If you don't see the paper you need, we will write it for you!

Established in 1995
900,000 Orders Finished
100% Guaranteed Work
300 Words Per Page
Simple Ordering
100% Private & Secure

We can write a new, 100% unique paper!

Search Papers

Navigation

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!