Table of Contents
The Internet should be censored to some extent. Although the internet provides unmeasurable amount of information it’s sometimes misused to spread hate, induce violent behaviours, fuel pornography, and violation of intellectual property rights. Internet censorship should not target freedom of speech but posers, hackers, and intellectual thieves. Currently, pornography and other unethical behaviours have spread uncontrollably because of the internet. The internet provides a whole new world of profit and distribution for sex traffickers and child pornography (Cohen, 2013). Furthermore, some websites exist just to promote hatred for different kinds of people. Today a disgruntled person can go online and turn his racist tendencies into full-fledged hatred. Sites such as “World Wide Blasphemy” and “Stormfront” are examples of websites being used to spread hate. On the other hand, artists are losing their hard earned money through piracy and other violation of intellectual property. I believe the internet should be regulated to ensure the cyber wellness of the people using it. It is not enough for parents or other authorities to restrict the use of the internet with policies. More likely as humans policy restrictions don’t tend to work on us. Hence, some of the internet contents should be censored all together to protect people during vulnerable situations. Situations in this case, include: – reducing hate crimes and terrorism, protecting children from sexual exploitation and to better protect intellectual property. The concept of internet “freedom” is just an abstract concept (Cohen, 2013). However, at the far end, there are real people who are being damaged by real problems that are brought by the uncensored internet.
Internet providers should not be held liable for the content that is posted online. Internet providers cannot monitor all the materials that they host. We cannot expect Internet providers to provide the service then, in turn, come in to act as regulators of the service. It is up to the daily users of the internet who should act responsibly when using the internet. If the internet providers are held responsible for the content online then at the end of the day they will be held accountable for all the actions of every single internet user. This entirely will be illogical.
From the post, it’s through that varying parts of the world possess different beliefs. Although the internet tends to connect people or groups from different parts of the world, it still doesn’t change the fact that these areas share different cultural beliefs. According to the post, an example is how Americans have the freedom of speech and religion. However, in places such as Iran and Saudi Arabia, the religion allowed to be practiced in those areas is only Islam. Additionally, freedom of speech for women and other groups are restricted in such areas. Furthermore, countries such as Cuba and North Korea control the internet to prevent any adverse statement or action to be taken against their government. That said it’s clear that online assessment of content depends on culture and geo- location of the state. North Korea accesses their internet content for government interest while Iran can censor their internet to promote religion. Factors which influence online assessment are culture, religion, geo- location and the constitution. As mentioned before Iran might assess their online content to promote their practiced religion while North Korea or China can access their internet content to promote the interest of their governments.
Cohen, J. (2013). Web censorship: the net is closing in. The Guardian, 64- 73.
Luong, D. (2017). Vietnam Wants to Control Social Media? Too Late. The New York Times, 103- 111.
Yen, A. (2003). Internet Service Provide Liability for Subscriber Copyright Infrigement, Enterprise Liability and the First Amendment. Boston: Boston College.