Censorship of the internet restricts first and ninth amendment rights, but also gives a sense of security to many people. The argument against government monitoring has been used before in the past for the technology at the time. The government should be able to monitor
The government should have limits to how much power they have on the internet for the safety and rights of our people. A good thing is to realize what rights we have on the internet and watch what we post. For example, lets say the government had complete control over what we post, see, and talk about. That they could see every activity we have committed on the internet. If they had that amount of control it would be crushing.
We 're a government website, hence the web address, so you can tell that the place where the facts reside is reliable. Many Americans don 't trust the government and the claims they make, which is somewhat understandable depending on the case, but we don 't hide anything here. Everything is out in the open for you to analyze on your own. Our definition is “bullying that takes place over digital devices like cell phones, computers, and tablets.” The information we 've gathered over the years is that in 2014,
Society will always differ over how we should and should not publicly post what we choose, the government also gets involved in this which takes away some of our amendment rights. The majority of people believe that by not allowing some things to be said or published, that this constitutional right is being violated. In essence, this means that government censorship would primarily attempt to stop an unintentional effect of certain speech or expression on the Internet; in other words, the government would be opposing the idea of individualism in society. Our rights get violated in everyday life and the government hinders part of it. Society should have fullness of their right and be allowed to post whatever they please to without worrying about it being removed by the
Why? Because in some countries there are little or no restrictions to what can be put on the Internet and by whom it could be viewed. However, in some countries, Internet censorship has been implemented by governments for moral and political reasons. These include, protection of children, political repression of dissidents, human rights activists, comments insulting the state and protection of intellectual property including restriction on illegally downloaded movies and music. Traditionally, the Internet has been a free digital medium for publishing and accessing information.
Others include religious factor, terrorism as well as other sensitive information for different group of people in terms of age, countries and parties. The governments of many countries are trying to mold the internet into a place that is safe not only for the users but also politically. The intent may be positive but what happens to the internet after the censorship can be lethal. Below are several bills and laws in regards of the censorship. In 2012, the Congress of United States developed and wanted to
Companies, such as Facebook and Twitter, for example, when they start to play editor for their communities, are likely to lose Section 230 protection as they become more liable for what comments are posted on their platforms. The debate over free speech is shifting towards online, and a vast majority of people blame
Indeed, the Internet represents the ultimate form of democratic communication in somehow. Internet also brought a new concept which is cyber democracy or e-democracy, it was first proposed by the American scholar Mark Slauka in 1995 and Mark Slauka argues that “cyber democracy” can be understood as a medium of network democracy, or a component of a network of democracy. But not all countries wish to use the Internet to promote democracy
“Censorship is the act of suppressing or deleting material considered objectionable.” (Ballaro and DiLascio 1). Since the birth of mankind, censorship was applied on anything regarded as offensive, and became through time, a heavily relied on method to counter any sensitive subject, such as sexuality and religion. Whether people are with or against the government’s handling of the situation regarding internet exploitation, it is commonly agreed that the free use of internet threatens everyone due to the presence of diverse controversial and dangerous materials. Often, the protection of children is used as an excuse to promote censorship. Unlike what the government is trying to convince its people, censoring the internet is not the right solution to end its unethical use.
However, in recent times, TRAI (Telecom Regulatory Authority of India) has presented itself as a supreme body for checking the user access to Internet. As a result of this, TRAI has been severely criticized by Indian netizens in recent times. Internet is used in neutral manner so far in country but no legal law for confirming net neutrality has been proposed yet. The process of legalising net neutrality has begun due to a massive online movement carried by Indian netizens aftermath of controversial debate on Airtel Zero but it is not certain whether it will be formulated. It is because there are many issues and challenges before legalizing net neutrality on paper in India where it requires a complex route of debates, voting & passing of net neutrality bill in two contrast houses of Indian Parliament.