Internet Free Speech Balance and Regulation
As stated in Gift of Fire, the First amendment was written to protect offensive and/or controversial speech and ideas. There is no need to protect speech, in any form including publication, that people do not object to. Some ideas may be considered offensive by most people; some ideas may be offensive to relatively few people. The following list is information or material that can be found on the Internet that some groups/legislators/governments have tried to ban:
Hate groups (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_groupsLinks to an external site.)
Pornography
Nazi materials/memorabilia
Abortion information
Anti-abortion information
Alcoholic beverage advertising
Depictions of violence
Some political speech/information
Some religious speech/information
Information on how to build bombs
Medical information (a doctor argued that people were getting bad medical advice)
This is not a comprehensive list. While different countries have different laws protecting (or prohibiting) freedom of speech, all of this information is legal within the U.S. There may be some restrictions on who is allowed access (i.e. in the U.S. it is illegal to distribute pornography to minors). All of the information listed above is available in other formats (books, magazines, newsletters, movies, TV, etc.), however, the Internet has made such information easier to access at any time. For this reason, many feel that the Internet should have some restrictions. A U.S. federal judge ruled that “as the most participatory form of mass speech yet developed, the Internet deserves the highest protection from government intrusion.”
How do you feel about freedom of speech on the Internet? Do you feel some ideas/information should be subject to censorship? Why or why not?
Student response:
Student #1
When our nation’s founders wrote the Bill of Rights and the Constitution, I believe they wouldn’t have thought there would be anything like the Internet. It’s a place where you can go digitally from several devices, and access basically any information you can imagine. It still seems almost supernatural in a sense even to someone who has grown up with it. I think that freedom of speech is still valid when it comes to the internet, but censorship can be valid when dealing with some things. Going off the list in the prompt, I think that some of that would be valid to censor or hide, but at the end of the day, it comes down to individual judgment. Everyone feels differently about things, and, for example, there would be some who identify with a religion that others find dangerous and would be offended if their religion is censored online. I think the best way to go about the internet censorship issue is to keep what is in place right now. Google (and other browsers I assume) has a SafeSearch feature, which will blur or hide some results that would be offensive or inappropriate to some. I feel this system is best because no one would be caught off guard by offensive material, but those who still want to see it can choose that option.
The only content that I would be okay with completely banning is material that would be found dangerous or harmful by everyone, but unfortunately, with how depraved our society is, that is likely impossible.
Student #2
I believe that freedom of speech on the internet is a necessity, as it’s a protected form of speech just like any other medium. However, I also believe it is fully within the rights of a platform or website to censor or restrict certain content to their liking. For example, if a site like Twitter or Threads wanted to ban pornographic content on their platform, they should be completely allowed to do so. The wonderful thing about the internet is the variety of avenues people have for communication, so if one platform doesn’t approve of certain types of speech, you can almost guarantee there will be somewhere else that will allow it. The early internet actually revolved around this idea where smaller sites hosted certain types of content or niches before we had the huge platforms we see nowadays like Youtube and Twitter. This freedom of moderation choice also allows there to be more kid-friendly locations on the internet which can be good to both avoid NSFW content as well as being more trustworthy for parents who allow their child internet access. All in all, free speech is necessary but platforms holders also have the right to regulate their platform as they see fit. I do think it’s nice when certain platforms offer filters for their users to blur or ignore certain content they don’t want to see. The only content that should be explicitly banned across the board would be anything that is outright illegal, as this material would also be restricted in other forms of media. Completely eradicating illegal material is next to impossible with the scope of the internet but having it stay illegal is still a massive deterrent to stop people from approaching that kind of material.
Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers
Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.
Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS
Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?
Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.
We write plagiarism Free Content
Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.
Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.
