Internet Censorship Essay

Government witness Howard Schmidt conceded under cross-examination that it is “highly unlikely” for anyone to come across sexually explicit information on the Internet by accident. Plaintiff witness Dr. Albert Vezza told the court about PICS (Platform for Internet Content Selection), a new rating system designed to allow parents to control children’s access to the Internet without censorship. Dan

The constitutionality of the two provisions enacted to protect minors from “indecent” and “patent offensive” on the internet were at issue. The District Court held that the statute truncates the ‘freedom of speech” protected by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. The CDA didn’t define ‘indecent’ and left out any mandates that the ‘patently offensive material’ lacks values. It applies to the entire universe of the internet/cyberspace. The CDC lacks the precision that the First Amendment of the Constitution requires when a statute regulates the content of speech. In a nutshell, in order to deny minors access to potentially explicit and obscene speech, it would also keep a greater amount of speech from adults that have a constitutional right to receive. The CDA’s ‘indecent transmission’ and ‘patently offensive display’ provisions abridge ‘the freedom of speech’ which is protected by the Frist Amendment of the Constitution. There have been other cases that have had difficulties with having a conclusive definition of word obscenity. For example, the Courts restated its definition in Miller v California (1973). It substituted a three part detailed test to be used by each locality- the so called ‘community standards’ test to help define the

    In June of 1998 the country was horrified to learn of the death of James Byrd Jr. He was a 49-year-old black man who had been found horribly mutilated after being dragged to death. Authorities have charged three men with murder and violation of civil rights ("A Fatal Ride in the Night" 33). Obviously, if convicted, these men are guilty of a horrible crime, but what if this crime had been committed after viewing a racist website? If a person reads an emotionally charged, hate-filled website and then commits an act of violence, can the creator and owner of the website also be found guilty?

Since there has not been a ruling in this case, the supporters of the censorship laws had to try and find a way to get the internet censored to children. So in the year 2000, Congress passed the Children's Internet Protection Act, which is aimed at the computers in the schools and libraries that the children would have access to. This law was limited to "only the schools and libraries that participated in certain federal programs such as, receiving federal money for technology". The schools and libraries that received this money were required to "install filtering software on all internet terminals to block access to sites with child pornography, obscene material, and material that is harmful to minors". My opinion on this law is that it is even better than the firs one. They are very similar, as you can tell from their names, there is very little changed in the names of the laws. I think that the sites that a minor can look at should be filtered. This way they cannot look at things that can be harmful to them.

In 2011, several people started a “Don’t Filter Me project.” They wanted to remove the web filters on the school computers that blocked several educational sites. They filed lawsuits and demanded that they unblock these sites and take away the web filters. Also another group of people petitioned the Supreme Court to strike down the Communications Decency Act in Reno v. ACLU in 1997. As a result, the court granted the “highest level of First Amendment protection to the internet.” Also in 2004, the Supreme Court “announced that it will not hear government’s appeal of a ban on the Child Online Protection Act.” They thought of this as a violation of the First Amendment (Internet Censorship 1).

The Internet is a global network of vast information. With a few clicks, an individual can have access to up to 200 million web-sites filled with educational and recreational information. The Internet is not regulated in anyway (Carnegie Library 1). It is accessible throughout the entire world from the North to the South, to the early morning sunrise and dark sunsets. Different ethnicity and backgrounds come together linked upon this network resembling a connection of one body in unity. Sadly, issues arise creating concern for users, focusing particularly on minors. Pornography is one of the inappropriate materials on the Internet for minors. This material is harmful to young impressionable minds. Pornography is tearing and

The most prominent issue dealing with censorship is the fact that there is child pornography readily available. Besides the fact that children as well as adults shouldn't be able to

Censorship of the Internet is on the rise in highly populated states today. Although the Internet is considered as one of the most significant tools for the public sphere, many users have decried the Internet’s benefits and seen the Internet as a ‘double-edged sword’. Even as the Internet connects most of the world and gives valuable access to information, the same tool allows access to material that may be considered dangerous or harmful. The recent increase in discussion on the act of censorship of the Internet is part of the reaction to institutionalised censorship, particularly governmental censorship, of a public tool. Since censorship describes the suppression of public information in order to hide content that may be considered objectionable or harmful to the audience, as determined by governments or institutions, this particular outcry stems from the idea that what is considered harmful to society is subjective and should not be judged by an institution alone. Censorship can then become detrimental towards society by suppressing the human right to freedom of expression as well as also becoming a tool in the act of limiting the rights of minorities. In contrast, supporters of Internet censorship focus on the protection of inappropriate and harmful information from children and communities. By censoring certain websites that provide content that are obscene or harmful to minors, illicit activities such as kidnappings or cyber-bullying become less common. With

The freedom of speech that was possible on the Internet could now be subjected to governmental approvals. For example, China is attempting to restrict political expression, in the name of security and social stability. It requires users of the Internet and electronic mail (e-mail) to register, so that it may monitor their activities. In the United Kingdom, state secrets and personal attacks are off limits on the Internet. Laws are strict and the government is extremely interested in regulating the Intern et with respect to these issues.10 Laws intended for other types of communication will not necessarily apply in this medium.

A lot has changed since the R v Butler case that was decided back in 1992, when Donald Victor Butler was charged with various counts of selling obscene material, possessing obscene material for the purpose of distribution or sale, and exposing obscene material to public view, contrary to Section 163 of the Criminal Code, which states that "any publication a dominant characteristic of which is the undue exploitation of sex, or of sex and any one or more of . . . crime, horror, cruelty and violence, shall be deemed to be obscene" (R v Butler Edited 2). With the introduction and growth of the internet, society has drastically shifted, as it has revolutionized the way humans live. One issue that has come along with it is, with the internet being so vast in size and so endless in content, it is difficult to regulate all the content on the internet with its borderless nature. Because of this, is it much easier to gain access to pornography, which is what Butler was initially charged for back in 1987. With such a shift in time from 1992 to now, I believe that the internet and other developments have changed community standards and expectations, but not necessarily enough so that the criminal restrictions on obscenity are no longer justified in our free and democratic society.

Some people wonder who came up with the idea of internet censorship. Other people want to know which countries use it. Some ponder over the idea of what really is internet censorship. Internet censorship is controlling what can be viewed, and which sites can be used on the internet. Some things about internet censorship are countries that use it, and who started the idea of it.

In recent years, pornography has established itself as perhaps the most controversial topic arising out of the use of the Internet. The easy availability of this type of sexually explicit material has caused a panic among government officials, family groups, religious groups and law enforcement bodies and this panic has been perpetuated in the media.

Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 borrows the definition of obscenity from section 292 of the Penal Code to punish the spreading of obscene materials over the internet. It is worth to take note of the fact that S. 98 of the then Code of Criminal Procedure was also amended to empower a magistrate to enter and search premises with a warrant and take possession of obscene materials. It was only after the passing of the Obscene Publications Act in England in 1959 (and perhaps owing to unsatisfactory and the widely criticized judgment in Lady Chatterly Lover‟s Case13) that the legislature saw a need for reform. Thus, a select committee was appointed under the chairmanship of Akbar Ali Khan in 1963, the recommendations made by the committee resulted in the passing of Act 36 of 1969, which brought about several significant changes in the provision. The 1969 amendments sought to bring clarity on the concept of obscenity.

Pornography. “Printed or visual material containing the explicit description or display of sexual organs or activity, intended to stimulate sexual excitement.”(Oxford Dictionaries) Pornography has no positive effect, it serves no positive purpose. If anything pornography is the site in which we all already monitor ourselves when it comes to the fear of our innocent children coming across. We already try to protect them from it. Pornography engages with society on multiple levels. Where some enjoy it, there are many who believe the world wouldn’t be missing anything had it never been around.

Pornography is a taboo topic to say the least. No one really wants to talk about it, but without a doubt it has become a global phenomenon. There has been a growing demand to censor or even ban pornography. Feminist organizations are now calling for an extreme censorship or ban to pornography because they believe it is harmful towards women. This notion of being harmful to women is misunderstood and much more complex. Pornography is in a sense the peak of liberalism and what our country stands for because it promotes free speech and expression. Banning or censoring pornography would directly harm our constitutional values and beliefs.