Internet Censorship
Internet CensorshipInternet Censorship
The Internet is a new medium where many ideas and views are expressed. The question is should these things be censored, and if so how. The debate on Internet censorship is a very volatile controversy affecting anyone who has ever accessed the World Wide Web. The debate is between those who believe censorship interferes with our rights, and those who think it to be a medium that should be regulated just like TV. An article written by Ann Beeson and Chris Hansen called “Fahrenheit 451.2” explores the faults with Internet censorship, e.g. how it violates our first amendment rights. Another article, “It’s Time to Tackle Cyberporn,” written by John Carr, takes the opposing view claiming the definite need for Internet censorship. While both articles successfully demonstrate their point Beeson and Hansen present their argument in a more convincing manner, making it more effective.
Beeson’s argument is very organized and precise. She starts off by detailing the subject at hand, telling the reader of her disagreement with the opposing side, saying that their methods of censorship were a “failure to examine the longer-term implication for the Internet of rating and blocking schemes”(590). She introduces the reader to what has happened so far in the struggle, stating various facts about what certain companies have done to “please” the government in their wish for regulations on the Internet. These companies include Netscape and Microsoft who adopted a standard for an Internet rating system after the White House held a “voluntary” meeting for industry leaders (590,591). She goes on to tell how industry standards for Internet censorship are being developed and the way they work. One such standard is the PICS (Platform for Internet Content Selection) system, which is the main standard being used, providing a method for rating that is uniform for all internet content (591).
Another method of rating sites called “self-rating,” is repeated by Beeson throughout the paper. Self-rating is a process designed by the government that asks web page designers to self rate their sites. This is not required, but with the default setting of most Internet censors, unrated sites are blocked out. She continues to offer recommendations and principles for what she believes should be the standard for Internet censorship by saying that Internet users should be able to choose what they want themselves or their children to see (593). Beeson then debunks the idea of self-rating, claiming what might be considered offensive to some might be considered very useful to others (593). She also goes on to argue that self-rating is “burdensome, unwieldy, and costly” (594). For example, an art studio on the Internet might contain some nude pictorials, which to some might be considered explicit. Should that whole site be censored or should just the art that might be offensive be blocked, which would waste time and...
To view the complete essay, you be registered.