You are on page 1of 3

Brian Pulliam Ms.

Cassel ENG 1201-503 3/30/14

Why the government should not monitor the internet so much

The government should stop monitoring the internet so heavily. I chose this topic because I believe it is an interesting topic. People should read this paper I will expand about other and my own opinions on why the government should stop censoring and monitoring the internet. Over the past few months I have researched why the government shouldnt do this. Some people thought that the government has a moral duty to protect its citizens from harmful sites and that as an extensive form of media, the Internet should be subject to regulation just as other forms of media are (idebate, 2012). Some people also think that the government has a moral duty to protect its citizens from harmful sites but while in some cases, such social networking sites can be used malevolently, they can also be a powerful force for good. I believe people should stop believing this way. If people continue to believe that letting the government monitor/censor the internet is good then we could get to a point where the government may not let us have as much of freedom of speech online. Two ways that people could think differently is if they actually joined an activist group or minority group. This is so they can know how it is in their shoes. They would change their minds because they would not want to be censored. The world would be different if people believed that the government monitoring the internet so much is bad. The positives would include more minorities/activist starting their own groups online and protesting for what they think is right and freedom of speech online would be very open. The negatives would include hate minority/activist groups able to come together and may cause violence. My first sub-claim states that censorship is fundamentally incompatible with the notion of free speech. Censoring the internet basically blinds the people of views of other people. The government would be asserting that people cannot handle opinionated written material. This would be an example of prejudice. I think the best way to combat prejudice is to expose it. This cannot be done if it is automatically and inconsiderately censored. I believe it is inconsistent for a government to assert the great benefits of free speech. They shouldnt act in a contradictory and hypocritical manner by banning certain areas of the Internet. Free speech should not be limited. It shouldnt even if it is an expression of negativity. I believe it should be publicly debated and logically criticized, rather than hidden altogether. My second sub-claim states that The Internet is a free domain and cannot be controlled by the government. The internet is a public domain and used worldwide. I believe the government has no right

to take over information accessible on the internet. Asserting false authority over the internet would make it seem as if the government is a dictatorial country. Finally my third sub-claim states that People often react poorly to being censored by their governments. Censoring the internet could limit freedom of speech. This could outrage a lot of people. It would not let minority/activist groups completely speak out. Take Pakistan for example. In 2008 during the dictatorship of Musharraf, Pakistan became more into social media. They started using Facebook, Skype, and Twitter. People started creating pages that spoke out against issues such as police brutality. After this the dictatorship started cracking down on activist pages. Many sites were blocked as a result of this such as Baloch national websites, websites reporting about genocide in Balochistan, and others. There was even a Facebook blackout in 2010. This is the kind of behavior is suspicious and dictatorial. In conclusion the government should not monitor / censor the internet so heavily because censorship is not very compatible with free speech, the internet is a free domain, and that people react poorly to being censored by their governments.

Works Cited

Clare Elliott. "This House would Censor the Internet." idebate.org. 21 Feb 2012. idebate.org, Web. 11 Mar 2014. <http://idebate.org/debatabase/debates/science-technology/house-would-censorinternet>

Saleem, Sana, and Paul Jay, . The Government of Pakistan Has Cracked Down on Internet Activism. 2014. Photograph. n.p. Web. 10 Mar 2014. <http://ic.galegroup.com.sinclair.ohionet.org/ic/ovic/ViewpointsDetailsPage/ViewpointsDetails Window?failOverType=&query=&prodId=OVIC&windowstate=normal&contentModules=&mode =view&displayGroupName=Viewpoints&dviSelectedPage=&limiter=&u=dayt30401&currPage=& disableHighlighting=true&displayGroups=&sortBy=&source=&zid=&search_within_results=&p= OVIC&action=e&catId=&activityType=&scanId=&documentId=GALE%7CEJ3010882223>

Goodale, James. WikiLeaks's Prosecution Would Imperil Freedom of the Press. 2014. Infographic. galegroup.comWeb. 10 Mar 2014. <http://ic.galegroup.com.sinclair.ohionet.org/ic/ovic/ViewpointsDetailsPage/ViewpointsDetails Window?failOverType=&query=&prodId=OVIC&windowstate=normal&contentModules=&mode =view&displayGroupName=Viewpoints&dviSelectedPage=&limiter=&u=dayt30401&currPage=& disableHighlighting=&displayGroups=&sortBy=&source=&zid=&search_within_results=&p=OVIC &action=e&catId=&activityType=&scanId=&documentId=GALE%7CEJ3010831211>.

You might also like