Code: Select all
The internet is the single largest collective of information in all existence. No other time in history has such a recourse been available. The world cannot allow for something of such great grandeur to crumble under misguided opinions of minorities. Although leaving the internet uncensored has been opposed, it should remain uncensored because this allows for the free and instantaneous flow of vast amounts of information.
Over the last twenty years the internet has been attacked relentlessly by governments, businesses and parents. In 1998 the FCC began forcing the implementation of rules of the CIPA or Children’s Internet protection Act. These laws required that any school or Library getting federal funding must censor what they provide over the internet (Federal Communications Commision). This censoring was implemented with things such as web filters. The censoring consisted of anything that could be deemed harmful or offensive to minors. This consists of inappropriate matter, electronic mail, chat rooms, unlawful online activities, and material deemed harmful for minors (Federal Communications Commision). However “An authorized person may disable the blocking or filtering measure during any use by an adult to enable access for bona fide research or other lawful purposes.” (Federal Communications Commision). In some other nations internet censorship is much harsher and forced upon the entire populace. For example in Iran blogger Mojtaba Saminejad has been held since 2005 for insulting the Supreme Guide Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Currently fifteen countries are on a list with Iran as being enemies of the internet by Reporters Without Borders (The 15 enemies of the Internet and other countries to watch). The countries consist of Belarus, Burma, China, Cuba, Iran, Liyba, The Maldives, Nepal, North Korea, Sudia Arabia, Syria, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Vietnam. Wither on the home front or abroad the internet is being threatened.
The internet is the world largest collective of all types of information ever conceived. For reference “If you converted all the text in the Library of Congress into digital format, it would equal about 20 terabytes (or 20,000 copies of the Encyclopedia Britannica). In October 2001, the Internet Archive's collection of online data contained about 10 billion web pages -- over 100 terabytes of data and growing.” (Does the Library of Congress keep a copy of every book ever printed?). The sheer amount of information like culture, scientific studies, recipes and most of what you could conceive is someplace on the internet. The idea that any of that could be lost forever by censorship is appalling. Mankind has created something amazing and because of political, religious and other views that creation it is threatened. Just the sheer availability of this information is incredible. Saying the average household has 100 books would most likely be generous. But at anytime these households could have access to 10 billion pages of data. Luckily in the United States the 1st Amendment grantees freedom of the press. While some activists for web censoring ignore this it is the savoir of free internet. Due to the first amendment it would be un-constitutional to support censoring the internet in the homes of the US population. As long as the Bill of Rights and the Supreme Court stand the internet will remain un-censored. Censoring the internet also leads to a breakdown of the free market economy. If the U.S. were to decide USPS was in trouble and therefore starts blocking DHL and FedEx’s websites it would prohibit capitalism. Another scenario could be the censoring of information about the Middle East. With this wealth of information gone, propaganda would become one of the largest sources of information. Knowing what the culture of the Middle East really was would become exponentially harder and could cause misguided hate and racism.
The strongest counter argument to a free internet in most people’s eyes is children’s protection. People believe if the government does not censor the internet their child or others could become mental damaged or come in contact with danger. However, it is the parent’s responsibility to censor what their children see. An online reviewing site reviews seven different applications alone for censoring the internet on home computers (Rubenking). The masses should not have their movement restricted on the internet because parents are too concerned with what their children may encounter. The second most plausible argument is the access of guides for criminal activity online. What should be made of that, however, is that the point is mute. Anyone who plans on committing a crime is going to commit it guide or not. If they were really so inclined to do it well they would just find someone who’s experienced. Regardless of that, people have the right to read and produce these guides all they want. Censoring the internet so they couldn’t get these guides would simply be un-constitutional and fruitless.
May have missed some other minor mistakes, but I'll let someone else take a shot.
)
