Giving Up Freedom of Speech -- Censorship on Hate Sites
The Internet is the largest and most accessible form of mass media available today. It allows anyone with a few simple tools to consume, and produce, information and ideas to millions of people at a practically non-existent cost; however, with the Internet growing at such a fast pace, controversies are arising because of varied types of speech can be easily distributed to children. And the most debatable issue is the banning of speech, which are often found offensive to minority and women, advocated on the hate sites. The supporters of pro-banning hate sites suggest that the government of the United States should regulate the existence of hate sites, and if necessary, have to completely ban on all hate sites. Yet, numerous factors indicate censorship of this force is not possible, and not the government's place. It should be left up to the users to decide what is broadcast. Most importantly, censorship of the Internet impairs the expression of ideas and infringes against the First Amendment of the Constitution. First of all, censoring the Internet as a whole is not possible since the setting standard of hate site is indefinable. Cyberspace is the most decentralized form of communication today making policing the Internet
"Censorship." New Grolier Electronic Encyclopedia 1991; Grolier electronic publishing, Inc. 2/15/1997 Banning hate sites will never eliminate one's hatred toward another; instead, "the appropriate response to speech with which one disagrees in a free society is not censor ship but counter speech - more speech, not less."(Strossen, 465). Many individuals assume that the supporters of the anti-banning hate sites, also, support hatred toward others-this is not true. Supporting anti-banning of hate sites "does not mean that (people) endorse the views it expresses. It is because (they) believe people are quite capable of making up their own mind about what they read or see on the Net"(http://www.netfreedom.org/racism/index2.html). With the guarantee of the First Amendment, "(it) puts a premium on the decision-making ability of each of (individuals) to weigh up all the arguments and draw (their) own conclusion" (http://www.netfreedom.org/racism/index2.html). Yes, hate literature and hate sites do exist on the Internet, but they are insignificant to the legitimate applications of the Internet. Some material may be offensive to one, but may be quite valuable to another. As Holmes suggested, "Every idea is an incitement"(Strossen, 466). By allowing more varied types of speech advocated on the Internet, at least, people have a chance to hear stories of both sides and therefore realize the fallacy. a virtually futile task. Unlike television or radio, "the Internet consists thousands of individual computers and networks, with million of speakers, information providers and information users, and no centralized distribution point"(ACLU vs. Reno Brief, 1). No guards watch to see who goes where and if that place is appropriate. The Internet has grown to be a global network. Just because one country deems something inappropriate does not mean that another will comply with the decision and follow the ruling. If posting anti-communism speech was banned in China, for example, someone in Switzerland could post those speeches and the Chinese would have access to every single word of speech. Another example, this being completely factual, occurred in Ontario concerning the Karla Homolka/Paul Bernado trial. The courts decided that in order not to influence the juror
Some common words found in the essay are:
Genesis Neo-Nazis, Supreme Court, , China China, Homolka/Paul Bernado, Constitution Censorship, Reno Brief, Amendment Constitution, Jews Apparently, hate sites, Nazi Germany, freedom speech, 2/15/1997 censorship, banning hate, banning hate sites, anti-banning hate sites, anti-banning hate, center york st, counter speech, minority women, varied types, types speech, st martin's prese, grolier electronic, left center york,
Approximate Word count = 1533
Approximate Pages = 6 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
