| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "INTERNET CENSORSHIP": |
|
|
Internet Censorship, 2002.
A look at the controversial topic of internet censorship.
1,400 words (approx. 5.6 pages), 7 sources, $ 53.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This six-page-paper presents a discussion on the topic of Internet censorship. The legal, ethical and constitutional aspects are all detailed as well as the social responsibility issue.
| |
|
Internet Censorship: The Freedom of Speech versus the Almighty Dollar, 2002.
This paper discusses the attempts of Congress to censor the Internet despite censorship legislation being struck down by the Supreme Court.
2,395 words (approx. 9.6 pages), 7 sources, MLA, $ 73.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines the thesis that the government is playing a wild card in its attempt to censor the Internet. It discusses several laws and examines how public libraries who do not censor the Internet can suffer funding losses.
From the Paper
"In Antigone, Sophocles wrote, "There is nothing in the world so demoralizing as money." Today's society revolves around money. Without money, no person, organization, corporation, or entity can function. It is well known that in the hands of the government, when push comes to shove, money pushes, money shoves, and, more often than not, money prevails. In other words, if the government wants something done, money is the wild card. The issue of Internet censorship is no different. For years, the United States government has pushed to place censors on the Internet. After having censorship legislation stuck down by the Supreme Court, the government turned its attention to censorship of the Internet in public libraries and public schools. In recent months, the issue of censorship of the Internet in public libraries and public schools has reached a boiling point. When closely studied, it is obvious that the government has chosen to pursue censorship within libraries and public schools because all other censorship avenues have been blocked. Furthermore, it is also obvious that the government is playing their wild card in their attempt to censor, essentially backing libraries into a comer with legislation that denies public libraries and schools significant amounts of governmental funding if Internet censorship guidelines are not followed. Because the issue of Internet censorship centers on the First Amendment, it is important to understand exactly what the freedom of speech guarantees United States citizens. Since its inception, the First Amendment's guarantee of the freedom of speech has plagued all forms of."
| |
|
An Overview of Internet Censorship, 2000.
A look at the law regarding Internet censorship and tools that are used to censor, as well as a debate about the extent of censorship that should be in place.
1,040 words (approx. 4.2 pages), 4 sources, $ 36.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"Countries with a history of limiting free expression, such as China and Singapore, are seeking to extend their controls into cyberspace. Meanwhile, countries with more democratic traditions, such as the United States and members of the European Union, are considering policies that seek to control problems like racism and pornography, which could end up restricting speech on the Internet."
| |
|
Internet Censorship, 2002.
A discussion of the policy in the U.S. towards censorship on the internet and whether it is justified.
650 words (approx. 2.6 pages), 2 sources, $ 26.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper answers the question of whether the U.S. government should be allowed to censor material on the Internet, or whether that would be a violation of free speech. The position that Internet material should not be censored is justified using the principle of freedom of speech, and also because of differences that exist between the Internet and other media.
| |
|
Internet Censorship, 2001.
A look into why the government should not try to censor the Internet and an overview of past censorship attempts.
1,150 words (approx. 4.6 pages), 5 sources, $ 39.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper deals with laws in place on Internet censorship and why they are unjust. The author discusses why the American government should not attempt to censor the Internet with emphasis on children's' rights.
From the Paper
"The United States Constitution guarantees each American the right to free speech and a free press. Does the government then have the right to tell you that something isn?t appropriate to be said or published? No. Through control, regulation and censorship, it seems as if the only free place to publish is on the Internet. However, the government now wants to pass legislation concerning Internet content. Government officials should not regulate what can or cannot be found on the Internet."
| |
|
Banning Internet Censorship, 2002.
An argument advocating the full right to free speech on the Internet, with a focus on pornography.
680 words (approx. 2.7 pages), 3 sources, APA, $ 24.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explores both sides of the internet censorship debate and settles upon the advocacy of unbridled free speech. The following topics are discussed in detail-- the presence of child pornography on the internet; the unique global audience that the internet attracts; the subsequent inconsistent standards for "indecent material"; the efforts of conservatives and liberals to enact internet-related legislation; and the possible consequences of curtailing the internet's voice. The paper ends with the notion that silencing "indecent material" on the internet would silence a world-wide web of voices that is still growing as we speak.
From the Paper
"Harmful objects are kept from children by locks on doors and tabs on cupboards. Now, right-wing Conservatives wish to apply this same child-proofing strategy to the Internet. The Communications Decency Act ? backed by such groups as the Family Research Council and the Christian Coalition ? would have made it illegal to transmit ?indecent? material to children online, had it not been struck down by the Supreme Court. The similarly themed Child Online Protection Act sought to demand ?ID verification? from those that visit ?adult? sites. The problem with such legislation is that the Internet ? unlike television, radio, or print ? is trafficked by a global audience unaffected by the strength of broadcast signals or the location of paper routes. For this very reason, provincial definitions of ?pornography? or ?indecent material? cannot be applied to the Internet without abridging First Amendment protection. To ban pornography from the Internet would be to curtail a medium that is fully deserving of the right to free speech."
| |
|
Internet Censorship, 2007.
An argument against John Carr's suggestion in "It's Time to Tackle Cyberporn" that censoring the Internet is the most effective way to prevent children from accessing pornography.
1,280 words (approx. 5.1 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 43.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the article by John Carr entitled "It's Time to Tackle Cyberporn." The paper argues that Carr's solution to Internet pornography is too radical and that it fails to lay the responsibility for keeping children out of trouble, with the parents, where it belongs. The paper goes on to suggest that his solution steps on the Bill of Rights, which guarantees freedom of speech.
Table of Contents:
Introduction: Why is Internet Porn an Issue? What's Wrong?
Criteria For My Argument
Ethical Argument: Principles
Ethical Argument: Consequences
From the Paper
"Two, Carr suggests a "ratings system" where, like music and movies, parents would be able to see whether it's "family-friendly" or not. This is an absurd notion, since there are virtually thousands of new Web sites going online every day, and the trickery that can be used in presenting the substance of their material will fool any ratings software. And in order to promote his point about strict ratings system Carr uses emotional arguments rather than principle-based arguments. He refers to those like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) - who resist any form of censorship on the Web - as having "anxieties...[that are] at best misplaced and at worst paranoid, reckless or self-serving." So, his principle arguments are one, outdated, and two, based on speculation about possible "ratings systems" - which are not bad, but have limited application to the real problem, which is parents who do not supervise their children with intelligent, firm strategies."
| |
|
Censorship on the Internet, 2007.
A forceful argument calling for censorship to be eliminated on the Internet.
807 words (approx. 3.2 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 28.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper claims that censorship on the Internet represents one of the greatest threats to the integrity and usefulness of the Internet as a medium for the exchange of information. The paper argues against totalitarian and repressive regimes controlling their citizenry by means of censorship. It further argues against those that wish to foist their own morals on others by limiting the access individuals have to pornographic material. The paper asserts that censorship is a practice that is exacted by the powerful upon the weak to forward some agenda. The paper contends that as a practice, censorship should be eliminated on the Internet or, at the very least, reduced at every opportunity.
From the Paper
"The growing ubiquity of the Internet means that new issues, once confined to the "real" world, have spilled over into cyberspace. Censorship in particular has been a significant concern ever since the Internet grew into a popular medium of communication. Now, unfortunately, censorship is no longer a concern; instead, it is a reality on the Internet and one that seems to be ever-increasing. Censorship on the Internet represents one of the greatest threats to the integrity and usefulness of the Internet as a medium for the exchange of information."
| |
|
Censorship on the Internet, 2006.
This paper explores the ongoing debate for and against censoring certain sites and materials on the internet.
1,840 words (approx. 7.4 pages), 3 sources, APA, $ 59.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This writer of this paper examines both sides of the controversial internet censorship debate and asks if instituting regulations that would censor certain websites and materials infringes on our basic human rights. Those who support internet censorship and those who oppose it both agree that adults must provide children with a safe and supportive environment in which to play and learn. This paper discusses the child protection and adult censorship debates which are often confused. This paper also details the various methods and strategies in blocking questionable websites on computers that are accessed by minors.
From the Paper
"This issue is an ongoing fierce debate both here in America and across the globe. Much of the debate is centered around practical concerns about any kind of solution. I therefor think it necessary that we examine our issue at hand both within ethical and practical concerns. If we come across too many practical problems, we may find that regulation may indeed need to be in the hands of the individuals. But as I intend to show, I think there are several viable options that clearly and effectively would regulate the current status of the Internet to which I am objecting."
| |
|
Censorship on the Internet, 2002.
An opinion piece on whether or not the internet should be censored.
755 words (approx. 3.0 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 26.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The author of this paper presents the argument for censorship on the internet, with a definite lean towards the negative side of the argument. The writer believes that those who try to censor the internet have in fact aimed their weapons at the wrong enemy. The paper explains the difference between the internet and the world wide web, with the internet being an older larger infrastructure and the www simply being a small part of its functionality. The writer therefore concludes that in fact it is not the internet which needs censoring but the aspects which belong on the web.
From the Paper
"The sides are divided unequally in the continuing debate over ?should we, or shouldn?t we?? And the choice of these two authors to argue against was based not because of the weakness of their arguments, or the irrationality of their defenses, but simply because they proved to be the least offensive of the readings offered in the particular section of the textbook."
| |
|
Censorship in Asia, 2002.
How censorship affects internet in Asia.
1,650 words (approx. 6.6 pages), 9 sources, $ 62.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the role of the Internet and how it is affecting censorship in Asia. The media has been controlled by government in Asia and the Internet is threatening this stranglehold.
| |
|
The Platform for Internet Content Selection, 2004.
An evaluation of the Platform for Internet Content Selection (PICS) and a discussion on whether it fulfils the objective of content control without censorship.
1,469 words (approx. 5.9 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 48.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines how, in an Internet=based world, PICS (Platform for Internet Content Selection) uses software that is put as a filter between the individual receiving the information and the online information provider. It describes how PICS is an incredibly flexible and potentially effective mechanism for content control on the Internet. It also discusses how it just might be too flexible and effective, since it creates an infrastructure that can be easily adopted to enforce a tight censorship net. It also shows how PICS can be manipulated by a government as a censorship tool because it can be installed to function as a censorship net, catching or filtering out whatever the government wants excluded.
From the Paper
"As mentioned above, PICS software recognizes a universal format of labels, but the content itself is not evaluated and labeled according to any one, universal standard. Providers of information either label their own content according to their own standard or leave the task to independent organizations. Each individual user can select the labeling standard that most conforms to their own standard. But this flexibility comes at a high cost. A new and separate market was created for organizations, each with a separate set of values, that create rating services that provide labels. Rating, however, is a very labor-intensive process."
| |
|
The Censorship of Art, 2002.
An overview of the controversies reagarding the censorship of art including over the Internet.
1,400 words (approx. 5.6 pages), 5 sources, $ 53.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper looks at the issue of censorship in art. This paper will identify some of the most recent controversies in the art world and defend the opinion that censorship stilts freedom of expression. This paper will also look at censorship in the areas of art pertaining in public places and on the Internet.
| |
|
Ethics and the Internet, 2002.
Examines the need for censorship and ethical standards in the internet age.
1,536 words (approx. 6.1 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 50.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
As access to the Internet in its various forms becomes more prevalent, parents and government officials have become more concerned about the possibility that children will be able to access areas of the internet containing obscene materials, pornographic images and even pedophiles on line looking for young people. The paper examines the need for legislation governing internet site contents and the arguments by those who criticize the move toward this type of legislation. The paper also examines the issue of assisted suicide over the internet.
From the Paper
"The issue of assisted suicide was publicized by the antics of Dr. Kevorkian, and for the time being that part of the debate seems to be ended because he has been convicted for killing one of the people seeking his help. This does not mean that the issue itself is ended, however, nor will it be so long as people are faced with making difficult decisions regarding their own lives in the face of insurmountable health problems and the accompanying suffering they must endure. The issue of assisted suicide is a moral and ethical dilemma, and this is true in spite of the fact that the government has tried to make it a simpler legal issue by passing laws against it. Whether it is illegal or not, people will consider assisted suicide when they feel that the need is great enough, and they will make their decision based less on the law and more on their situation."
| |
|
Censorship, 2002.
This paper presents a detailed examination of censorship. The writer explores the reasons that the first amendment should not always be followed and how censorship in some cases may be the best course of action.
1,254 words (approx. 5.0 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 42.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
An opinion paper about how there are times that censorship should be instituted. The writer argues that in most cases the attempt to censor or the act of censorship is something that should be fought at all costs, however there are occasional times when censorship would be beneficial. It explains why the nation should follow the constitutional first amendment in most instances but in light of recent historical events it is time to rethink the 100 percent rule. The use of censorship for the protection of millions is something that needs to be revisited, and embraced.
From the Paper
"On 9-11-2003 the nation watched in terror as the towers came down. Until then the nation?s residents had lived in the secure belief that they were untouchable and that the strength of the United States constitution and all of its amendments were a brick wall surrounding the country from harm(Page pg L15). The rights and protections of the first amendment have been challenged periodically throughout the nation?s history but after the terrorist attacks it has become evident that there needs to be some flexibility when it comes to the issue of censorship with regards to first amendment rights. In a recent survey more than half of those participants who took it believed that the time has come to provide some flexibility in the first amendment and that some forms of censorship are positive actions for the emotional, physical and collateral safety of those who live here. In the 2002 survey, nearly half of those questioned said they believe the First Amendment goes way overboard in guaranteeing rights to Americans? though many politicians spoke out in favor of the amendment(Page pg L15). "
|
|
|
