Censorship? Or no censorship? Some argue it's better for children, while others would say it in fact hurts children. Does it protect national security? Do we really need it to maintain peace? Does it keep us blinded? Proponents argue that internet censorship is good because of today's youth and security, while opponents argue it actually hurts the youth, and destroys democracy.
“Having more internet regulations and censorship will prevent terrorist acts and improve security.” “If the amount and kind of information anyone can access and disseminate online, terrorists will have limited access, if not, no access to pertinent information that they can use to cause harm. Conversely, people with bad intentions will not have a venue to persuade the …show more content…
"Independent, aggressive journalism strengthens American democracy, improves the lives of its citizens, checks the abuses of powerful people, supports the weakest members of society, connects us all to one another, educates and entertains us. News matters." (Gene) Media censorship helps citizens stay informed of the powerful people in the world, supports the lowest people in the United States and connects people to each other through social media sites like Facebook, Snapchat, and Instagram. Media is critical in a democracy, to keep people informed of the changes around them and help keep up on what the government is doing. Ownership limits and laws help keep the news more spread, and less centralized making the news you get more reliable and less likely to have bias. This doesn’t mean however that all news sources are biased or filled with blatant …show more content…
Internet regulations could easily shift even though their power now, is nothing like what it could turn into. “It's worth reminding ourselves ... that surrendering privacy does not automatically make us more secure—that systems of surveillance can themselves be a major source of insecurity.” (Sanchez )Surveillance can make us insecure and not more secure as the government and others think. With major hacks happening in the past, the government is able to use google to find criminals, and Chinese hackers used it to find people who spoke out about their government. Things can be turned around really easily. There was also the social security number hack that happened within the past month and they had access to over 140 million Americans. (Sanchez) The government could easily turn good to bad, and limit our internet freedoms, China has the most internet censorship of people, and most of them would be hung if to speak out about China.
Proponents argue that internet censorship is good because of today's youth and security, while opponents argue it actually hurts the youth, and destroys democracy. This is a very controversial topic with both sides having many points, however all the points are valid. This is an important issue because it stresses the importance of whether or not censorship is more helpful or hurtful, and it seems today we still don’t know and meet in the
“Having more internet regulations and censorship will prevent terrorist acts and improve security.” “If the amount and kind of information anyone can access and disseminate online, terrorists will have limited access, if not, no access to pertinent information that they can use to cause harm. Conversely, people with bad intentions will not have a venue to persuade the …show more content…
"Independent, aggressive journalism strengthens American democracy, improves the lives of its citizens, checks the abuses of powerful people, supports the weakest members of society, connects us all to one another, educates and entertains us. News matters." (Gene) Media censorship helps citizens stay informed of the powerful people in the world, supports the lowest people in the United States and connects people to each other through social media sites like Facebook, Snapchat, and Instagram. Media is critical in a democracy, to keep people informed of the changes around them and help keep up on what the government is doing. Ownership limits and laws help keep the news more spread, and less centralized making the news you get more reliable and less likely to have bias. This doesn’t mean however that all news sources are biased or filled with blatant …show more content…
Internet regulations could easily shift even though their power now, is nothing like what it could turn into. “It's worth reminding ourselves ... that surrendering privacy does not automatically make us more secure—that systems of surveillance can themselves be a major source of insecurity.” (Sanchez )Surveillance can make us insecure and not more secure as the government and others think. With major hacks happening in the past, the government is able to use google to find criminals, and Chinese hackers used it to find people who spoke out about their government. Things can be turned around really easily. There was also the social security number hack that happened within the past month and they had access to over 140 million Americans. (Sanchez) The government could easily turn good to bad, and limit our internet freedoms, China has the most internet censorship of people, and most of them would be hung if to speak out about China.
Proponents argue that internet censorship is good because of today's youth and security, while opponents argue it actually hurts the youth, and destroys democracy. This is a very controversial topic with both sides having many points, however all the points are valid. This is an important issue because it stresses the importance of whether or not censorship is more helpful or hurtful, and it seems today we still don’t know and meet in the