Example research essay topic: Civil Liberties Union American Civil Liberties - 1,725 words

NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote

Surfing the Internet is like strolling through a library. With just one click of the mouse, a person can enter an amazing world of information. The Internet takes away the inconvenience of having to drive to the public library, plus, the Internet is open twenty-four hours a day. But, not only can a person research information on the Internet, he can shop for products, read the latest news and stocks, meet new people, not only in the United States, but in other countries as well, look for a job, and more. With the many application of the Internet, so many more opportunities for individuals exist. Also, a new meaning of Its A Small World After All comes to mind when surfing through the World Wide Web.

But not all is grand and spectacular in the Internet world. The Internet has been a major concern of the American people and government for the last few years with controversies over certain types of web sites displayed over the Internet including pornography, hate group web sites, inappropriate literature, and other various kinds of web sites. Their main concern for these types of web sites is that this material is easily accessible to a young, impressionable audience. Some believe that censorship of the Internet is not the best solution. There are other alternatives to censorship that wont violate the free speech clause as stated in the First Amendment.

First of all, the reason why censorship is not the best solution is because the censorship of expressions of speech is a violation of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. This argument is supported by the United States Supreme Court ruling in the landmark case of American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) v. Janet Reno. On June 26, 1997, the Supreme Court held in ACLU v. Reno that the Communication Decency Act, which would have made it a crime to communicate anything indecent on the Internet, violated the First Amendment (ACLU) This ruling declared that the Internet is entitled to the highest level of free speech protection.

In other words, anything printed on the Internet deserves the same amount of protection as any book or magazine that is sold at a store or available at the local library; this is why surfing the net is similar to going Although the Communication Decency Act (CDA) was declared unconstitutional, a supporter of the act, Senator J. James Exon, did have good intentions in trying to come up with a solution for the Internet problem. The main goal of the CDA was to protect children from the indecent material accessible on the net. I think that protecting the children is a very crucial element that must be considered in developing the best solution, however, not at the expense of free speech.

Abridging the First Amendment right of free speech is the flaw associated with the CDA, which is the reason why it is wrong. Another reason why Internet censorship should not go into effect is that the methods of censorship including rating systems and filters are prejudice; rating systems do not accurately judge. systems are deficient because they will cause controversial speech to be censored. According to the ACLU, Kiyoshi Kuromiya, founder and sole operator of Critical Path AIDS Project, has a web site that includes safer sex information written in street language with explicit diagrams, in order to reach the widest possible audience (ACLU). If his web site is rated, it will be in the same category as pornography as a result of its references to sex and it will be blocked by a majority of the audience that he wishes to view his web site. In all actuality, his Critical Path Aids Project web site is just an informative speech about the prevention of AIDS, not pornography.

This type of rating system is not fair because even though his web site mentions sex or deals with sex, it shouldnt be considered pornography or placed in the same category as pornography. systems are simply unequipped to properly rate or judge the diversity of content that is available on the Internet. To put it briefly, rating systems are based on taste and opinion, which does not accurately fit the disposition of the general population. One question that poses a problem with the rating system is how will foreign material be rated? Since half of all Internet speech originates from outside the United States, how would American rating make sense to a Turk whose standards and beliefs are totally different from American culture (ACLU)? Despite all good intentions, the application of rating systems is unsuitable for the Internet.

The Internet isnt like the television where the Playboy channel can be clocked and the Discovery channel is kept unblocked as well. Theres just too much information in cyberspace to keep tabs on. Even if all controversial speech is blocked, it will still exist because hackers will always have the ability and technology to escape through filters and establish their prohibited, Instead of using censorship, I recommend that the choice be left up to the Internet user. The primary responsibility for determining what speech is appropriate or inappropriate should remain with the individual Internet user. Let the individual censor what he doesnt want to see or read. When an individual logs onto the Internet, he has the choice to double-click on the link that leads to pornography or to the commentary on the K Klux Klan.

Even though pornography had been the most controversial topic arising from the use of the Internet in recent years, its availability on the Internet has caused fear and a moral panic among almost everyone (Elmer-Dewitt 35). I can understand this outrage from the public against pornography on the Internet. Its a scary thought to know that a child can accidentally stumble onto a web site that is filled with pornography, but a child can also accidentally come upon dads hidden stash of porno magazines the same way. From my own experience, every time I log onto my e-mail server, my mailbox is full of porno mail. I dont even look at the junk mail; only delete the unwanted mail and block the sender from ever sending me mail again.

I wasnt forced to look at the pornography because I still had a choice to not look at the undesired material. And I chose not to look at the material because my parents instilled in me values and morals. As far as protecting children from the indecent or controversial material, parents should take the responsibility for determining what their children should access on the Internet. Parents already take on the responsibility of determining what their children watch on television, listen to on the radio, and read; they should supervise where they surf on the Internet as well. Parents may act as if it is a big hassle to watch over their childrens shoulder, but a small price to pay to protect them from the indecent material on the Internet. Perhaps parents need to educate their children more thoroughly about the Internet and its dangers.

Web sites that teach kids valuable tips on the net are available on the Internet. The Federal Trade Commission, who provides one of these types of web sites, has been a big supporter in protecting children on the Internet. Recently the Childrens Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) was passed by the U. S. Congress in November of 1998 (FTC). This act requires that operators of online services or web sites must obtain parental consent prior to the collection, use, disclosure, or display of the personal information of children (FTC).

This act just went into effect April 21, 2000. From now on, privacy policies are required to be available through a link on every web sites homepage where general information about the web site is provided. COPPA is just one of the few ways that children can be protected on the Internet. But, more importantly, it is up to the parents of these children to supervise their activity on the net. Since parents can control what children watch on television with a v-chip (violence chip) that blocks certain channels, maybe parents can control what their children see on the Internet with user-based programs that allow the parents to make their own list of blocked sites, parents should be able to determine what sites they want blocked. It is very important that the user-based software provide maximum user control.

If the online software companies have most of the control, the companies rating system would discriminate against or censor much of the content, as mentioned previously. There are many programs available with parental control features, but sometimes this kind of software goes too far and limits access to or censors inconvenient web sites, or filters potentially educational materials regarding AIDS and drug abuse prevention (Akdeniz). This ties into the reason why censorship and rating systems are wrong. Whether playing, shopping, studying, or just surfing, todays children are taking advantage of all that the Internet has to offer. At the same time, children are susceptible to the dangers of the Internet as well, including pornography and other inappropriate material. Some propose that censorship is the best solution.

I disagree with that proposal because censorship of free speech is a violation of the First Amendment and the rating systems and filters used to regulate content on the net creates discrimination and censorship as well. The number one priority in creating a solution is the protection of children, and this protection begins with the parents. Parents know best what material is appropriate or inappropriate for their children. Parents have the responsibility to determine what their children watch on television. Also, parents need to educate their children about the dangers on the Internet and they need to explain to them why they dont want them to visit such web sites. Censorship of the Internet is just a quick-fix and inefficient solution to solving the Internet problem.

Bibliography: Works Cited Akdeniz, Yama. The Regulation of Pornography and Child Pornography on the Internet. The Journal of Information, Law and Technology. 28 Feb. 1997. American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). Fahrenheit 451. 2: Is Cyberspace Burning? Cyber-Liberties. 1997.

Elmer-Dewitt, Philip. On a Screen near You: Cyber porn. Time. 3 Jul. 1995: 34 - 41. Federal Trade Commission (FTC). Childrens Online Privacy Protection Act of 1998. 20 Oct. 1999...

Research essay sample on Civil Liberties Union American Civil Liberties