Sensoring Pornography On The Internet

The Internet is now one of the main communicating tools of the

One solution that was tried by the American Government was the communications Decency Act (CDA) as part of the Telecommunications Reform Act passed by congress on February 1, 1996. “Although the purpose of the CDA was to protect young children from accessing and viewing material of sexually explicit content on the internet, the wording of that act was so broad and poorly defined that it could have deprived many adults of information they needed in the areas of health, art, news, and literature” (Wilkins 4-7). The Government would restrict many people from finding facts that could save peoples lives. Another case of “Big Brother” putting his foot in a doorway where he does not belong, Thankfully, the United states Supreme Court ruled that the act was unconstitutional an June 6, 1997. “The act violated that First Amendment guarantee of freedom of speech and would have threatened to torch a large segment of the Internet community” (Wilkins 4-7). This was a major victory for many people in the Internet community.

On the Internet, more and more websites are committed to broadcasting pornography. “Some people roam the networks collecting massive amounts of what is more sophisticated called erotica. Most of it, frankly, is smut” (Van der Leun 36-37). These websites are open to anyone who has a modem, a phone line, and who is connected to the Internet through a service such as American Online (AOL). “Though one never finds mention of it in the corporate literature, AOL owes much of its early success to middle-aged men and teenage boys spending endless hours in sex chat rooms” (Luenfeld 26-27).

The movie ratings system is proof that the government should not get involved in censorship of the Internet. “We have fooled ourselves into thinking that movie ratings solve the problem of violence. But the tragic shootings in early December (1997) demonstrated the slippery nature of voluntary censorship. Apparently a movie pilot contributed to the young gunman’s decision to open fire on his classmates” (Lewis). History shows that the government actions- - media ratings, the V-chip (in all likelihood), information campaigns- to prevent children from gaining access to inappropriate material ought to be a message for society. Similarly, voluntary censorship by those who control a given medium has its limits” (Lewis 420-421). The government just cannot get things right.

That is why I propose a bill to not censor the Internet. There are private solutions in America that will give parents peace of mind, such as Net Nanny, CYBERsitter, and Surf Watch. These solutions censor the Internet in a way that information will not be limited, but parents have the opportunity to limit the things their child will see on the Internet. The American government will provide tax breaks for parents who purchase these programs for their computer. The parents must have documentation of children in the household and the computer that they purchased the software program for. An advantage of these programs would be to take the government out of the loop and let parents have a say in what their child sees on the Internet. Also, the government does not violate freedom of speech. The disadvantage of the censoring programs is taken care of due to the tax break provided by the government. The bill will b

Some topics in this essay:
Liberties Union, Webster’s Dictionary, Net Nanny, Online AOL, Internet American, Carnegie Mellon, Reform Act, Cindy Crawford, CYBERsitter Windows, Lewis History, american government, censor internet, wilkins 4-7, pornography internet, van der leun, allow parents, kids viewing, van der, internet parents, protect children, leun 36-37, der leun 36-37, solutions allow parents, parents control kids, allow parents control,