Internet Censorship Essay - We Need Censorship to Protect Children Online :: Argumentative Persuasive Topics

We Need Censorship to Protect Children Online One Source Cited This paper will elaborate the reasons wherefore minors deserve legislative protection while using the internet, and how to implement this protection. Most families agree that the custody, care, and nurture of the child resides first with the parent. On the other hand, the general availability of the Internet presents opportunities for minors to access materials through the World Wide Web in a manner that can frustrate parental superintendence or tally, for example, at the local public library(Morales). The protection of the physical and psychological well- organism of minors by shielding them from materials that are harmful to them is a obligate interest to intimately parents. To date, while the industry has developed innovative ways to help parents and educators restrict material that is harmful to minors through parental control protections and self-regulation, such efforts have not provided a national solutio n to the problem of minors accessing harmful material on the World Wide Web. Notwithstanding the introduction of protections that limit the distribution over the World Wide Web of material that is harmful to minors, parents, educators, and industry must continue efforts to find ways to protect children from being exposed to harmful material found on the Internet. Meanwhile, a prohibition on the distribution of material harmful to minors, combined with legitimate defenses, is currently the most effective and least restrictive means by which to satisfy the compelling interest of parents. Such prohibition should include the following conduct Whoever knowingly and with cognition of the character of the material, in interstate or foreign commerce by means of the World Wide Web, makes every communication for commercial purposes that is available to any minor and that includes any material that is harmful to minors shall be fined and possibly imprisoned. Intentional repetition of this v iolation should accrue greater penalties. This prohibition should not give way to carriers and other internet service providers, including (1) a telecommunications carrier engage in the provision of a telecommunications service (2) a person engaged in the strain of providing an Internet access service (3) a person engaged in the business of providing an Internet information location tool or (4) similarly engaged in the transmission, storage, retrieval, hosting, formatting, or translation (or any combination thereof) of a communication made by another person, without selection or alteration of the content of the communication.