1. Introduction
In today’s New Media Age, most individuals of all ages have access to the Web. That access gives them the freedom to consume and publish information of their choice, be it harmful or dangerous – which is where the controversial question “Should the Web be censored?” comes in.
The reasons for Web censorship are numerous. They may vary from parents or guardians wanting to shelter children from accessing content which is considered unsuitable for their age, to businesses wanting to improve the productivity of their employees by limiting access to webpages that they deem to be distractions, or even to authoritarian governments attempting to regulate citizens’ access to information.
No matter the motivation for censorship, the outcome is that access to certain websites or webpages are blocked, based on what the individual, business or authoritarian deems undesirable.
2. Definition of Key Terms
Web or Internet censorship - The control or suppression of accessing or publishing certain information on the Internet.
New Media Age - Also known as the Computer Age or Digital Age, is a period where an economy is based on information computerization.
Technological freedom - The freedom to use technology such as the Internet to publish and consume information of one’s choice.
Hate speech - Speech which attacks a person or group on the basis of attributes such as race, religion, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, disability, or gender.
3. What is Web censorship?
In order to answer the question “Should the Web be censored?”, this essay will consider the definition of Web censorship. Thereafter, it will explore the different levels of Web censorship, from Web-filtering software and hardware, to the Web-censorship tools used by businesses and governments. Lastly, I will give my personal opinion in respect of each level.
According to Laws (Laws.com, 2017). “Internet censorship is the control or suppression of accessing or publishing certain information on the Internet. Internet censorship aims to block users from accessing information that is typically viewed as harmful…or discourage publishers from producing certain content that can be deemed as hurtful...”
4. Different levels of Web censorship
4.1 Web censorship at home
Parents around the world seem to agree that the Web is filled with content which should not be seen by children. Websites containing pornography or hate speech, or even gambling websites and chat rooms, can expose children to dangerous or harmful content and people. One way to prevent this could be by parents supervising their children whenever they are online. I feel that supervising a child’s access to the Web at all times can become tedious for the parents and almost unbearable for the child who wants to surf the web unrestricted.
That is where hardware and software solutions can help. Web-filtering programs such as Net Nanny or CYBERsitter are able to restrict or completely block access to dangerous or harmful websites. All web-filtering programs typically have numerous options for parents to select when attempting to limit access to their children. “CYBERsitter has 35 filter categories, including pornography and social-networking sites” (CYBERsitter, 2017).
The majority of Web filters make use of two main methods when blocking content: Blacklists and keyword blocking. “A blacklist is a list of Web sites that the Web filter's creators have designated as undesirable.” (Strickland, 2008). Those blacklists are updated continuously, much like antivirus software. A child will not be able to access any of the blacklisted websites.
Keyboard blocking means that a webpage is scanned by the Web filter the moment a child attempts to access it. The Web filter checks for specific keywords which are considered to be inappropriate. If the Web filter concludes that the webpage is not suitable, access to it is denied.
An alternative option is for parents is to utilise a firewall. “A computer firewall provides protection from dangerous or undesirable content. They act as a barrier between the Internet and your computer network” (Strickland, 2008). Like Web-filtering programs, firewalls can be in the form of both hardware and software and allow access to safe content only.
4.2 Web censorship in the workplace
The core aim of most profit-making businesses is to make an economic profit. In order for businesses to make a profit, employees should achieve a high level of productivity, with as few distractions as possible. That is why many businesses limit the Web access of their employees to prevent them from wasting time on websites which can decrease their productivity. Another major reason for censorship in the workplace is to prevent or limit access to unsuitable content such as pornography. Pornography has been proven to have negative effects on people who consume it -- specifically, it negatively affects men’s attitudes towards women (Derksen, 2013). Consumption of pornography can also lead to cases of sexual-harassment claims or lawsuits in the workplace, which can lead to a bad reputation for the business.
The Web-filtering software used by Network Administrators in businesses is very similar to the software used by parents at home. The main difference is that businesses cannot afford to block websites which their employees require to access legitimately, therefore they tend to rely heavily on firewalls for blocking specific webpages and occasionally entire domains. When employees attempt to access a restricted webpage, they receive a message from the Network Administrator which indicates that access to the webpage has been denied or restricted.
4.3 Web censorship at an International level
Many countries use some form of Web censorship, - some at a much higher level than others. In South Africa, there are certain websites which are considered illegal and which the citizens are restricted from accessing. Public libraries, Internet cafés and schools usually have user-agreement policies which the users need to acknowledge that they have read, understood and accepted and before they are allowed to use the computers. They also usually have Web-filtering software and Network Administrators monitoring them. There are many countries which have much stricter Web censorship policies.
OpenNet Initiative (ONI) is an organisation which informs the public about Web policies from around the world (OpenNet Initiative, 2017). According to ONI, Web filtering can be classified into four categories:
· Political: Content that includes views contrary to the respective country's policies. The political category also includes content related to human rights, religious movements and other social causes
· Social: Web pages that focus on sexuality, gambling, drugs and other subjects that a nation might deem offensive
· Conflict/Security: Pages that relate to wars, skirmishes, dissent and other conflicts
· Internet tools: Web sites that offer tools like e-mail, instant messaging, language translation applications and ways to circumvent censorship.
Countries like South Africa are fairly open-minded and have only a small number of policies which restrict the access to certain webpages (Cardo, 2017). According to (Reporters Without Borders , 2016), countries with the strongest Web censorship policies are:
· Belarus
· China
· Cuba
· Egypt
· Iran
· Myanmar
· North Korea
· Saudi Arabia
· Syria
· Tunisia
· Turkmenistan
· Uzbekistan
· Vietnam.
For some countries, restricting access to certain webpages is not enough. For example, the government of Myanmar has constant surveillance over Internet cafes. It is not unusual for computers there to take screenshots of the content their users are viewing every few minutes (OpenNet Initiative, 2017). China has a highly advanced filtering system known as the Great Firewall of China. This filtering system is constantly restricting access to webpages and blogs which the government deems as illegal, in real time (Wiseman, 2017). Cuba has taken Web censorship a step further and has completely banned its citizens from using the Web in their private capacity. If they would like to access the Web, they will need do so in a public location. (Committee To Protect Journalists, 2017).
5. Conclusion
So, should the Web be censored? Well, that depends on the levels of censorship, as well as the motivation as to why it was implemented.
When it comes to Web censorship at home, I believe that parents should censor certain websites to shield their children. At the same time, children should be educated on how to use the Web as a tool for increasing knowledge and answering questions. They should also be alerted to the dangers of not using the Web correctly.
With regard to Web censorship in the workplace, here too I agree that employees can easily become distracted by social-media websites or any website which will allow them to become distracted from the job. Employees should also be trained in how to utilise the Web as a tool to increase their productivity, so that it is less of a distraction.
Web censorship at an International level, however, is something I do not fully agree with. I believe that the citizens of all countries should have the right to browse any website of their choice, provided they are using their own personal computers. Citizens should be allowed to create their own websites and blogs, wherein they state their own opinions on topics of their choice. I also believe that in the same way that citizens are allowed freedom of speech, so to, should they be allowed to freedom of speech online when publishing information, provided that said information does not infringe on someone else’s basic human rights.
Lastly, I believe that it is the responsibility of all Web users to be educated and to treat the Web with respect. We should always remember “Whenever there is great power…there is great responsibility“(Cumming, 1854). The Web is a wonderfully powerful tool. It can allow us to do so many positive things in this world that we should not be using it for negative or harmful purposes like hate speech or exploitative pornography.
6. References
Cardo, M., 2017. Politics Web. [Online]
Available at: http://www.politicsweb.co.za/opinion/the-closing-of-the-south-african-mind
[Accessed 2 June 2017].
Committee To Protect Journalists, 2017. Repressive nations threaten jail terms, restrict Internet to silence press. [Online]
Available at: https://cpj.org/2015/04/10-most-censored-countries.php
[Accessed 2 June 2017].
Cumming, R. J., 1854. The Parliamentary Debates from the Year 1803. Scotland: s.n.
CYBERsitter, 2017. CYBERsitter. [Online]
Available at: https://www.cybersitter.com/
[Accessed 1 June 2017].
Derksen, D. S., 2013. Top Five Researched Negative Effects of Pornography. [Online]
Available at: http://www.drsyrasderksen.com/blog/effects-of-pornography#sthash.3bCBeiMF.dpbs
[Accessed 5 June 2017].
Laws.com, 2017. Laws. [Online]
Available at: http://court.laws.com/internet-censorship
[Accessed 26 May 2017].
OpenNet Initiative, 2017. OpenNet Initiative. [Online]
Available at: https://opennet.net/
[Accessed 4 June 2017].
Reporters Without Borders , 2016. Reporters Without Borders. [Online]
Available at: https://rsf.org/en/reports/beset-online-surveillance-and-content-filtering-netizens-fight
[Accessed 4 June 2017].
Strickland, J., 2008. How Internet Censorship Works. [Online]
Available at: http://computer.howstuffworks.com/internet-censorship.htm
[Accessed 4 June 2017].
Wiseman, P., 2017. Cracking the 'Great Firewall' of China's Web censorship. [Online]
Available at: http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=4707107&page=1
[Accessed 4 June 2017].
0 comments:
Post a Comment