Jennifer Pasternak
Free Speech on the Internet
November 8, 2010
Research for CST: Home | Crime and Technology | Privacy and Technology
Freedom of Speech is defined in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution as part of the Bill of Rights. The First Amendment states that:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
This amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees freedom of expression, including press, for everyone. It does not limit the type of expression or press that individuals are entitled to. However, when the First Amendment was proposed in 1789 and enacted in 1791, the internet was not yet created; therefore, freedom of speech on the internet is not specifically included. This right must be inferred from the freedom of speech and press granted.Censoring is defined by the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary (2010) as:
There are laws that have been passed to try and limit access to obscenity on the Internet. The Communications Decency Act (CDA) of 1996 was Congresses’ first attempt to regulate pornographic material on the Internet by making it a criminal act. The CDA attempted to regulate both indecency (when available to children) and obscenity in cyberspace. It also has been interpreted to say that operators of Internet services are not to be construed as publishers of indecent or obscene material; therefore, they are not legally liable for what third parties distribute using their services.
“One section of the CDA defines indecency as speech depicting or describing sexual or excretory acts or organs in a patently offensive fashion under contemporary community standards” (Mangan & Wallace, 2010). Each of these three clauses could threaten the future of freedom of speech in the United States.
In 1997 the U.S. Supreme Court partially overturned the CDA in the Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union case. This case confirmed that Internet speech is entitled to complete protection by the First Amendment. Additionally, it allowed the Internet to expand without restriction on its content.
In 1998, Congress approved the Child Online Protection Act (COPA). The purpose of this Act is to prohibit online sites from knowingly making available to minors material that is harmful to them. This includes sexually explicit material meeting the definitions set forth in the Act. It is more narrowly focused then the CDA, as it only covers Internet “communications that are made for commercial purposes” (Internet censorship: Law & policy around the world, 2002).
However, a restraining order later in 1998 has prevented the enforcement of the Act. But, if the law were enforced, violators would be subject to fines of up to $50,000 per offense, prison terms of six months, or both.
In 2001, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued rules implementing the Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA). This Act “is a federal law enacted by Congress to address concerns about access to offensive content over the Internet on school and library computers. CIPA imposes certain types of requirements on any school or library that receives funding for Internet access or internal connections from the E-rate program” (Children’s Internet Protection Act, 2009). The E-rate program is a program that makes technology more affordable for eligible libraries and schools.
CIPA requires that libraries and schools certify that they have an Internet safety policy. This includes Internet filters that block access to pictures that are:
Also, according to the Children’s Internet Protection Act Web site, Libraries and schools must also adopt and implement and Internet safety policy addressing:
Lastly, schools are required to “adopt and enforce a policy to monitor online activities of minors” (Children’s Internet Protection Act, 2009).
“Censorship is the control of information and ideas that are circulated within a society” (Censorship, Free Speech and the Internet, 2010). The government, society, or individuals can force censorship upon a group or individuals. Reasons for censorship include morals, military views, political views, and religious views.
Despite the laws in place there are still issues and concerns with censoring information on the Internet. One of the main problems with the CDA, COPA, and CIPA is that it is difficult to define obscenity, as the courts do not like overly broad definitions that would apply overly broad restrictions. Even if obscenity could be defined, it would be near impossible to find an accurate way to filter or block obscene content on the Internet.
Also, many people feel that these laws violate the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Not only would these laws limit the content minors’ access, it would also in turn limit the content adults are able to access in public libraries or in schools. This would make these laws unconstitutional.
There are many reasons why people think censorship on the Internet is a good thing. The foremost reason is the protection of minors from pornographic and potentially harmful information. Censoring information on the Internet can also promote good moral and develop a moral standard for the community viewing the information. This will work if extremely violent messages or tragic events are not shown, or if these topics are downplayed to the extent at which they took place.
Information and intelligence on the Internet can also be censored to protect national security or military affairs. This can include enemy knowledge, weapons technology, and other sensitive information. Additionally, it can also stop the spread of information that could be deemed dangerous. This type of information can include directions on how to make a bomb, information on biological warfare, and suicide methods.
Freedom of speech is not an absolute right. That is, laws do exist that limit some speech. These include regulation of obscenity, libel, slander, electronic mass communications, and access to government information or national security information.
The most compelling argument against Internet censoring is that it is violation of freedom of speech, which is a right guaranteed by the First Amendment even though some types of speech are not allowed (libel, slander, etc.). Additionally, if speech and press is allowed to be censored on the Internet, there is no guarantee that it will end with pornography. Scientific, religious, and education could be censored as well. This would limit the spread of ideas and knowledge throughout the world. In turn, this could lead to ignorance if people are unaware of scientific facts and other points of views.
Additionally, people could become biased in their beliefs if they are not exposed to other ideas. Or, people may stop questioning conservative or conformist ideas if they are sheltered from opposing beliefs on the Internet. Sheltering people from opposing beliefs or ideas is usually associated with dictatorship governments, no democratic governments.
One of the most prevalent social concerns with censoring information on the Internet is that once censoring is started it will be difficult to limit or end. Even if obscene, pornographic, and military information are the first to be censored, scientific, religious, and educational information could easily be censored next. Therefore, I do not believe it is a good idea to censor any information on the Internet. The chance that non-harmful information could be censored in the future is too great. It is important that we protect our right to the freedom of speech.
Calingaert, D. (2010). Authoritarianism vs. the Internet. Policy Review, (160), 63-75. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.
censoring. (2010). In Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. Retrieved October 27, 2010, from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/censoring .
Censorship, Free Speech and the Internet. Retrieved October 27, 2010, from http://webpages.scu.edu/ftp/eching/Censorship.htm .
Children's Internet Protection Act. (2009). Retrieved October 27, 2010, from http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/cipa.html .
Declaration of independence: Primary documents of american history. (2010). Retrieved October 27, 2010, from http://www.loc.gov/rr/program/bib/ourdocs/DeclarInd.html .
First amendment | LII / legal information institute. Retrieved October 27, 2010, from http://topics.law.cornell.edu/constitution/first_amendment .
Goldberg, J., & Schulz, N. (2010). Gated or X-RATED?. National Review, 62(13), 35-36. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.
Independence and the presidency. Retrieved October 27, 2010, from http://www.americaslibrary.gov/aa/wash/aa_wash_ind_1_e.html .
Internet censorship: Law & policy around the world. (2002). Retrieved October 27, 2010, from http://www.efa.org.au/Issues/Censor/cens3.html .
Johnson, D. (2010). Censorship by Omission. Library Media Connection, 28(4), 48-49. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.
Mangan, M., & Wallace, J.The internet censorship FAQ. Retrieved October 27, 2010, from http://www.spectacle.org/freespch/faq.html#2 .
Nordlinger, J. (2010). 'A Very Important Subject'. National Review, 62(3), 28-29. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.
Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 117 S.Ct. 2329, 138 L.Ed.2d 874 (1997). Retrieved October 27, 2010, from http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/96-511.ZS.html .
If you have any questions for me concering this topic, please don't hesitate to contact me via e-mail .