advantages of internet censorship essay

13 Internet Censorship Pros and Cons

Internet censorship is the ability to restrict specific websites or online content from being viewed. It may come in the form of an edit, regulation, or law issued by the government. It could also occur privately is an ISP objects to the content that certain individuals wish to view.

The advantage of allowing internet censorship is that content which is violent, obscene, or dangerous can be immediately blocked. This protects children from inadvertently viewing content that could be scary or harmful to them, such as the murder and decapitation videos which have made their way to sites like Facebook and Twitter in recent years.

The disadvantage is obvious: internet censorship is a restriction on a person’s ability to view the content they wish to see, when they wish to see it.

Here are some additional internet censorship pros and cons to discuss.

What Are the Pros of Internet Censorship?

1. It creates the chance to set common sense limits. There are some things that just aren’t part of what a society would deem to be healthy. A simple search right now on an unfiltered public search can provide anyone with access to numerous videos that purport to show real murders in progress. High-profile cases, such as the murders of Alison Parker and Adam Ward, were broadcast on-air and then a first-person video of the event made its way through social circles afterwards. Restricting this content sets a common-sense limit on the content that van be viewed.

2. It limits access to harmful activities. There are dark areas of the internet where anything goes right now. Access to illicit drugs, sex trafficking, human trafficking, and child pornography can be accessed with relative ease by those who seek out such things. By restricting content that can be accessed, it limits the opportunities that predators can create to reach out to find new victims.

3. It could lessen the impact of identity theft. One of the fastest growing crimes in the world today is identity theft. NBC News reports that more US citizens were victims of identity theft in 2016 than any year before. More than 15.4 million reports of identity theft were compiled by Javelin Strategy and Research, which reflects a 16% increase in the total number of reports from 2015 figures. Restricting content that would allow identity information to be easily shared could lessen the impact that identity theft causes to a society.

4. It may provide a positive impact on national security. Although hacking will occur no matter what internet censorship laws may be in place, by creating internet censorship regulations with strict and mandatory penalties for a violation, it could become possible to reduce the number of hacking incidents that occur. That could have a positive impact on national security because the restrictions would possibly prevent alleged incidents like what occurred during the 2016 US Presidential election.

5. It stops fake news. Claims of fake news increased dramatically in 2017. Fake news websites promote false reports for money through clicks because readers think the news is real. Internet censorship would provide another level of discernment which could possibly stop divisive incidents that are based on events that never occurred.

What Are the Cons of Internet Censorship?

1. Who watches the watchers? Even if internet censorship is directly supervised and ethically maintained, someone somewhere is deciding on what is acceptable and what is not acceptable for society to see online. At some level, someone does not have anyone to whom they report regarding their censorship decisions. With that kind of power, one individual could influence society in whatever way they chose without consequence.

2. It stops information. Although fake information can be restricted through internet censorship, so can real information. According to the World Economic Forum, 27% of all internet users live in a country where someone has been arrested for content that they have shared, published, or simply liked on Facebook. 38 different countries made arrests based solely on social media posts in 2016.

3. It is a costly process. According to research from Darrell West, VP and Director of Governance Studies and the founding director of the Center for Technology Innovation at Brookings, internet shutdowns cost countries $2.4 billion in 2015. The decision to cut connectivity in Egypt came at a cost of $90 million. Censoring content is costly and it will come at the expense of taxpayers.

4. It provides a negative economic impact. What happens if a business has their website blocked because it doesn’t meet an arbitrary standard of “goodness”? Allowing the government or some other entity to declare what is “good” or “bad” for the internet can have a dramatic economic impact at the local level. If a business cannot promote themselves online or sell their goods on an e-commerce platform, then they are placed in a disadvantageous state compared to industry competitors who would be allowed to sell online.

5. It shifts where responsibilities lie. If the government is dictating what individuals can see online, then people are no longer as responsible for the decisions they make. It cedes that control over to the government. Once that control is ceded, it becomes easier to cede more control over responsibility because the action was normalized.

6. It prevents individuals from accessing a freedom of expression. A free internet allows individuals to post what they want. It gives them the chance to freely express their thoughts, opinions, and views. Laws may already exist in many jurisdictions that would allow for the prosecution of individuals who share illegal content already, such as child pornography, so placing additional restrictions would simply create another layer of bureaucracy.

7. A lack of truth leads to ignorance. In 1984 by George Orwell, people in this dystopian environment are kept under tight control so that specific societal results can occur. Once people in this society begin to discover love, they discover truth. That truth prevents them from living in ignorance. With internet censorship, there is a lack of truth which exists in such a policy. That means there is a societal ignorance in place that a ruling party could attempt to control.

8. It limits entrepreneurial opportunities. In a world of internet censorship, entrepreneurs would be forced to have their ideas approved by an oversight committee, board, or individual instead of pursuing the idea immediately on their own. If a business in the same industry as the entrepreneur has enough wealth or influence, they could potentially restrict the entrepreneur from pursuing their opportunity. Such an action would limit innovation in many sectors.

These internet censorship pros and cons show us that what can be used for good can also be used for selfish intent. Who do you think should determine if content is inappropriate? Should it be a government, an oversight committee, or yourself?

Pros and Cons of Censorship: A Detailed Breakdown

March 27, 2024 Valeria G

Censorship has been a contentious issue throughout history, with various forms impacting societies worldwide. The practice has sparked debates on its merits and drawbacks, from political censorship to self-censorship. While censorship can protect national security and maintain social order, it also raises concerns about freedom of speech and access to information.

Key Takeaways:

• Censorship has been used throughout history to control information and maintain social order, but it can also infringe on freedom of speech and limit access to information.
• While censorship can be argued as necessary for protecting national security and children from harmful content, it can also be used for propaganda and political control.

What Is Censorship?

Censorship, the control of information and ideas by authorities, has evolved over time for social, political, and moral reasons. It has historically been used to maintain power structures, preserve cultural norms, and protect national security. From ancient to modern times, rulers and authorities have restricted free expression to manage public perception and uphold societal values. Major events such as the Enlightenment period and the rise of totalitarian regimes have shaped the practice of censorship, with technological advancements like the internet offering new methods of control and surveillance. Understanding these dynamics is crucial in navigating censorship’s complexities today.

Types of Censorship

Censorship manifests in various forms, including political censorship laws imposed by governments, religious censorship dictated by faith doctrines, corporate censorship driven by profit motives, and self-censorship practiced by individuals.

1. Political Censorship

Political censorship involves governmental authorities’ suppression of information or expression to control public discourse and protect political interests.

By restricting access to certain content, governments shape public opinion and limit the spread of dissenting viewpoints. By controlling the flow of information, authorities can perpetuate their agendas, manipulate public perception, and maintain their hold on power. For example, propaganda plays a crucial role in political censorship, as governments often use biased or misleading information to sway public opinion.

Case studies worldwide showcase the diverse strategies authorities employ to silence dissent and stifle opposition. Examining the intricacies of these mechanisms provides valuable insights into the dynamics of censorship and its impact on societies.

2. Religious Censorship

Religious censorship restricts the dissemination of content that contradicts religion or challenges established beliefs, doctrines, or practices of religious institutions.

Religious censorship aims to safeguard the traditional values and teachings upheld by a particular faith by controlling the flow of information. Throughout history, religious authorities have imposed strict regulations on publications, artworks, websites, and public speeches to prevent the spread of heretical or sacrilegious ideas. From the banning of certain texts by the Catholic Church during the Inquisition to the suppression of critical interpretations of Islamic scripture, examples of religious censorship abound.

It is essential to recognize that the rationale behind such censorship often stems from a desire to maintain orthodoxy and unity within a religious community. Religious leaders seek to avoid internal divisions and preserve their faith’s doctrinal purity by silencing dissenting voices and alternative viewpoints. The impact of these measures on intellectual freedom, freedom of expression, and the progress of knowledge is a subject of ongoing debate.

3. Corporate Censorship

Corporate censorship occurs when private entities restrict or modify content to align with their business interests, marketing strategies, or stakeholder preferences.

Examining the motivations behind corporate censorship reveals that profit-driven decisions play a significant role in shaping internet content restrictions. Companies often prioritize safeguarding their revenue streams and maintaining favorable relationships with advertisers, leading to the suppression or alteration of certain information that could potentially harm their financial interests.

This phenomenon is particularly prevalent in media and digital platforms, where monetization is crucial in dictating the content disseminated to the public. By analyzing case studies of corporate censorship, such as social media giants implementing algorithms to limit the reach of certain content, one can observe how financial considerations often override the principles of unrestricted information dissemination.

4. Self-Censorship

Self-censorship refers to individuals suppressing their thoughts, opinions, or expressions to conform to social norms, avoid backlash, or protect personal interests.

This behavior often stems from a fear of judgment, sanctions, or consequences for expressing dissenting or controversial views. Moreover, societal pressure to adhere to commonly accepted beliefs or ideologies can significantly drive individuals to self-censor.

It’s essential to recognize that self-censorship is not solely about silencing one’s voice; it can also lead to a suppression of creativity, diversity of thought, and the open exchange of ideas.

Pros of Censorship

Censorship can have positive implications by safeguarding national security, maintaining social order, and protecting vulnerable populations such as children from harmful content.

When implemented effectively, censorship plays a crucial role in regulating the dissemination of information within society. By filtering out potentially harmful or misleading content, governments can prevent the spread of misinformation that may incite violence or conflict.

Censorship can promote a sense of cohesion by ensuring that all citizens are exposed to content that aligns with societal values and norms. It can also shield marginalized groups and individuals, such as victims of cyberbullying or harassment, by removing harmful online materials. Ultimately, censorship can contribute to building a safer and more inclusive community.

1. Protecting National Security

One of censorship’s primary advantages is its ability to prevent disseminating sensitive information that may threaten national security or public safety.

Government censorship also plays a crucial role in protecting classified data and thwarting threats from external entities seeking strategic insights by controlling what information reaches the public domain.

Security measures such as redacting confidential materials or restricting access to certain government information channels are essential to national defense mechanisms. This delicate balance between safeguarding vital secrets and ensuring transparency in governance is a complex challenge faced by governments worldwide.

2. Maintaining Social Order

Censorship plays a role in preserving social harmony and stability by regulating content that could incite unrest, violence, or disruptive behavior within a community.

Censorship aims to prevent the spread of misinformation, hate speech, and war propaganda, which can fuel tensions and exacerbate social conflicts, by controlling the dissemination of sensitive information. It also contributes to maintaining order and civility by filtering out content against societal norms and protecting individuals from harmful influences.

Upholding cultural norms through censorship ensures that values and ethics deemed important by society are respected. This fosters a cohesive community where diverse perspectives can coexist peacefully. In this way, censorship is a tool for shaping public discourse and safeguarding collective well-being.

3. Protecting Children from Harmful Content

Censorship that shields children from exposure to inappropriate or harmful content helps promote their psychological well-being, moral development, and safety in digital environments.

Protecting minors from stumbling upon harmful content is crucial to nurturing a healthy mindset and shaping respectable values from a young age. The impact of unsuitable material on children’s mental health and behavior can be profound, influencing their perception of the world and interactions with others. By creating a safe online space through content filtering, parents and guardians play a pivotal role in safeguarding their children’s innocence and ensuring they grow up responsibly. When considering the ethical dilemmas surrounding restricting access to certain content, weighing the balance between protection and freedom of information becomes a complex challenge in the digital era.

Cons of Censorship

Despite its potential benefits, censorship raises concerns about infringing on individuals’ freedom of speech, limiting access to diverse information sources, and potentially stifling creativity and critical thinking.

When certain ideas or opinions are suppressed through censorship, it can hinder a society’s intellectual growth. By limiting freedom and restricting the flow of information, people may be deprived of the opportunity to engage with different perspectives and challenge their own viewpoints. This limitation on free expression not only inhibits personal development but also stifles the exchange of ideas that is essential for societal progress.

1. Infringes on Freedom of Speech

One of the primary criticisms of censorship is its tendency to curtail individuals’ rights to express opinions, challenge authority, and engage in open dialogue, thereby impeding the democratic exchange of ideas.

When speech is restricted, dissident voices are silenced, hindering the flow of diverse perspectives essential for a vibrant society. This suppression of dissent can lead to a dominant narrative that stifles critical thinking and innovation.

Censorship can create echo chambers where only certain viewpoints are allowed, narrowing public discourse and limiting the space for constructive debates and intellectual growth. It raises ethical dilemmas by determining who can decide which narratives are acceptable and which are not, potentially leading to subjective biases influencing what the public can access and discuss.

2. Limits Access to Information

Censorship can restrict access to a broad spectrum of information, impeding individuals’ ability to make informed decisions, engage in critical thinking, and participate fully in democratic processes.

When individuals lack diverse perspectives and alternative viewpoints, their understanding of complex issues can be skewed, leading to uninformed opinions and stilted discussions.

Furthermore, censorship hampers creativity and intellectual growth by stifling innovation and limiting exposure to new ideas and intellectual advancements.

In a society where information is vetted or suppressed, the fabric of knowledge dissemination is compromised, resulting in a fragmented awareness among the populace.

3 . Can Be Used as a Tool for Propaganda

When used as a propaganda tool, censorship manipulates narratives, distorts truths, and controls public perception, influencing individuals’ beliefs and attitudes through selective information exposure.

Certain agendas are pushed forward through selective content filtration, shaping public opinions and worldviews. Censorship can conceal vital information that challenges the status quo or threatens those in power. The dissemination of distorted facts hinders critical thinking and suppresses dissent, creating an environment where misinformation flourishes. Censorship can turn a country’s or history’s course by molding the collective memory of events and controlling the narrative presented to the masses.

Conclusion: Is Censorship Necessary?

The debate over the necessity of internet censorship still continues to spark discussions worldwide. Proponents advocate for security and order, while critics argue for preserving free speech and information access.

Proponents of censorship often emphasize the importance of maintaining social stability and protecting individuals from harmful content such as hate speech, violence, and news and misinformation. They believe censorship is crucial in upholding public morality and safeguarding national security.

On the other hand, critics raise concerns about the potential abuse of censorship by those in power to silence dissenting voices and control the flow of information, citing instances where censorship has been used to suppress political opposition or restrict artistic expression.

You might also like

All You Need to Know About Removing Negative Information from the Internet

April 14, 2022 admin

How To Push Negative Search Results Down: 7 Expert ORM Strategies

May 23, 2024 admin

IDTrue Opt Out: Empowering Users to Safeguard Their Data

May 23, 2024 Valeria G

How to Dispute a Google Review Without Damaging Your Brand Image

May 6, 2024 Valeria G

Looking for a Free Analysis?

We help you take control of your online reputation.

18103 W 106th St, suite 120, Olathe, KS 66061

© 2024. InternetReputation.com. All Rights Reserved.

Free Online Reputation Consultation

Get in touch with one of our online reputation management specialists at internet reputation today.

• Name * First Name Last Name
• Comments This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

• Entertainment
• Environment
• Information Science and Technology
• Social Issues

Home Essay Samples Social Issues Internet Censorship

Advantages and Disadvantages of Internet Censorship: Unveiling the Web

Table of contents, introduction, the issue’s, current scenario, perspectives, possible solutions, bibliography.

• https://www.ukessays.com/essays/media/the-advantages-of-internet-censorship-media-essay.php
• https://alair.ala.org/bitstream/handle/11213/258/Plain%20Facts%20about%20Internet%20Filtering%20Software.pdf?sequence=76&isAllowed=y
• https://www.theverge.com/2017/12/14/16777626/ajit-pai-net-neutrality-speech
• https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323187023_Teacher_Perspective_on_Internet_Censorship_in_Turkey
• https://www.ifla.org/publications/trends-in-transition-from-classical-censorship-to-intenet-censorship-selected-country-o
• https://fee.org/articles/the-blockchain-can-solve-internet-censorship-and-copyright-issues/
• https://medium.com/nauticus-blockchain/five-smart-uses-for-blockchain-technology-b1bc8630707b
• https://futureofworking.com/8-advantages-and-disadvantages-of-internet-censorship/
• https://www.jurist.org/news/2013/01/governments-abusing-internet-surveillance-and-censorship-technologies-report/
• https://citizenlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Planet-Blue-Coat.pdf
• https://vittana.org/13-internet-censorship-pros-and-cons
• http://bileta.ac.uk/content/files/conference%20papers/2008/Internet%20Censorship%20and%20Freedom%20of%20Expression%20%5BRonald%20Kakungulu%5D.pdf
• https://ipfs.io/
• https://www.inverse.com/article/47948-everipedia-just-launched-a-blockchain-wiki-that-governments-can-t-censor
• https://www.ohchr.org/EN/UDHR/Documents/UDHR_Translations/eng.pdf

*minimum deadline

Cite this Essay

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below

• Empowerment
• Homelessness
• Civil Rights
• Dumpster Diving
• Street Beggars
• Immigration

Related Essays

Need writing help?

You can always rely on us no matter what type of paper you need

*No hidden charges

100% Unique Essays

Absolutely Confidential

Money Back Guarantee

By clicking “Send Essay”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement. We will occasionally send you account related emails

You can also get a UNIQUE essay on this or any other topic

Thank you! We’ll contact you as soon as possible.

Internet Censorship: Definition, Types, and How It Can Affect You

DataProt is supported by its audience. When you buy through links on our site, we may earn a commission. This, however, does not influence the evaluations in our reviews. Learn More .

Affiliate Disclosure

DataProt is an independent review site dedicated to providing accurate information about various cybersecurity products.

DataProt remains financially sustainable by participating in a series of affiliate partnerships - it is visitors’ clicks on links that cover the expenses of running this site. Our website also includes reviews of products or services for which we do not receive monetary compensation.

DataProt's in-house writing team writes all the site’s content after in-depth research, and advertisers have no control over the personal opinions expressed by team members, whose job is to stay faithful to the truth and remain objective.

Some pages may include user-generated content in the comment section. The opinions expressed in the comment section do not reflect those of DataProt.

Internet censorship is a big deal. The days of complete cyber freedom are all but gone, with  companies and governments interfering with the web. Their involvement is ruining the cyberworld for the rest of us in various ways, with censorship being the most prominent.

Internet censorship is the control or suppression of what can be accessed, published, or viewed online. It happens when governments, organizations, or individuals restrict or block access to web content. In this article, we’ll be explaining how censorship happens, its impact on the internet, and how to avoid it. 

What Is Internet Censorship and How It Happens

Some countries censor the internet because they don’t want their citizens to see things that might upset them or make them think differently. They also might do this to keep people from organizing protests or speaking out against the government.

Their goal, usually, is to make it difficult to get accurate information about what’s going on in the world or stop people from being able to share their opinions freely.

But, the government internet censorship can happen for a variety of other reasons , including political, religious, or moral grounds and restricting media freedom. 

While government-level censorship is meant to shut down dissidents, there are other reasons why organizations and groups of people restrict internet access to others. An organization may block certain websites to protect its members from offensive or inappropriate content or simply to increase productivity by limiting access to entertainment and social media sites.

Censorship of the internet happens in one of two directions:

• Top-down censorship is when a government or organization tells service providers what content to block. In some cases, laws may require certain content to be censored. Users have no say in this and can’t choose what to access. 
• Self-imposed censorship is associated with individuals or groups self-censoring by choosing what content to avoid. For example, someone may decide not to view certain websites because they know their government will censor the information, making it inaccurate. 

Different Types of Web Censorship

Different things can be censored, like specific pictures, words, or whole websites and internet protocols. There are also different ways to censor things – blocking either full access to the material or limiting searches for censored terms.

Government-level Censorship

One type of censorship is when a government makes it illegal to say certain things . For instance, in China, the government has made it illegal to talk about certain topics online, like democracy or human rights. They do this by censoring websites that discuss these topics and punishing people who break the rules. Governments work with ISPs to put those restrictions into motion, either by outright blocking access to websites or redirecting traffic to similar, regulated sites.

Platform Restrictions

Another type of censorship is when social media companies block certain content from their platforms . For example, Facebook has been criticized for censoring body positivity and sex education posts. Likewise, YouTube has been accused of censoring videos about LGBTQ+ rights, mental health, and COVID-19 awareness. In this case, platforms issue take-down notices, followed by the removal of said content.

It’s not uncommon for governments to even force tech companies to impose content restrictions based on their own propaganda. In such a case, the government would strong-arm content hosts into submission by threatening outright bans of their platforms. As a counterpoint, Twitter has started clearly marking government-related profiles, so users can see at a glance whether the profile could be a part of a propaganda machine. It’s not much, but at least it helps fight the censorship on the internet.

Local Restrictions

Lastly, censorship can happen on a smaller scale within a single institution. For example, a school may restrict access to certain parts of the internet or even key phrases. That way, the students cannot use the school’s computers to visit inappropriate websites like adult websites or social networks.

Similarly, employers may put blocks on specific apps, services, and websites, so the employees can only access the software and websites they allow them to. While we’ll be discussing how to avoid content blocks and censorship using free VPNs and similar tactics, we strongly advise caution in such situations.

How Censorship Works in Different Countries

Some countries have rigid censorship laws, while others have none at all. China is well-known for its internet restrictions, which some call the “great firewall of China.” The Chinese government blocks access to many websites and social media platforms, like Facebook and Twitter. Google’s search engine, as well as all other Google products, is also banned in China. The government is censoring search results and blocks certain words from being used online.

In Saudi Arabia, the government filters content based on religious and moral values. It usually blocks websites that contain pornography or material that could be considered offensive to Islam. In Iran, the government blocks websites that are critical of the regime or that contain information that could be used to foment dissent.

In Russia, a new law requires internet service providers to censor websites that the government decides are “extremist.” This can include foreign websites that have critical opinions of the government in question or that provide information about protests or other forms of defiance.

Censorship can also happen in less obvious ways. For example, many countries require internet companies to collect data about their users’ activities. This data can be used to track people and see what they’re doing online. Needless to say that such laws disrupt net neutrality.

Impact of Censorship

Increased censorship can have a number of negative effects. For starters, it limits people’s ability to access information and ideas. This can lead to a loss of knowledge and opportunities for education and personal growth. 

Additionally, digital censorship can stifle creativity and critical thinking . Having no access to the online world can restrain people’s ability to freely express themselves. When people are only exposed to one side of an issue, it can be challenging to develop a well-rounded opinion. Seeing only one aspect of the whole picture can also lead to misinformation.

Censorship can create an atmosphere of fear and mistrust. People may grow afraid of expressing their opinions or sharing their ideas, which can lead to a feeling of isolation and disconnection.

Why Is Internet Freedom Important

Since the early days of the internet, people have been fighting for online freedom. The internet has become an essential part of our lives, so much so that internet access has been declared a basic human right by the UN Resolution in 2016. Censoring the internet denies us that basic right.

Access to the internet means access to information, education, and communication. It allows us to connect with friends and family and participate in the global community. It is essential for businesses and for the economy, which the pandemic years especially confirmed to be true. When regulations on the type of content we can access are imposed, serious issues may arise, such as when restrictions infringe on medical websites that people need. 

Cyberspace is also a powerful tool for democracy and human rights. The UN recognized the importance of the internet in a Resolution passed in 2016, declaring it a basic human right. The general belief is that the internet is something all people should have access to. Restricting access to parts of the internet is threading on human rights, rights to community, learning, and prospering in this modern world.

How to Circumvent Censorship

If you live in a country with restricted internet, there are several ways to bypass the restrictions and gain access to all internet content.

Web proxies are the simplest, fastest way to get around censorship and regional restrictions on the internet. They work by routing your traffic through a different server so that the website you are trying to visit doesn’t know your true IP address. This can be used to get around simple content filters, like the ones your school or workplace may have in place.

Web proxies are not perfect, however. They can be slow, and they don’t always work with every website. Additionally, your traffic is still going through another server, which means that the proxy owner could be snooping on your traffic and detecting phony IP addresses. More important – your internet service provider and, thus, the government, can still know what you were browsing.

Another way to get access to censored websites is to use a virtual private network. VPNs create a private, secure connection between two devices, which can be used to access restricted websites. When you use a VPN that doesn’t log data, your traffic is encrypted, so your ISP or anyone else can’t see what you’re doing online. Even more important, there’s no data saved on the provider’s side as if you’ve never used the service at all. 

While VPNs are legal in most parts of the world, some countries block them and can even issue a fine if you get caught. If you’re using a VPN in a country where they are not allowed or just worried about the repercussions, you may need to use a different method to access restricted websites.

Tor Browser

Lastly, you might only need to switch your internet browser to a more secure one. Tor is a free browser that allows you to surf the internet anonymously. By encrypting traffic and bouncing it through a distributed network of relays, Tor makes it difficult for anyone to track a user’s online activity.

The main downside to using Tor is that it can be slow. Because traffic is routed through multiple relays, each with its own bandwidth limitations, Tor users may experience slowdowns when browsing the web. Additionally, some websites may block traffic from known Tor relays, making them inaccessible to Tor users.

Final Thoughts

Internet censorship, as explained, can be a difficult issue to navigate. On the one hand, it’s important to protect people from offensive or harmful material. On the other hand, it is important to allow people to freely access information and express themselves. 

Lastly, as the internet is now considered a basic human right, imposing restrictions of such kind is a sign of dictatorship and not a signal that the government actually cares about pressing issues.

Further reading

The Onion Theory of Data Security Layers

What Is the Dark Web? Myths and Facts About the Hidden Internet

Leave a comment.

You must be logged in to post a comment.

• Skip to content

Harvard Law & Policy Review

Online Censorship Is Unavoidable—So How Can We Improve It?

By Ben Horton*

A few weeks ago, Professors Jack Goldsmith and Andrew Keane Woods ignited controversy by suggesting in the Atlantic that China was right and America was wrong about internet censorship and surveillance. This seemingly contrarian stance rubbed people the wrong way , especially given reports that China’s online censorship delayed their response to COVID-19 and that Chinese agents have actively disseminated disinformation about the virus—and then attempted to suppress reports revealing their disinformation campaign .

Except the professors’ critics seem to have missed the point of their essay. Goldsmith and Woods said China was right that the internet inevitably would be censored and surveilled, not that China’s methods were normatively appealing.

Even discounting existing state surveillance and censorship on the internet in the United States, private surveillance and censorship is ubiquitous. And, notwithstanding our intuitions, most people want an internet that is subject to ubiquitous censorship—that is, “content moderation.”

Putting aside illegal content (child pornography, snuff films, etc.), most consumers do not want to be inundated with what Sarah Jeong has dubbed “ the internet of garbage .” They do not want to be harassed, bullied, threatened, or spammed on the internet. And in the midst of a global pandemic, they want to ensure disinformation is kept to a minimum. They want to limit harmful speech.

Part of our problem is we still think of speech burdens in a binary, on-off way. But especially online, the question is not whether you can find content, it is how hard it will be to be find and how much it will be amplified .

The question is not if there will be censorship and surveillance, [1] the question is who gets to do it, and how it is done. Right now a relatively small group of private actors make not only the substantive decisions about content on the internet, they decide the process that drives those decisions and how information flows through their networks. They wield enormous power , and are almost completely unaccountable to the public.

So, what are our options?

Option 1: Stay the Course

First, the United States could continue to shield tech companies from most tort-based liability for content posted on their platforms via Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act , maintain an expansive view of the First Amendment, and not substantively regulate tech companies.

Supporters of the current system largely admit that ubiquitous content moderation is good, so long as it is private. They hold that a system of private speech regulation provides a market incentive for platforms to reach a Goldilocks-zone of content moderation : Enough harmful speech is blocked that it is possible to maintain deliberative communication amid the noise, but not so much that deliberative communication is also blocked. Consumers have a choice, and services that fail to moderate will either fail or be consigned to the dark corners of the internet .

But how real is that choice? Alphabet owns the two most popular websites in the world. Facebook (through its eponymous service and Instagram), Twitter, and Reddit collectively dominate U.S. social media . Over the past twenty years who has rivaled them? MySpace? Snapchat? Yahoo!? Tumblr? Even including these rivals, American consumers have had two significant options for their search engines and four or five social media sites. And, at least in part, that lack of choice is due to the inaction by antitrust enforcers at the Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice when Google bought YouTube and when Facebook acquired Instagram . In a monopolistic environment consumers can try to campaign for changes to private companies’ policies, but their effectiveness might rely on some of the substantive regulations discussed below.

As Evelyn Douek has argued, these platforms are increasingly cooperative in their moderation decision-making , making consumer choice even more illusory. YouTube’s policies on terrorism-related content are not significantly different than Facebook’s or Twitter’s because they all belong to the same private group that develops those standards. Facebook’s new Oversight Board is probably a step in the right direction, but what happens if it becomes the de facto decision-maker for social media standards generally?

Finally, the market theory is contingent on the assumption that people choose their networks based on the ability of the network to curate information. But the profit incentive of social media companies is to increase our engagement—which might mean pushing harmful content on users , or at least enabling that sort of thing ( until they’re caught ). The negative effects of this content might be exaggerated , but without greater transparency we just don’t know.

Aside from the harms of disinformation, staying the course has the additional drawback of eliminating the United States from the global conversation about internet governance. As Microsoft President Brad Smith mentioned in a recent interview , in the future, tech companies may simply adapt their products to the regulations of the European Union and other Western democracies that lack stringent First Amendment or Section 230 protections against government involvement in online speech. We already see this to some extent with the NetzDG law in Germany, which, if nothing else, is offering us some useful transparency on content moderation.

Or tech companies themselves might simply decide how public health crises are managed .

Either way, the United States government, for better or worse, will simply not have much of a say in what the internet looks like.

Option 2: Content-Based Regulations

For constitutional reasons, the approach of regulating speech based on its content is closed off to the United States. There is a lively academic debate about the status of lies and hate speech under the First Amendment. But absent a political revolution, it will remain an academic debate. The Supreme Court has said, in an 8-1 opinion , it will not open up new “uncovered” zones of speech. Content-based regulations of harmful speech will continue to be subject to strict scrutiny, and they will continue to be struck down.

In the U.S. context, at least for the foreseeable future, content-based censorship will continue to be ubiquitous and limited to private actors. That does not mean we need to leave the speech moderating apparatus entirely to the private sector.

Option 3: Torts, Competition, Process, and Friction

Contrary to cyber-libertarians, the options available are not limited to “censorship” or no regulation at all. We have other tools at our disposal. The key is to focus on content-neutral regulations, especially those that govern the flow of information rather than regulations that criminalize certain content.

As a threshold matter, these policies do not have to—and likely will not—take the form of flat bans and mandates. They might be conditions attached to liability immunities or tax incentives, and they can—and should—distinguish between different types of online services. Of course, companies have been lobbied, and should be lobbied, to make these changes on their own; I am arguing that there is some role for direct government regulation in these realms.

First, we could reform Section 230. While supporters maintain that Section 230 is necessary to ensure that platforms can engage in decent moderation without fear of liability , detractors argue that a well-crafted alternative could still shield sites that engage in good-faith moderation without shielding sites that are designed to facilitate human trafficking , for instance. And regardless of where you stand on the 230 debate, given bipartisan support for both SESTA – FOSTA and the delayed “ EARN IT Act ,” 230 as we know it is unlikely to survive. If we want sensible intermediary liability protection, and not a patchwork of exceptions that probably make the internet less safe, the 230-or-nothing stance is increasingly politically untenable.

Second, we can advocate for regulations that promote competition, creating a market where consumers have real choices and their choices make a difference. This need not be the traditional “breaking up” of companies given the beneficial network effects consumers find in centralized services and the possible aggravation of harm that a balkanized internet could bring . Pro-competition policy could start with blocking the sale of startups to Facebook and Google . It could include the imposition of substantive requirements, like an information fiduciary responsibility or interoperability requirement on organizations with a certain share of the market. Any regulations, however, need to be sensitive to the needs of non-profits with large user bases and low revenues .

Third, and more controversially, we can require more transparent processes in content moderation. A number of organizations have released and advocated for the “ Santa Clara Principles .” These include, at a minimum, publishing the number of posts and accounts taken down organized by the category of violation, providing notice to users whose accounts or posts are taken down, and instituting some kind of appeal process. If content-based moderation decisions are largely going to be done by private actors, their legitimacy relies on being transparent and understandable to the public. Even if changes are brought about by private pressure, we cannot collectively criticize and improve on secret processes .

Finally, and most controversially, maybe we can impose content-neutral, friction-creating regulations that force consumers to be more deliberate in sharing and consuming information. For instance, WhatsApp recently limited its forwarding function so that any messages that come from a chain of more than five people must be forwarded one chat at a time. This type of rule is not content-based; it applies to speech based on its virality, not the “topic, idea or message” communicated. Disclosure requirements—revealing, for example, whether or not a human is speaking —might also increase friction and deliberation. And some regulations of social media’s “frictionless” design might be allowable under the First Amendment.

These regulations avoid the hard epistemological questions and constitutional hurdles of defining harmful speech. They regulate the flow of information regardless of its content instead of worrying about speech concerning a particular topic. Furthermore, they ban no speech—deliberate communication is unaffected.

There are pros and cons to every policy mentioned, with administrability challenges and constitutional issues . But to reach a substantive discussion of the realistic possibilities for regulation in the U.S. context, the conversation needs to move beyond the false binary of “censorship versus free speech.”

* Ben Horton is a rising 3L at Harvard Law School and an Online Editor for HLPR.

[1] I am not talking about the problems of surveillance presented by innovations like the Ring doorbell , or facial recognition . I am referring to the level of surveillance necessary to ensure that speech is successfully moderated on platforms—being able to tie punishments to certain accounts, for example. That overlaps with the problems of online behavioral manipulation and surveillance capitalism, which I am not addressing in this post.

John Brown University's Student Newspaper

Averting our eyes: The controversy of internet censorship

Pornography. Extremism. Fake News. Few words have as visceral an effect on a person as these. Together, these three items embody almost everything that is wrong in American society. And how has the government responded to their increase? By inviting them in as guests of honor through internet servers around the country.

Since its inception, the internet has been a nearly universal hub of information and activity. Everything from debates, auctions and photo albums is shared across the web in plain view of the public. Unfortunately, the internet contains much more sinister files than these. Pornography, drug deals and explicit content are all only a few clicks away from anyone with access to a computer. In this age, parents are forced to protect the eyes of their children from graphic content and sexual innuendos from the moment they touch their first device. Sexual addictions and crime rates across the country are on the rise and the vulgarity of the internet bears the brunt of the blame.

For years there has been an ongoing argument regarding the subject of internet censorship. Many groups claim that any content that someone desires to put on the web should be allowed to be posted. Others staunchly believe that the internet has become too explicit and harmful to be allowed to continue unchecked.

I believe that there is a difference between the restriction of useful information that can be applied and evaluated freely by consumers and the restriction of material that has little to no positive application. To be clear, I don’t believe that the internet needs to be dismantled. It is a wonderful tool with limitless potential for the improvement of mankind. But, I also believe that it is a tool that can easily be misused. Evil was not born on the day the internet was created, but it was given a new foster home. In the days of newspapers and encyclopedias, evil things were still captured and mass-produced but not on the scale that the internet allows them to be.

Much of the content on the internet including pornographic websites fall within that category of harmful material. These are things that have no potential to improve society and serve as a stumbling block to many who are exposed to them. We are becoming a culture that is more addicted, sexualized and uncaring than we ever have been before, and it is happening at a younger age than we have previously seen. Left unchecked, this exposure could lead to a dramatic shift in the moral values of American youth. When exposure to explicit content becomes normalized, other more socially unacceptable acts become more acceptable. Several scholars and studies have made the connection between rape acceptance and pornography exposure. Pornography is not simply images or videos; it is the breeding place of complacency and acceptance of heinous acts.

Another more controversial item needing censorship from the internet is websites and forums that foster extreme or criminal opinions. The United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime published a document that records multiple examples of how the internet has been used to foster terrorism across the globe. One of the main ways these groups use the internet to reach people is through propaganda, including messages, videos or games that intended to sway people to a more extreme mindset.

This topic becomes startling when we realize that none of this is actually prohibited. The UNODC states that “the dissemination of propaganda is generally not, in and of itself, a prohibited activity.” How is this not illegal? Criminal groups are embedding dangerous messages into the internet, and there is nothing the law can do to stop them.

The final commonality on the internet that needs to be regulated is fake news. As internet users, we are practically drowned in a flood of news. I understand that storylines will differ based on the perspective from which they are told, but an issue arises when two stories become irreconcilable. We are correct to assume that a narrative contains multiple storylines, but those lines should not contradict each other.

Somehow, individuals and news outlets manage to transform a single-threaded story into a web of self-contradiction and fallacy. Often, only a select few of those accounts are reasonably factual, leaving the rest as pure fiction, written to incite an emotional response in undiscerning people. It has become increasingly difficult to find cultural common ground with people around us because of the sheer quantity of fallacies we are fed. Humanity requires a standard to be set for news on the internet if groups are to begin to fix bridges and restore broken relationships.

But my viewpoint is uncommon. As a whole, the general American consensus is that freedom of speech should not be infringed. They cry that the First Amendment protects our freedom and keeps the government from influencing our lives. The American Constitution makes it clear that information should be free for all, and that it cannot be restricted by the government.

There is certainly justification in their fears. Governments should not be allowed to abuse their power to subjugate their citizens by scrubbing the internet. Many people fear what may happen to America if internet censorship is allowed. They fear that their freedom of speech will be infringed upon, and they will not be able to express their doubts and concerns to the public. In the opinion of many, internet censorship is the first step down the road leading to the eventual loss of freedom for Americans. Without freedom, innovation and progress will come to a standstill, leading to the undoing of American society.

The discussion regarding internet censorship is just one example of a larger ongoing debate. The core of this issue lies the question of man’s moral compass. If a man is born good, then there is no need to regulate content on the internet or anywhere else. But if man is inherently evil, regulation is imperative. Without guidance, humanity will slowly fall away from moral rightness, and we will begin to suffer the consequences of our arrogance.

The question also remains, who exists that is good enough to regulate us? Certainly not the government. They are human as well and have shown that they fall victim to the same errors as the public. The regulator would have to be a group with objective goals and moral uprightness. I am not sure if such a group exists. But if humanity has proven anything, it is that we are a people sorely in need of regulation if we are to remain on a path to improvement.

Comments are closed.

Contact The Threefold

Join our team, latest articles.

• JBU’s Newspaper Celebrates Multiple Wins at the ACMA Awards
• Spy vs Spy!
• ‘Fly By Night’ Flew into the Audience’s Hearts
• Decree 95 and the Persecuted Church in Vietnam 
• “Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire” Rocks the Big Screen

Follow us on Twitter

19 Biggest Pros and Cons of Censorship

Censorship is defined as the suppression of ideas, images, or words that some people find to be offensive to them in some way. It happens whenever there are personal, moral, or political values from one group that get placed onto another in some way. Although it is often viewed through the lens of government policies, this processed can be carried out by anyone, including private groups, religious organizations, and even schools.

It must be mentioned that a private group or individual can organize boycotts, demonstrate in protest, and take other actions that are defined as free speech. When taken to the extreme, even rights protected by the First Amendment can become dangerous. The ACLU notes that the Hollywood Blacklists during the McCarthy period were from private pressure groups and not the government.

What is unique about American society is the amount of ambivalence there is toward censorship. Even the 1996 Communications Decency Act in the United States is a form of it, even if the “intentions are good” from the point of view of the majority.

That’s why we must be proactive about the perceived pros and cons that there are with censorship. When it becomes permissible to restrict the actions, words, and thoughts of one group of people, it can create opportunities to target other groups in society too.

List of the Pros of Censorship

1. Censorship can reduce the impact of hate speech in society. The idea that all speech is equal is arguably false. There are words that people use as an effort to shut down the right to speak of others. It took over a century for minorities and women to gain a semblance of equal rights because of the presence of hate speech. Even if it is clothed in the ideas of religious freedom, state’s rights, or patriotism, that doesn’t change what it is to others.

Censorship gives us the opportunity to stop this hate before it can get started. We already live within the confines of education, family, entertainment, commerce, and more. This limiting process creates more opportunities for equality.

2. Censorship can protect children from unhealthy content. Parents have plenty of work to do in today’s society to protect their children from unhealthy influences. There is content everywhere, including items that slip through parental filters and kid-friendly apps, that could lead to harmful encounters in the future. Children have fewer qualms about talking with strangers online than adults do primarily because of the way kids see the world. They have more innocence, curiosity, and might even be shy and lonely.

Censorship allows us to cut through the ignoring of potential threats so that a child’s inexperience and lack of foresight doesn’t get them into trouble. By stopping people before they can act (or the child can respond) to a situation, we can keep everyone safer because of certain restrictions.

3. Censorship can reduce the amount of conflict that is in society. If you look on the Internet long enough, there will be something that can offend anyone. The goal of censorship isn’t to eliminate access to anything that anyone might find to be problematic. We wouldn’t get to go online if that were the case. What we can do with this process is to limit access to information that could have an adverse impact on the overall culture of our homes, communities, or countries.

Netflix and Saudi Arabia work together to create targeted areas of censorship based on this principle. Whether you agree or disagree with the practice, this work removes access to content that might be disruptive to society.

4. Censorship can provide another level of security to a country’s profile. We also use censorship as a way to limit the amount of information that the general public receives every day from their government, businesses, and large institutions. Without this concept, top secret files could be made public with a simple request. Proprietary ingredients wouldn’t be available because of the need for disclosure. By limiting certain types of data from the primary flow of society, there is less of a potential for harm.

5. Censorship protects the rights of artists, innovators, and inventors. Did you know that copyright laws are a form of censorship? The same is said for patents and any other legal construct that gives someone exclusive access to a specific form of content or work without allowing others to do the same. We have these protections in place to protect the “creation rights” of the first person who pursued this idea.

Preventing plagiarism and IP theft gives us the foundation of an economy. If your work doesn’t receive some level of protection, then it can be stolen by someone who can put it together cheaper than you. Small businesses get to stay competitive because of the acceptable elements of censorship that we maintain in society.

6. Censorship provides us with a vehicle to stop false content. There are censorship laws in place that prevent businesses from lying to you about their products or services. Advertisements must be a direct reflection of what you can expect if you make a purchase. Failing to remain honest can result in fines and penalties. Without this advantage, businesses could say or do anything in an attempt to get you to buy their stuff. You can avoid the risks of false pretense thanks to the protections that remain in place because of this advantage.

7. Censorship can work to improve a person’s knowledge. People tend to believe what they see when consuming media and the various forms of content that are available. By removing items that could create a panic from public view, government and law enforcement officials can provide better protection, reduce the spread of rumors, and encourage individuals to review the information they see before coming to a conclusion. People can use this technique to promote the flow of negative data to create a specific result, but this process is also useful for the times when you want to create a positive outcome as well.

8. Censorship can limit the impact of identity theft. There are over 15 million reports of identity theft each year. In a recent data breach reported by Experian, the information of over 120 million people was exposed. When there is so much information floating around on the Internet and in other public places that is readily accessible, then it is possible for people to become victims of a crime without realizing it until they need to apply for credit or receive a notice in the mail.

Children can become victims of identity theft as well. Their clean profiles make for a tempting target, especially if there is no verification of age or data during the application process. Censorship of this information can provide a layer of protection because it stops access to it while holding those who keep it responsible for their conduct.

9. Censorship helped to create our ratings system. There are times when censorship can get out of hand, but it is also a process that can be used for good. An excellent example of this benefit comes from the ratings systems that we use for entertainment products, including movies, video games, and music. Until 1984, films went from PG to R, which eventually led to a PG-13 rating being developed after parents called for action after taking their children to Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom.

Ratings on music allow us to see if lyrics are explicit so that we can decide if we want to listen to the song. TV ratings give us a guide to see if a show is appropriate for our needs or what our families want to watch. Movie ratings do the same.

List of the Cons of Censorship

1. It represses one group of people in favor for what the majority wants. A museum director was once arrested because sexually explicit photographs from Robert Mapplethorpe were included in an art exhibited that was being managed. Although the artist’s work displays images, often black and white, that feature nudity and a certain amount of suggestiveness, it was far from violent or suggestive content that would encourage lawlessness.

Under the laws of the United States, it would be fair to say that the country is the most speech-protective nation in the world. When it comes to sexual speech, things are different because there are still remnants of the country’s Puritan heritage remaining in the law. Even the Supreme Court has affirmed that censorship on moral grounds is permissible.

2. It allows people to create a specific narrative in society to call it truth. You will often hear calls for censorship on violence when they see it in video games, read it in books, or see examples of it in film or on TV. The reality of fictional violence is that it does not cause otherwise stable people to suddenly want to hurt someone. If we start suppressing material based on the actions of unstable people, then nothing would be safe from the censorship process.

The work most often cited by people as a way to justify their harmful actions against others is the Bible. As the ACLU points out, Ted Bundy collected cheerleading magazines. If there were a clear cause-and-effect argument that could be proven, then a limit on expression here could be warranted. Until there is such an example, it is not.

3. It stops people from pursuing career opportunities. If we live in a world where everything receives censorship, then it would be a place where nothing could get done without specific permission from someone in charge. That means every business, each idea, and even the foods that you would eat each night would come with an official stamp of approval. It creates an Orwellian landscape where direct supervision by an authoritative figure or state becomes “necessary” for the greater good of all.

Because of this disadvantage, there is always at least one person who sits above the societal constructs. They receive permission to do whatever they want because it is their responsibility to approve everything else. If you have enough wealth or influence, then you could get approvals for things that others would not have.

4. It reduces the overall intelligence of the general public. Censorship requires that the general population be under tight controls so that specific outcomes are achievable every time. It is an attempt to prevent individuals from discovering what the truth of any situation happens to be. Even an attempt at suggesting that content is fake or untrustworthy, as the Trump Administration does so often with the news media, is a way to create censorship from an official capacity.

It’s one thing to have a person say, “I don’t like watching CNN because I feel like their news stories are fake.” When the president of a country says that the news media is the enemy of the state, then it creates a position from authority, especially when he says that it has a “major role to play as far as tone and as far as everything.”

5. It prevents an individual from expressing themselves freely. In a no-rules environment that is completely free of censorship, anyone could post anything that they want without fear of reprisal. The United States walks a fine line along this path by preventing the use of “obscene” items. Other countries take this issue a little further, outlawing social media posts that are determined to be at odds with the official position of the nation’s government.

Nicholas Demas from Mic completed a profile of eight social medial users who were arrested for what they said online in 2013. Matt Woods posted inappropriate comments about a 5-year-old at a time when he was drunk, earning him three months in jail. Some governments use their power to arrest those who are deemed to be in opposition.

6. It shifts where the responsibility of consumption is in society. When the government is responsible for what people can access for information, then there is no longer any personal accountability for one’s actions. This process cedes control of ethics, morality, and standards to whomever is in charge of implementing these policies. Once someone is willing to allow another individual, company, or elected official to tell them how to think, feel, and act, it becomes much easier to let more control over life’s decisions disappear as well. Instead of being individuals, censorship turns people into commodities.

We already see the impact of this disadvantage in China. If someone adds comments that are anti-government, violent, or sexually graphic, then the content is subject to automatic deletion. Do it enough times and the account will be deleted.

7. It creates an adverse impact on the economy at all levels. When censorship starts blocking any form of content because it doesn’t meet someone’s perspective on what is “decent” or offends someone, then there are fewer economic opportunities that become available at all levels of society. Businesses can no longer promote themselves because their advertising might be offending someone. Companies can’t train workers because the processes could be considered offensive by someone. It creates a world where our actions are dictated by others, so those with the loudest voices will typically have the most control.

8. It allows a false narrative to become the truth. If you ask the average person living in North Korea what they think of the world, they’ll tell you that the United States is one of the worst countries in the world, that their standard of living is excellent, and that life is beautiful all of the time. Never mind that the average person in that country earns $3 per month or less, that 18 million people need food assistance to avoid malnutrition, and there is no access to basic medical care. There are also extreme human rights issues, such as a complete curtailing of freedom of expression, religious practices, or even independent civil society organization. It is a land of torture, arbitrary arrest, and public executions.

The Trump Administration wants to label anything in opposition to its viewpoint as being fake because that indicates their content is the truth. It is another form of a false narrative intended to get a specific reaction out of supporters as a way to keep power.

9. It is expensive to be engaged in the practice of censorship. The cost to shut down the Internet to prevent specific content items from being viewed by the general public was over $2 billion in 2015. Cutting connectivity in just one country can be more than $100 million. Those expenses are only the tip of the iceberg to consider when looking at the practical enforcement of censorship on others.

China on its own pays more than $2 billion each year just to keep its firewall in place to limit information access online. There are hundreds of thousands of workers who monitor individual activities, with some sites allowing back-end access to facilitate this work. When you look at the direct and indirect expenses in every other category, the world likely spends over $100 billion to create altered information flows that people accept in fact.

10. It creates repression so that it encourages compliance. One of the most-banned books in the world today is The Lord of the Rings by JRR Tolkien. What is so remarkable about that fact is that the author was a devout Catholic and a good friend of C.S. Lewis. He once wrote a letter to Lewis to say that his trilogy and The Hobbit were unconsciously written from a Christian perspective at first, and then edited consciously to incorporate those themes.

Christian churches and schools are the most likely places where you will see these works banned because they are viewed as being anti-religious or anti-Christian. That’s why a singular viewpoint being in charge of censorship is so dangerous to society. It can be an ill-informed opinion that is completely contrary to the work in question, yet the power it has to condemn can influence countless others.

Verdict on the Pros and Cons of Censorship

Some people look at the idea of censorship as a way to add common-sense restrictions to our daily routines so that we can stay safe and protect our children. The other side of that equation is that families can set their own limits, establish rules, and create circumstances that fit their needs without imposing their morality or beliefs on others.

That’s not to say that all forms of content should be allowed in society. Murder videos, child pornography, and similar items that encourage violence against others or promote actual harm in the images is a safety factor that we cannot ignore.

That’s why the crux of the pros and cons of censorship work to distinguish fictional content from factual items. We don’t outlaw murder mystery novels because someone in the story dies. We would outlaw content that showed a murder because a real person was harmed in the process of its creation.

The Disadvantages of Internet Censorship

• Small Business
• Setting Up a New Business
• Starting Your Own Company
• ')" data-event="social share" data-info="Pinterest" aria-label="Share on Pinterest">
• ')" data-event="social share" data-info="Reddit" aria-label="Share on Reddit">
• ')" data-event="social share" data-info="Flipboard" aria-label="Share on Flipboard">

What Countries Are American Companies Forbidden to Do Business With?

Advantages & disadvantages of business ethics, employment liability laws for internet usage.

• How to Bypass Internet Filters Without a Proxy
• What Is the Purpose of a Proxy Server?

Internet censorship is a practice of putting restrictions on publishing and viewing content on the internet. Governments imposing restrictions on publishing and viewing sensitive or harmful content is an example of internet censorship. The objectives of internet censorship are to protect copyrighted information, control cybercrime, and stop spreading false news like hoax and propaganda. But every coin has two sides, and the internet censorship debate brings up both advantages and disadvantages.

Censorship Violates Freedom of Speech

One of the internet censorship cons is that it limits not only the accessibility of information but also the freedom of expression. In a country where internet censorship is practiced, a simple social media post against a person in power could be enough for an arrest warrant to be issued. When freedom of speech is restricted, people will be afraid of speaking out about evil practices in society. In the name of blocking harmful information, censorship restricts real information that empowers local communities. The lack of access to truths often leads to ignorance.

Censorship Gives Authority to One Group of People

The government gives the authority to a specific group of people or an agency to implement internet censorship practices. But this brings up a few questions:

• Does this group follow morals while restricting information?
• Do abusive government officials restrict this agency from publishing their wrongdoings?
• Who oversees the activities of this group?

Ruling governments use internet censorship to their advantage by blocking websites that pose a threat to their power. Internet censorship allows people who have power and money to control what common citizens are able to see and express.

Censorship Limits Promotional Opportunities

The major impacted groups of internet censorship are corporations and budding entrepreneurs. Restricting social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter obstructs the small- and medium-scale businesses or groups from reaching audiences at a low cost.

For example, China has restricted the access of Facebook and Twitter to prevent activist groups using these sites to organize. As reported by Stanford University , 12 of the 100 most trafficked websites in the world — including Facebook, Twitter, Youtube and Instagram — have been blocked by China. Due to the restriction, Chinese companies have lost the opportunity of using the world’s largest social media platforms to reach domestic customers.

Censorship is Costly

A lot of resources are required to implement internet censorship effectively. The government or authorized agency should hire a qualified workforce and procure appropriate technological infrastructure to monitor content published on the internet. As part of implementing internet censorship, most countries completely disrupt the internet. As reported by Brookings , the internet disruption in May 2016 in Saudi Arabia resulted in a cost of about $465 million in GDP. Saudi Arabia has blocked several applications related to texting and instant messaging, including Facebook Messenger, Whatsapp and Skype, citing that they are causing economic damage to local telecommunication providers. The internet disruptions in 2016 resulted in a loss of $968 million in GDP for India.

On the positive side, internet censorship offers several advantages. It can help prevent fake news spreading and causing panic within local communities. It also protects people's personal information and reduces internet-related crimes. Internet censorship helps reduce the accessibility of content related to illicit drugs, child pornography and sex trafficking. The major benefit of internet censorship is that it can reduce the violent behavior of among youth.

• Brookings: Internet shutdowns cost countries $2.4 billion last year
• The Stanford University: The Impact of Media Censorship: Evidence from a Field Experiment in China

Naveen is a copywriter and content strategist. He is also an educational consultant who coaches students to equip with relevant knowledge on entrepreneurship and helps them to set up small-scale and freelance businesses.

Related Articles

The disadvantages of doing business on the internet, why should employers track employees' online habits, definition of transparency advertising, can facebook be banned at the workplace, what forces drive small businesses into international marketing, how to unblock pop-up windows on internet explorer, ethical issues & employer monitoring internet usage, ethical considerations of marketing research, why companies censor the internet at work, most popular.

• 1 The Disadvantages of Doing Business on the Internet
• 2 Why Should Employers Track Employees' Online Habits?
• 3 Definition of Transparency Advertising
• 4 Can Facebook Be Banned at the Workplace?

Home — Essay Samples — Social Issues — Censorship — The Importance of Censorship in Today’s World

Advantages and Disadvantages of Censorship in Today’s World

• Categories: Censorship Freedom of Expression Modern Society

About this sample

Words: 2738 |

14 min read

Published: Nov 26, 2019

Words: 2738 | Pages: 6 | 14 min read

Works Cited

• Mette, N. (n.d.). The History of Censorship. Ancient History Encyclopedia. Retrieved from https://www.ancient.eu/article/1015/the-history-of-censorship/
• Palfrey, J. (2016). A Short History of Internet Regulation. In A. Sokolova, J. Kulesza, R. Maguire, & F. Dignum (Eds.), Social Informatics (pp. 15-26). Springer International Publishing.
• Mackinnon, R. (2012). The Dictator’s Dilemma: The Internet, Dictatorships, and the Prospects for Democratization. Journal of Democracy, 23(2), 63-76.
• OpenNet Initiative. (n.d.). Internet Censorship and Surveillance by Country. Retrieved from https://opennet.net/research/
• Karnadi, E. B. (2019). Censorship, Crime, and Corruption: An Empirical Study of Internet Regulation and Crime Rate in Asia. In P. Bui & H. L. Yang (Eds.), Governance and Sustainability in Asia (pp. 41-61). Springer.
• Chang, E. C., & Chu, Y.-H. (2011). Internet Censorship and Regulation Systems in Democracies: Comparative Analysis of South Korea and Taiwan. The Chinese Journal of Communication, 4(3), 321-338.
• Johnson, I. (2016). Media Censorship in China. Salem Press Encyclopedia.
• United Nations. (n.d.). Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights
• Holt, K. (2012). Internet Censorship: A Comparative Analysis. Canadian Journal of Law & Technology, 10(1), 153-179.
• Wu, Y. (2017). Censorship, Not a Solution: An Analysis of Internet Filtering in China. Journal of Current Chinese Affairs, 46(3), 3-30.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Verified writer

• Expert in: Social Issues Sociology

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

1 pages / 570 words

1 pages / 408 words

3 pages / 1296 words

3 pages / 1531 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Censorship

Censorship is a practice that has been used across many governmental systems throughout history. In the novel Fahrenheit 451, author Ray Bradbury explores the latent damages that arise when censorship is placed upon a society. [...]

Ray Bradbury paints a haunting picture of a society consumed by mindless entertainment, where books are banned and intellectual curiosity is stifled. Through his vivid portrayal of this futuristic world, Bradbury raises [...]

In conclusion, Fahrenheit 451 is a thought-provoking novel that explores the themes of censorship, the dangers of technology, and the importance of intellectual freedom. Through its cautionary tale, Ray Bradbury invites us to [...]

However, there has been a long-standing debate about whether certain books should be banned from public spaces, schools, and libraries due to their content. While it is important to acknowledge that some material may be [...]

“Everything faded into mist. The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became truth.” This line, delivered in George Orwell’s sinister book, 1984, exemplifies a totalitarian government censoring information, [...]

While some argue that censorship can protect society from harmful ideas, Fahrenheit 451 presents a counterargument that censorship can create a society that is intellectually stagnant and vulnerable to manipulation. By [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

404 Not found