FREE ESSAY ON GOVERNMENT INTERNET INTERVENTION

GOVERNMENT INTERNET INTERVENTION

Government Internet Intervention
The Internet is a method of communication and a source of information that is becoming
more popular among those who are interested in, and have the time to surf the information
superhighway. The problem with much information being accessible to this many people is
that some of it is deemed inappropriate for minors. The government wants censorship, but
a segment of the population does not. The Internet should not be considered a bad source
for people, considering all the uses and information it distributes.
During the past decade, our society has become based solely on the ability to move large
amounts of information across large distances quickly. Computerization has influenced
everyone's life. The natural evolution of computers and this need for ultra-fast
communications has caused a global network of interconnected computers to develop. This
global net allows a person to send E-mail across the world in mere fractions of a second,
and enables even the common person to access information worldwide. With the advances
with software that allows users with a sound card to use the Internet as a carrier for
long distance voice calls and video conferencing, this network is the key to the future
development of technologies. At present this net is the image of the First Amendment:
freedom of speech. It is a place where people can speak their mind without being
reprimanded for what they say, or how they choose to say it. 
Recently, Congress has been considering passing laws that will make it a crime punishable
by jail to send vulgar language over the net. The government wants to maintain control
over this new form of communication, and they are trying to use the protection of
children as a smoke screen to pass laws that will allow them to regulate and censor the
Internet, while banning techniques that could eliminate the need for regulation.
Censorship of the Internet threatens to destroy its freelance atmosphere, while methods
such as encryption could help prevent the need for government intervention (Levy 56).
The current body of laws existing today in America does not apply well to the Internet.
Is the Internet like a bookstore, where servers cannot be expected to review every title?
Well, according to an article written by Michael Miller in PC Magazine, The Internet is
much more like going into a book store and choosing to look at adult magazines (Miller
75). The Internet differs from other forms of media. In that one cannot just happen upon
a vulgar site without first, either entering a complicated address following a link from
another source, or by clicking on the agreement statement at the beginning of the site
acknowledging that one is of the legal age of 18.
This lawless atmosphere bothered many people. One such person is Nebraska Senator James
Exon (D), who is one of the founding fathers of the Telecommunications Decency Act of
1996 which regulates  any obscene or indecent material via the Internet to anyone under
18 years of age." Exon's bill would also according to an article written by Steven Levy
in an April 1995 issue of Newsweek magazine criminalize private mail, Levy also stated
emotional I can call my brother on the phone and say anything-but if I say it on the
Internet, it's illegal (Levy 55).
One thing that Congress seems to have overlooked in its pursuit of regulations is that
there are no clear boundaries from information being accessed over the Internet from over
countries. All it takes is a click of a mouse to access, even if our government tried to
regulate information accessed from other countries, we would have no control over what is
posted in those countries, and we would have no practical way to stop it. Today's
Internet works much like that of our own human brains. In that if one barrier or option
is taken, your brain tries to find an alternate route or option. Today's Internet works
on a similar design, if a major line between two servers say in two countries, is cut,
then the Internet users will find another way around this obstacle. This process of
obstacle avoidance makes it virtually impossible to separate an entire nation from
indecent information in other countries. If it were physically possible to isolate
America's computers from the rest of the world, in my opinion it would be devastating to
our economy.
In an article published in Time magazine, written by Philip Emler-Dewitt 
Martin Rim put together quite a large picture collection (917,410 images) and he also
tracked how often each image had been downloaded (a total of 6.4 million). A local court
had recently declared pictures of similar content obscene, and the school felt they might
be held responsible for the content on its network. The school administration quickly
removed access to all these pictures, and to the newsgroups where this obscenity is
suspected to come from. A total of 80 newsgroups were removed, causing a large
disturbance among the student body, the American civil Liberties Union, and the
Electronic Frontier Foundation, all of whom felt this was unconstitutional. After only
half a week, the college had backed down, and restored the newsgroups (Emler- Dewitt
102). 
This is only a tiny example of what may happen if the government tries to impose
censorship. Regardless of what types of software or safeguards are used to protect the
children of the information age, there will always be ways around them. As stated by
Michael Miller 
When it comes to our children, censorship is a far less important issue than good
parenting. We must teach our kids that the Internet is an extension and reflection of the
real world, and we have to show them how to enjoy the good things and avoid the bad
things. This is not the government's responsibility. It's ours (Miller 76).
An example of the government trying to get around something is the whole issue with
Napster. "Shawn Fanning an 18-year-old college dropout wrote the code that changed the
world. His fate, and ours, is now in the court's hands. It is now in the government's
hands to decide whether worldwide file sharing shall stay legalized" "Napster is not
harming the industry, certainly not so much that it has to be shut down before trial"
(Greenfeld 64). Many people feel this way about the program. Many artists even feel this
way about the file-sharing program. Actress/grunge rocker Courtney Love says," Why aren't
record companies embracing this great opportunity? Why aren't they trying to talk to
kids... to learn what they like?" (Greenfeld 66). Her and many other non-greedy musicians
feel this way about the program. It is shown that Napster has not made a difference in CD
sales. "Although Napster might seem to be taking sales away from the record companies, CD
sales have actually increased in the Napster era - by $500 million this year alone
(Greenfeld 66). This shows that Napster is actually a promoter for CD sales. This is
probably because the people sample the music and then go and buy it. 
Until the development of the Internet, the U.S. government controlled most of the new
communication techniques. With the development of faster personal computers and the
addition of the worldwide web, they had no control over the vast range of this style of
communication. To stop the spread of data the U.S. government has imposed strict laws on
the exportation. This is explained in an article by Phil Zimmerman To send a encoded
message to someone, a copy of that person's 'public' key is needed. The sender uses this
public key to encrypt the data, and the recipient uses their 'private' key to decode the
message (Zimmerman 3). As with any new technology, this program has allegedly been used
for illegal purposes, and the FBI and NSA are believed to be unable to crack this code
(Zimmerman 4). Zimmerman's reply to his knowledge of this rumor was quoted in Steven
Levy's article in Newsweek If I had invented an automobile, and was told that criminals
used it to rob banks, I would feel bad, too. But most people agree that the benefits to
society that come from automobiles taking the kids to school, grocery shopping and such
outweigh their drawbacks (Levy 56).
As the Internet continues to grow throughout the world, more governments may try to
impose their views onto the rest of the world through regulations and censorship. It will
be a sad day when the world must adjust its views to conform to that of the most prudish
regulatory government. If too many regulations are incited, then the Internet as a tool
will become nearly useless, and the Internet as a mass communication device and a place
for freedom of mind and thoughts, will become non-existent. The government should rethink
its approach to the censorship and the encryption issues, allowing the Internet to
continue to grow and mature. The users, parents, and servers of the world need to
regulate themselves, so, as not to push the government into forcing these types of
regulations on what might be the best communication instrument in history
Bibliography
Emler-Dewitt, Philip. Censoring Cyberspace: Carnegie Mellon's Attempt to Ban Sex from its
Campus Computer Network Sends A Chill Along the Info Highway. Time Nov. 21, 1994:
102-105. 
Greenfeld, Karl Taro. "Meet the Napster." Time Oct. 2, 2000: 60-73.
Levy, Steven. The Encryption Wars: is Privacy Good or Bad? Newsweek Apr. 1995: 55-57. 
Miller, Michael. Cybersex Shock. PC Magazine Oct. 10, 1995: 75-76.
Telecommunications Decency Act of 1996, Section 502, 47 U.S.C Section 223. 
Zimmerman, Phil. (1995). Pretty Good Privacy v2.62. Available Ftp: net-dist.mit.edu
Directory: pub/pgp/dist File: 262dc.zip.