Should the internet be monitored or censored? By whom?
There is a controversy about the internet whether should be monitored, censored or the free flow of information should be allowed. There are two main arguments that come up to the surface. The first reason is political and the second reason is rather social. Today, the internet provides the widest source of information and addresses to anyone at any age. It is an ever-expanding spectrum of information that helps people to enrich their intellectual life. The internet lets people alone with many other perspectives and helps to grow conscience about other individuals’ lives, ideas, cultures, norms, causes, beliefs and lifestyles. Any democratic country would appreciate the operation of the internet. Some countries do not expose the whole content to their citizens because of political and social reasons. Some of them censor the whole phenomenon. I acknowledge that there are some extreme political cases on monitoring which we will have a closer look in the next paragraphs although the internet should not be censored in any way because everyone has the right to express themselves and it is the major purpose of it. Also it is the only medium that is not censored. Also, I may agree that at some measure there are some harmful content in the internet that needs to be controlled in a particular way that I will explain but censoring and monitoring the internet is oppressive and sectarian.
The greatest reason of censoring the internet is politics, especially in the countries which have a weak sense of democracy. This is almost always in countries that do not have free and fair elections and where rulers are trying to hold on to power. The censorship is usually to limit access to the sites of minority groups or that contradict what the government has told people. (1) No other authority demands control over the internet rather than the politicians because the internet can be an effective tool for propaganda and...