It cannot be denied that the internet brought a revolution in certain aspects of human social lives. It is no doubt that the internet has provided a certain degree of freedom, which if combined with sufficient anonymity, and lack of control, can turn the granted freedom into chaos. In that regard, the same can be applied to the freedom of speech in the internet. This paper provides an overview regarding freedom of speech, and freedom of expression, on the internet, stating that, the absence of censorship as well its dominance might lead to a misuse that compromises the idea of the freedom of speech.
Freedom of speech or freedom of expression, in the internet, refers to the right to express an opinion or an idea, through any electronic means. The issues that might arise through practicing that right are twofold. On the one hand, the freedom of expression on the internet allowed the general public to be informed about the true nature of the certain events, regardless of geographical locations and restrictions. The successful examples can be seen through the coverage of the events in Tianmen in Chine, the Kuwait Invasion, Iran election and etc. (“Internet Freedom of Speech,” 2009) The ability to express one’s opinion freely creates a dialogue, and in the case of the internet, it is a global dialogue.
On the other hand, the freedom of speech allows the widespread of pornography, personal attacks, falsified information, plagiarism and etc. One might argue that several of the aforementioned points might be regulated by the law. However, the nature of the internet makes it accessible for the general auditory, hard to control, and without boundaries.
It can be concluded that control and censorship are issues that should be considered in parallel to freedom of speech and expression. Even with the laws incapable of controlling the flow of information in the internet, it is an ethical responsibility for every user to refer to common sense when expressing his/her freedom of speech on the internet.
Before the Internet
- The public access to such documents might have been possible through a library archive. In case of bills that were debated at the time, this might have been another issue where copies might be published before their hearing for public use. Other legislature documents also had the same fate, where for example accessing court records, required physically going into the courthouse. The disadvantages might be obvious, such as time consumption, search possibilities, and overall involvement. People tend to ignore political participation, if it does not concern them, or if it requires additional efforts.
- In this case, the most obvious way is subscribing to medical journals, or using the library. The disadvantages include the limited search abilities, if any, where in order to find specific article on a particular topic, it would require examining hundreds and thousands of paper editions. Accordingly, the subscription to a specific journal would cost money, where internet resources also might not be free of charges, but the search options allows the user to be 100% sure that they are getting the information they need. In terms of libraries, their geographical dispersion would put require enormous efforts on finding the needed information and requiring a copy, specifically if the topic is not so popular.
- Such procedure might have been done through posting an advertisement through the media. This might be a newspaper, a radio, or a rubric in a magazine. The disadvantages include paying for the advertisement, the time needed for the newspaper to be published, and the limited geographical coverage. The limitedness of choice would have not enabled the seller to address all the potential offers, and accordingly, the potential sellers would not have been informed about all the information regarding the poster.
References
Fisher, W. (2001). Freedom of Expression on the Internet. Berkman Center for Internet & Society.
Internet Freedom of Speech. (2009).