1

The internet (A) could and (B)

should be regulated. Discuss.
(INTRO) The internet is arguably the most
signifcant technology of our time. It is truly phenomenal in
increasing the freedom of millions around the world to spea
their mind! share nowledge! e"pand their networs or simply
be entertained. #owe$er! this freedom has come with many
concerns so much so that there ha$e been calls to regulate
the internet. %o$ernments or website owners certainly ha$e
ways and means to restrict internet access or control online
beha$iour. &ut should they do so ' T his essay takes the
view that the internet could, and should, be
regulated, provided it is with the higher aim of
ultimately securing freedom for all. t must not
be e!cessive and oppressive.
(&(1) One of the reasons against internet
regulation is that too much control (i) sti"es debate or (ii)
prevents the distribution of information that is needed
to make improvements in society. )uppression on the
internet insults the intelligence of the people by
assuming that they are incapable of bringing about positi$e
change. Internet regulation that goes o$erboard
simultaneously entrenches the paternalism of the ruling
power as the *father+ who nows what is best for his
*children+ and as a result! is himself beyond reproach.
e.g. blocing of sites , -aceboo in Iran! %reat -irewall of
.hina
e.g. )g , sites that criticise the go$ernment are not bloced ,
this is one way of (i) promoting discussion as an alternati$e to
parliamentary debate and also (ii) helps pre$ent opposing
/
$iews from being hidden , the go$t can gain from online
discussion
(&(/) In addition! those who support freedom
raise the point that internet regulation can be seen as a form
of oppression or impingement of human rights.
.onse0uently! regulation in$ites baclash and hence! it
should not be encouraged e$en if it could be carried out.
a. #reedom of speech $ e!pression (creativity) ,
support for free online $ersions of banned boos e.g.
&anned &oos 1ee on openculture.com to celebrate
the freedom to read
b. #reedom to seek recourse , people should not be
denied the chance to reach out to others for help e.g.
%a2ans used social networing sites to spread frst3hand
accounts of Israeli human rights o4ences
c. %ight to privacy , neti2ens should not be monitored to
regulate them indirectly with the fear of sur$eillance
d. 5ore recent contro$ersy 6 the right to be forgotten ,
those who do reporting or in$estigati$e research oppose
this because this regulation that allows erasure could
obstruct their wor.
(&(7) On the other hand! the internet should be
regulated to preser$e safety and security. This means that
there are certain inds of content that should not be
circulated without any control ...
a. .rime pre$ention e.g. circulation of child pornography
should be stopped by blocing sites8 to demonstrate
seriousness towards the matter! some people support
tracing the online acti$ities of both $iewers and
suspected distributors
b. %o$ernments say these methods should be undertaen
for the sae of national security e$en though such
actions could $erge on the abuse of power
7
c. .orporate encroachment into personal space of
consumers , users do not want their personal
information or contact list details to be sold or shared ,
need for rules9laws
(&(:) )hould there be a moral watchdog for the
internet ' Other than outright legal prohibitions! this can be
achie$ed by website owners themsel$es or forum
moderators ...
a. .reate safe en$ironment with a code of conduct , this is
a bottom3up approach which is seen as more lasting e.g.
;llo! the new social networing site
b. < code of conduct is also needed to eep those who
report or write commentaries honest regulate them ,
not by restricting , but by eeping them accountable and
lea$ing their $iews open to scrutiny
c. 5oral sub=ecti$ity appears to be a global trend because
the internet e"poses users to so many other $alues.
<gainst this bacdrop! indirect regulation should be put
in place so that the community+s own standards are
preser$ed. &y doing so! e$en if the tides of change
cannot be indefnitely fended o4! at least! these
standards can e$ol$e without the tensions and con>icts
that could blow up due to uncontrolled online debate and
foreign inter$ention $ia the internet.
d. (ossible e.gs 6 ?%&T mo$ement in )g! <shley 5adison in
)g! no pornography on @outube
(&(A) #owe$er! e$en if internet freedom should
be regulated as argued abo$e! and there are ways to get it
done! regulation has se$eral ma=or implementation problems.
a. Bi4erent countries or societies disagree on what should
or should not be regulated , users =ust eep searching to
fnd an online platform that lets them do what they want.
:
b. ;$en if countries agree and tae more uniformed action!
the worldwide web is too e"pansi$e , new material is put
up e$ery day , monitoring e$erything is impossible
(.ON.?C)ION) #a$ing said the abo$e! the diDculties of
regulating the internet should not deter leaders and internet
users themsel$es from trying their best to mae the internet a
safer place for e$eryone. If all parties bear in mind how the
internet has gi$en a $oice and many opportunities for people
to impro$e their own li$es and their communities! then
whate$er regulation should ser$e to promote these benefts
e$en further.
This outline has around EFG words.