As an online course, the writing that we do in English 305 is substantially different from a face to face course. As such, it is imperative that you understand the course style from the start. Nearly all of your work in this course will be posted on the course blog.
EACH WEEK YOU WILL HAVE THREE BLOG ASSIGNMENTS:
1. A BLOG ENTRY,
2. A READING, AND
3. A WRITING ABOUT THE READING. Your reading and writing on the blog must be completed by the Friday (by midnight) of the week in which the reading falls. You have all week each week to complete the reading and writing for that week, but there are no late assignments accepted, so be sure to be disciplined about the work from the start. Let me re-state that point; if you do the assigned work before or during the week it is due, you will receive full credit. If you do the work after the Friday of the week it is assigned, you will get zero credit for that week.
Sunday, January 29, 2012
WEEK FOUR RESPONDING TO WHAT YOU READ
What's the key line in this essay and why does that one stand out to you?
For the other article that you found, what can you tell us about it? Would you recommend it? What else does that article add to the conversation?
As American citizens, we value the ability we have to express our opinions in various formats through various channels. We value the freedoms given to us by our brothers, neighbors, and founding fathers and our right to change anything deemed controversial or infringing on personal rights, given the majority of society agrees. Because American citizens are, from birth, given intangible rights and guaranteed rights by our countries’ constitution, it is hard for us to fathom the idea that countries throughout the world limit their citizens and severely cut into the rights we seemingly take for granted. A stunning line in our most recent assigned weekly reading signifies the vast differences between countries in regards to censorship. Although censorship is present within the United States, its presence is unlikely to be noticed in our daily routine as its effects and limitations are scarce. However, in Chinese society, the view and usage of censorship can be described as directly opposite that of the United States. “…the company said the Chinese government had been "crystal clear throughout our discussions that self-censorship is a non-negotiable legal requirement"”. This reference clearly identifies the incredible use of censorship in Chinese society and also reflects the challenge made to Chinese civilians to change such policies. This is in direct conflict with the views, policies and beliefs of the United States which makes understanding the need for such control and manipulation extremely difficult.
Twitter has long been known as a company in which free speech is highly valued and recognized. However, due to recent requests by repressive governments, Twitter will soon begin to censor tweets found by said governments to be in some way offensive or intolerable. Though Twitter is not itself censoring tweets, as governments must request specific tweets be blocked after they have been posted, Twitter has come under fire for its acceptability of governments to censor said tweets without any feud. Many argue that because of Twitter’s expansive reputation, the company should have fought harder to maintain its original policies. Because of this policy change, some users have lost confidence in the company. This article only strengthens the realization that unlike the United States, personal freedoms and liberties are not guaranteed, let alone easy to come by, in other modern countries and although Americans accept that countries are different, because of our long-standing history of freedom, we find it difficult to stand by and watch as our brothers be limited by governmental authority. Many wonder if Twitter could have done more to save their original polices in which they were founded rather than succumbing easily to critic pressure.
It is difficult to tell what is really going on here with this censorship feud. In China it seems like the government wants censorship in order to have more control over their citizens and keep "big brother" watching them. It also seems to me that they want to pick a fight. The line, "state media in China attacked Google for the companie's "intricate" ties with the U.S. Government," makes it seem like they want to just make a jab at the U.S. government, and are using Google as their leverage.
I read an article from ABCnews.com about SOPA (Stop online Piracy Act). It sais that the act wants to block digital file sharing, and is intended to protect the copying of movies and music for free. I think that this would be a good thing to do, if those websites were the only ones to be blocked. But, it seems like this blocking would be difficult to regulate, and I don't quite understand how it would be done. Google, Yahoo, and Bing could be stopped from linking to websites that are involved with digital file sharing, but what other websites would it block? It seems like this goes a lot farther than digital file shareing, but more into sensoring what we are looking at, talking about, and posting.
The key line is this essay is Google's post regarding the censorship, "the Chinese government had been "crystal clear throughout our discussions that self-censorship is a non-negotiable legal requirement". For those of us in the United States where freedom of speech is valued, protected, and a right these policies and regulations are completely foreign to us. We live in a society where access to any topic from politics to controversial debates are at our fingertips. Based on this article and the statements made by the chinese government everything they view has been censored. The only information received is what the government has approved. These policies are in complete contrast to our American belief system. Censorship regulations do exist in the U.S.however not to the extreme of those in other countries. An article that I came across was in regards to the the U.S. goverment asking scientists to censor research findings about a flu virus. The government claims if certain research data was published terrorists could easily gather this information, infect thousands, and cause a worldwide epidemic. The government is not asking the scientists to omit the entire data only that which can be used to replicate the virus. In this case the government is asking for censorship with the goal of protecting humanity. Their request is being considered by a panel of scientists responsible for censorship issues regarding research publications. Based on the article, the members of the panel are looking for other alternatives to relay this valuable information to scientists. I would definitely recommend this article, it noted a valid argument for censorship policies. I'm betting we would all be in favor of censorship if it were required to protect the lives of others. This article definitely look at censorship from a different positive perspective.
The censorship feud in China between the Chinese government and Google is one that I believe we will soon be facing in the United States. With the debate over the newly proposed SOPA, PIPA, and OPEN acts against online piracy being brought to the forefront of the censorship debate, we will continue to hear about the issues surrounding privacy and our freedoms. The key line in the "Google Stops Censoring in China" article is "the company said the Chinese government had been 'crystal clear throughout our discussions that self-censorship is a non-negotiable legal requirement.'" This quote shows how serious the Chinese government is about its censorship practices and how it will continue to do everything in its power to make sure that their internet and citizens stay completely censored and in the dark. As American citizens, we are all born with certain unalienable rights; those include the freedom of speech. The internet in the United States has thus far been a free and open enterprise. Therefore it is difficult for us to fathom being openly censored such as the citizens of other countries are being. This article allows us to understand how lucky we are to live in a land that allows us these rights because they do exist everywhere and as the Chinese government is showing us, can easily be taken away. The second article I found in the NYTimes online collection was titled “Chine: TV Limits May Hit the Web by Edward Wong. This article discusses the restrictions on what can be shown on Chinese television. I found it interesting because it coincided with the first article we read about Google and its feud with the Chinese government over its censorship policies by showing that the censorship practices don’t just end with the internet. They extend much farther than that. The agency that is in charge of regulating film and television, Sarft, has said as of January 1st, 2012, at least half of all of the networks dramas must be sent in the present day. It also has put a halt and limit on the number of reality television programs that it allows because it considers them “vulgar.” In the United States, you cannot turn on the t.v. without seeing some version of a reality program. It is mind boggling to realize that there are some governments that still have that much influence over the daily activities in their constituent’s lives. I recommend this article because many of us are not aware of the global censorship situation of other countries. It is eye-opening to see how severe the censorship is in other countries. All of the programs that have been put in place with regards to television and film in China are supposed to “better control culture,” although I am not sure how limiting the amount of reality and history-based shows will do this. I feel that culture comes from much more than simply what one watches on television or in movies.
Censorship is not as authoritarian in the United States as other countries like Chines. United States has always protected the freedom of speech and for people to let their voices to be heard. Every individual has the right to express themselves in any way they like as long as it cannot harm others or violate the law so it is a very simple statement for the society to understand. However, the key line in this essay that stood out which was not a surprise is, “In a blog post, the company said the Chinese government had been "crystal clear throughout our discussions that self-censorship is a non-negotiable legal requirement"” Almost everything, if not all, is monitor (censor) by the Chinese government in order to direct people and shape the society as the government pleases. The whole dilemma of “censor” reminds me of “Big Brother is Watching You,” and it sounds scary. However, censorship has been a stamp of “dictatorship” throughout history and unfortunately it’s still going. Censorship has been used by many countries for the purpose of altering that found to be obnoxious or invasive in anyway. An article that I found calls “Businessman is Happy with Twitter Censorship” on the LexisNexis Academic database stated that Twitter has decided to block certain post and what not on a “country –to country basis.” From my perspective, they should have done that long time ago because people post crazy things so I believe certain things have to be filtered from public views and it is to protect our kids. Only threaten post and whatever believed to be offensive will be filtered; however, some people seemed to object to such action due to the freedom of speech. In the end, ideas and other communication forms were suppressed under the appearance of protecting social institutions: law (state), church, and most importantly, family.
In the first portion of the article, towards the end of that portion, there was a quote from the Chinese government stating that “self-censorship is a non-negotiable legal requirement”. This stood out the most to me as I read the article because it is a perfect example of what kind of censorship is unacceptable. If you read this portion from another article separate from what we have just read, it would be better because everyone should exercise some self-control. The unacceptable part of this is that China’s government is actually threatening people with unwanted consequences if they don’t. China is well known for the control that their government exerts on its people. Government censorship in that country exceeds far more than what is necessary to achieve successful living and relationship between its inhabitants with the government. What bothers me the most is that, Chinese has no fight against this over-controlling government; unless, I’m not aware of any incidence where the Chinese population had tried to fight against their government for such issues. As this statement entails that censorship is a “non-negotiable legal requirement”, the people of China is obligated to follow the rule to avoid unwanted consequences. As for the other article that I’ve read regarding the issue of censorship, China is not the only Asian country suffering from this dilemma. The article was entitled “Vietnam's awakening youth circumvent censorship” of Boston Globe. It talks about how the young people of the country defies to follow the censorship rules of their government about what they can read, what they can write, and how they can express their love for their country. The reasoning for applying such rules by the government was good; that is to maintain a close tie of the people to their country’s culture and practices without external input from foreigners, but the bad portion about it is that they exaggerate the applications of these rules to the point that everything that attacks the politics of that country is also banded. The truth is, with the technology today, young people will always find a way to get what they want, to express what they feel, and to show their opinions. Like it was stated in the article “The more the government tries to ban something, the more young people try to find out why” (www.Boston.com).
Chinese government officials had warned Google repeatedly that it would face consequences if it did not comply with the country's censorship rules.
In the article, it seems that the Chinese government is still living the golden years. It wants to keep its people controlled—in everything. The Chinese government even “warned” Google that they HAD to obey their censorship rules when in reality? Google is doing their part. As Mr. Drummond said, "We very much hope that the Chinese government respects our decision, though we are well aware that it could at any time block access to our services.” For me, this is a red flag. If simple decisions can’t be made now, I wonder how this situation will settle? The SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act) act has been around the news for quite a while now. In this article, it states that it’s illegal to post copyrighted material which Google and YouTube try to avoid; however, they are not doing very well. SOPA, is all about closing these websites down. Although Google and YouTube (along with many other sites) are doing their best to play fair, SOPA would still close them down. The biggest concern is that people feel like their rights are being diminished over a non-significant cause. http://www.freep.com/article/20120118/COL41/120118005/SOPA-blackout-day-Web-went-dark
In my perspective, the key line in this essay is the argument that Mr. Drummond posted in the blog. He stated, “We very much hope that the Chinese government respects our decision, though we are aware that it could at any time block access to our services”. This declaration reflects the authority and censorship that the Chinese Government has over the nation. Equally important, at the end of the essay, I identified that all the control that the Chinese government has over its population is alarming since it totally controls every single movement of the web activity. Additionally, due to the abundant quantity of police officers and automated systems that are constantly monitoring the web activity, everyone can think that visiting any website is secure, and maybe it is, however, were is the confidentiality of the citizens? All the web dominance that the government has indicates that the internet users have no privacy at all, since the authorities can identify what websites that users are visiting. In my opinion, this event is intolerable, due to the fact that the lives of each individual is controlled by a supreme authority, and consequently, there is no freedom at all. Furthermore, the censorship that the Chinese government has over its population goes beyond our imagination. In the article that I read, “Must-see Chinese TV becoming a snooze” it demonstrate how the censorship rules that the Chinese government is establishing is driving away the audience of traditional t.v. programs. For example, in the traditional show of Chinese Year eve, which is compared to the Rose Parade, many television spectators turn off their t.v. because they see the program as a false situation that it is being lived in China. Moreover, the show viewers argue that this program tries to praise all the accomplishments that the government has fulfilled, which leads to a less entertaining and a more idealistic show. All this movements are controlled by the government, which totally disappoint the viewers. Overall, I think that the Chinese Government exaggerates with the dominance that they want to establish in their country.
To me the key line is Google championing a cause, at cost to 2% of its revenue. The United States government was given a chance to support one of its largest companies, as well as promote freedom which we so often do, and instead they take a neutral yet condescending tone about Google not being able to resolve its differences with China. I like the reach around Google is using by offering the service to Hong Kong which has its freedoms protected when the United Kingdom ceded control back to China. The underlying message though is one of history, we saw it in Russia, Vietnam, Egypt, and soon to be Syria. A nation is only as strong as its people, when the people cannot take any more oppression and censorship the nation crumbles and a new one takes its place. Sometimes the new nation is just as oppressive as the old one but that too will collapse, humanity in general are moving more towards a world that is free of oppression and at least free of censorship on the surface. So the sad thing is the more China tightens its fist on its populace the more cracks and fissures appear. So why tighten the fist and hurt your own brother and sisters? The second article that I read had to deal with banned books in the United States, for a place that is supposed to be free to the written word (excluding libel), we have a surprisingly long list of banned book. One in particular has to do with our very own county, The Grapes of Wrath by J. Steinbeck was banned from Kern County for over a year due to how truthful, particularly the end painted kern county in the dustbowl era. It’s sad to think that our government feels it's necessary to blank out the past, instead of learn from it and ensure a future that would be free of past mistakes. I would recommend this article only as an eye opener to how far censorship can go, such as a county level!
The part of the article that stood out to me the most was how they were “crystal clear… that self-censorship is a non- negotiable legal requirement”. The Chinese government is a totalitarian. They want control of their citizens and go to great lengths to enforce it. It was evident that the government in China was adamant about maintaining their control on the Chinese citizens and had “warned Google repeatedly that it would face consequences if it did not comply”. A country that governs as China does is too extreme. I understand that there are boundaries that must be set to regulate society but as human beings, we all deserve the right to have our own thoughts and ideas. Everything that they do online, watch on television, or hear on their news are monitored by their government which would block anything they feel would give their citizens a negative outlook on its government. Government censorship should have boundaries where it protects people’s privacy, but at the same time allow them access to a variety of information online as long as they don’t break any laws (hacking, fraud, etc). “Internet Censorship”, an article on the American Civil Liberties Union website had a slogan that caught my attention. It read, “BECAUSE FREEDOM CAN’T PROTECT ITSELF” hit close to home especially since it references censoring the internet in America. Luckily, according to it, the Supreme Court refused to review the COPA for a third time and supported the rights of citizens. It asserted that “the government has no right to censor protected speech on the Internet, and it cannot reduce adults to hearing and seeing only speech that the government considers suitable for children.” I just thought that if our government started to censor information from us and deny us our rights to freedom of speech, press, and just basically dictating what they thought we should know or not know, we would loose part of the foundation of what our founding fathers tried to establish years ago. I believe censorship should be within boundaries and total censor like China is unacceptable. For us in America, we have laws to help regulate society and the government shouldn’t push for more control. This is America, and we deserve our freedom of speech. www.aclu.org/free-speech/internet-censorship
The key line in this essay is "China accused Google of violating a "written promise" it made when entering the market to abide by laws requiring it to filter its search service".Key line of accusations made by China stands out the most due to the fact that Google made a written promise and than decided to do what they please. In a moral standpoint, if Google made a written promise than they should of kept that promise. On the otherhand, people should be able to do whatever they want. Censorship should be up to the people as a whole not up to the goverment. China has too much control and it is clearly portrayed in article. For instance, China warns google demanding they comply with the laws and regualtions of China. The people in China should stand up for themselves and take control or their rights will diminish. Censorship should be in the hands of the people not the government. Futhermore in the article "Sopa Blackout Aims to Block Internet Censorship Bill" SOPA gives governement the right to shut down websites accused of copywright infringement without trial. The article in sense is protraying what the Chinese government is trying to do with censorship. Both goverments want control over peoples rights. Furthermore, it all comes down to standing up for ones rights.
[Apparently, the first submission did not fully go through.]
The key line in the article is, "In a blog post, the company said the Chinese government had been 'crystal clear throughout our discussions that self-censorship is a non-negotiable legal requirement"' because it shows that the Chinese government is very strict about censoring certain information from their public. China take it seriously about what the public can view and can not view online. China has given Google warnings about their decision of not censoring certain information from the people of China. Even though everyone have different views and opinions, I believe that the respect of one another should always be there. Google should respect China's rules and regulations of censorship and not disregard the rules the Chinese officials implemented.
The article, "Rumor Fever" by David Bandurski is a very interesting article about censorship in China. This article shows that there is a lot of online activities in China; however, many posts and information are censored daily. The Chinese officials do their best to censor materials that they believe is a threat to their nation. Therefore, they would censor out all the information that is opposing their views. The key line that stands out in this article is, "it is couching its antirumor policy by sugarcoating censorship as a kind of public health measure" because it shows that China is doing whatever it takes in order to censor the unwanted information. It is amazing to see how much control a government has over its people. The government would feed its people information and tell them that those rumors are of a big health threat. In America, we believe in freedom of speech and many Americans would oppose the government to have top notch control over what we may and may not view online. Whereas in China the Internet control is seen as a healthy condition. For example, Chinese official, Wang Chen, says that China's top Interent control is a "healthy and upright online culture" see the Internet control as a "'healthy and upright online culture." Any rumors that are seen as a threat to the government is marked as a social disease and is in need of elimination. I would definitely recommend this article because it ties in with our conversation regarding the censorship in China. It shows how strict China is about the information that is leaked out onto the Internet. http://latitude.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/12/12/rumor-fever/?ref=internetcensorship
The message I get from the china versus Google article is that Google is finally sticking to its true beliefs. The company made an agreement with china that it knew went against its most sacred motto; "Do no evil". It wanted the Chinese audience and money so bad that it set aside its own beliefs, a sellout basically. Google claims to have been misled by the strict Chinese government, into how the servers and the data would be shared with the public. With that and the sophisticated cyber-attacks on the Chinese Google hubs, Google is going back to its original ways and not censoring. Google says do no evil, and by making this deal with the Chinese it did just the opposite, I feel they wanted to correct the evil that was done and give the Chinese fair and equal access to the internet. Let the people choose what they want to do with the information that is on the internet, instead of treating the Chinese like children. The second article I read was on ASU and change.org. ASU is forbidding access to the site which is up and running to petition tuition increases of recent and most likely future times at the university. The site itself was created by a current ASU student, but he and others are no longer allowed to access it on the schools network. This has led many to dub ASU as censorship U. I recommended this article to any college student and anybody who has ever been denied the right to do something. For our purposes it adds the knowledge that censorship is everywhere not just china but in the US. If someone is powerful enough and does not like what you have to say they will stop you from saying it. Or at least attempt and for your sake temporarily win. This country was founded on free speech, we shouldn't censor our citizens especially not its future leaders.
The key line in the reading is that China has the most advanced censorship systems in the world. This tells me that China spends so much time and money ensuring that their people are watched and controlled. The fight for power over their people is such a priority that China will not allow a search engine giant like Google to get in their way.
In the article I read it dealt with self-censorship that is going on in many parts of Mexico. The people who are dealing with self-censorship are the reporters, journalist, and even police officers since they face violent attacks from drug trafficking mobs. I highly recommend this article since it details how reporters find themselves in the drug trafficking mess by doing their jobs. It also entails how all roads in Mexico lead to drug trade and most journalist do not sign their articles due to fear for their lives. This adds an extreme view of what censorship can become if we allow power and money to control us. We must choose our leaders wisely since they control our future.
What stood out to me the most from this article was the fact that China was so demanding in keeping the internet usage their way when google and the U.S. had already warned them that actions would be taking if they did not follow the regulations of the popular web site. I also found it surprising that googles cheif legal officer David Drummond said, "uncensored search" for Google.com.hk was a "sensible solution to the challenges we've faced-it's entirely legal and will meaningfully increase access to information for people in China". I don't believe that they sould have gave into them so easily. Google should have stood their ground. It's amazing how the internet affects countries literally halfway around the world from us. They shouldn't be arguing about thigs such as these. Everyone just need to follow the rules to make it easier on everyone.
I read several mini articles on censorship on http://articles.cnn.com/keyword/internet-censorship (CNN News) and it was interesting just to get different takes on the matter from differnt authors. Lara Farrar in "Cashing in on Interent censorship" explained that in palces where the government blocks pwpole from all access to things on the interent it makes people want to find ways to get around it and break rules to see what they are not allowed to. This is very true. Adults have that charcter trait just like children. The more they are told no; the more they want to do it.
The main point I got from the article given to read is that China is upset at Google due to the lack of censorship the website has provided. The web page is absolutely an open book, where we as users can find and see just about anything and everything. China has a government so such different than the one we have in the United States where we have more freedom of speech and opportunity to express ourselves. This article was about change.org a student made website to petition the increase of school tuition. The reason given to censor the website was because they argued that school computers should only be for school purposes as it states in the following quote given in the passage, "to protect the use of our limited and valuable network resources for legitimate academic, research and administrative uses." I find the reason given absurd and invalid due to the limitation of freedom of speech. I can’t seem to see how censorship plays a positive role in this case. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/josh-levy/arizona-state-censors-cha_b_1253155.html
What I got form this reading is that China is so obsessed with having full control over citizens that they have spent large amounts of money and time on censorship. Their obsession for full control has lead them to warning Google that they would regret not complying with them, because there would be big consequences. Yes I do believe that the government needs to have some control over its citizens. Censorship can be a way of protection and a way to keep things in order, but that does not meant that they should be allowed to keep people from having their own opinions and thoughts. People should feel free to expand their ideas without the fear of being watched by the government. Chinese government has gone way too far by threatening people. The job of the government is to protect citizens not to cause fear. The article that I read is about how students in New York protested against their schools because they were blocking sites on the internet that they considered were very useful. Blocking sites prevents students from doing real research when they have a term paper. For example, YouTube and other sites containing material on topics like weapons. I would recommend this article because it shows how those who are in control can prevent people from exploring things they might be interested in. For example, if a student is thinking about joining the armed forces, and wanted to look some information there would be a lot of sites he would not be able to visit, due to the fact that weapons is a restricted word.A student should be able to log into Facebook at school because social networks is a place where students share their thoughts, ideas and opinions. Students should feel free and should be able to express themselves. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/29/education/29banned.html?ref=censorship
This article gave us a lot information about how different governments rule the web sites. Of course, every government is completely different; however, they have something in common-all of the control of the censorship. One of the key line that I chose is "the Chinese government had been crystal clear throughout our discussions that self-censorship is non-negotiable legal requirements." Of course, Chinese government only wants to have the power to check everything and everyone. They do not accept Google statement about not interfere with any political laws. This situation will harm Google in different ways because it has so many people who use it; the company delay its future growth. There is another company competing with Google in China. I think the Chinese government wants to give the access to Baidu because probably this company is giving the money to the government. As we know, China does not have good relationship with U.S. and probably thinks that Google is spying for U.S. It was very interesting in finding out the governments around the world operate their political power. In the article "Cashing in on Internet censorship" it is easy to see how the web can control that people amount would pay by restricting access to the information. Of course, people would pay more if it is harder to get anything they need. No matter if the information is confidential or not. In my opinion, countries where the government does not have specific rules about web these people will continue to find a way to get the information. Some countries such as, Iran and China have imposed restrictions on the Internet access, so web surfers cannot communicate with friends and family online because they ban Gmail. Of course, I recommend this article because it has some important information about how government try to impose restriction on the web, and Google is the company who is in the line of fire.
The key line in week four's article is that if Google ignores the warnings by the Chinese government to stop adhering to their censorship laws, they could ultimately be blocked from China entirely. This means that Google will loos a large amount of their profit, which could potentially lead to a failed business. This sticks out to me because it amazes me that one country can have so much power over whether or not a country will be able to succeed. A government has enough power to control businesses, in order to make them do what they want them to.
When I was doing my research for another article on censorship, I came across one that said Google was now taking a similar stand on censorship as Twitter has. Google will now be considering the amount of censorship on a country by country basis.
After reading this article, I realized that Google more than likely realized that if they were eventually blocked from China, they could risk going under. Ultimately, Google gave up the fight, and chose censorship over failure.
The reading for week 4 is about the censorships that china has with their country and controlling their people and blocking them in what they can and cannot do. China has warned Google that they need to show in reality what is really happening with Chian before they lose their profits to the rights of the wbesite. China wants to control what is going on and the china government is trying to ban the cesnorship laws completly.
A great censorship Article i found was censorship in schools from kindergarden to 5th grade about certain rules the kids had to follow in order to keep attending the school. This school in Vigina banned the kids from curse words and other things and if broken a first offese they get warned and a second time they are kicked out of the school. I find this very hard believe because the kids are put into school to learn the rules and learn to behave, to learn something you have to fail a couple times, life is all about failing, its how you overcome failing is what makes you who you are. So all in all, I feel the school should be able to let kids not obey the rules because thats how they will learn, if you kick them out they will never learn.
As American citizens, we value the ability we have to express our opinions in various formats through various channels. We value the freedoms given to us by our brothers, neighbors, and founding fathers and our right to change anything deemed controversial or infringing on personal rights, given the majority of society agrees. Because American citizens are, from birth, given intangible rights and guaranteed rights by our countries’ constitution, it is hard for us to fathom the idea that countries throughout the world limit their citizens and severely cut into the rights we seemingly take for granted. A stunning line in our most recent assigned weekly reading signifies the vast differences between countries in regards to censorship. Although censorship is present within the United States, its presence is unlikely to be noticed in our daily routine as its effects and limitations are scarce. However, in Chinese society, the view and usage of censorship can be described as directly opposite that of the United States. “…the company said the Chinese government had been "crystal clear throughout our discussions that self-censorship is a non-negotiable legal requirement"”. This reference clearly identifies the incredible use of censorship in Chinese society and also reflects the challenge made to Chinese civilians to change such policies. This is in direct conflict with the views, policies and beliefs of the United States which makes understanding the need for such control and manipulation extremely difficult.
ReplyDeleteTwitter has long been known as a company in which free speech is highly valued and recognized. However, due to recent requests by repressive governments, Twitter will soon begin to censor tweets found by said governments to be in some way offensive or intolerable. Though Twitter is not itself censoring tweets, as governments must request specific tweets be blocked after they have been posted, Twitter has come under fire for its acceptability of governments to censor said tweets without any feud. Many argue that because of Twitter’s expansive reputation, the company should have fought harder to maintain its original policies. Because of this policy change, some users have lost confidence in the company. This article only strengthens the realization that unlike the United States, personal freedoms and liberties are not guaranteed, let alone easy to come by, in other modern countries and although Americans accept that countries are different, because of our long-standing history of freedom, we find it difficult to stand by and watch as our brothers be limited by governmental authority. Many wonder if Twitter could have done more to save their original polices in which they were founded rather than succumbing easily to critic pressure.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/01/30/EDUT1N0HHK.DTL
It is difficult to tell what is really going on here with this censorship feud. In China it seems like the government wants censorship in order to have more control over their citizens and keep "big brother" watching them. It also seems to me that they want to pick a fight. The line, "state media in China attacked Google for the companie's "intricate" ties with the U.S. Government," makes it seem like they want to just make a jab at the U.S. government, and are using Google as their leverage.
ReplyDeleteI read an article from ABCnews.com about SOPA (Stop online Piracy Act). It sais that the act wants to block digital file sharing, and is intended to protect the copying of movies and music for free. I think that this would be a good thing to do, if those websites were the only ones to be blocked. But, it seems like this blocking would be difficult to regulate, and I don't quite understand how it would be done. Google, Yahoo, and Bing could be stopped from linking to websites that are involved with digital file sharing, but what other websites would it block? It seems like this goes a lot farther than digital file shareing, but more into sensoring what we are looking at, talking about, and posting.
The key line is this essay is Google's post regarding the censorship, "the Chinese government had been "crystal clear throughout our discussions that self-censorship is a non-negotiable legal requirement". For those of us in the United States where freedom of speech is valued, protected, and a right these policies and regulations are completely foreign to us. We live in a society where access to any topic from politics to controversial debates are at our fingertips. Based on this article and the statements made by the chinese government everything they view has been censored. The only information received is what the government has approved. These policies are in complete contrast to our American belief system. Censorship regulations do exist in the U.S.however not to the extreme of those in other countries.
ReplyDeleteAn article that I came across was in regards to the the U.S. goverment asking scientists to censor research findings about a flu virus. The government claims if certain research data was published terrorists could easily gather this information, infect thousands, and cause a worldwide epidemic. The government is not asking the scientists to omit the entire data only that which can be used to replicate the virus. In this case the government is asking for censorship with the goal of protecting humanity. Their request is being considered by a panel of scientists responsible for censorship issues regarding research publications. Based on the article, the members of the panel are looking for other alternatives to relay this valuable information to scientists. I would definitely recommend this article, it noted a valid argument for censorship policies. I'm betting we would all be in favor of censorship if it were required to protect the lives of others. This article definitely look at censorship from a different positive perspective.
The censorship feud in China between the Chinese government and Google is one that I believe we will soon be facing in the United States. With the debate over the newly proposed SOPA, PIPA, and OPEN acts against online piracy being brought to the forefront of the censorship debate, we will continue to hear about the issues surrounding privacy and our freedoms. The key line in the "Google Stops Censoring in China" article is "the company said the Chinese government had been 'crystal clear throughout our discussions that self-censorship is a non-negotiable legal requirement.'" This quote shows how serious the Chinese government is about its censorship practices and how it will continue to do everything in its power to make sure that their internet and citizens stay completely censored and in the dark. As American citizens, we are all born with certain unalienable rights; those include the freedom of speech. The internet in the United States has thus far been a free and open enterprise. Therefore it is difficult for us to fathom being openly censored such as the citizens of other countries are being. This article allows us to understand how lucky we are to live in a land that allows us these rights because they do exist everywhere and as the Chinese government is showing us, can easily be taken away.
ReplyDeleteThe second article I found in the NYTimes online collection was titled “Chine: TV Limits May Hit the Web by Edward Wong. This article discusses the restrictions on what can be shown on Chinese television. I found it interesting because it coincided with the first article we read about Google and its feud with the Chinese government over its censorship policies by showing that the censorship practices don’t just end with the internet. They extend much farther than that. The agency that is in charge of regulating film and television, Sarft, has said as of January 1st, 2012, at least half of all of the networks dramas must be sent in the present day. It also has put a halt and limit on the number of reality television programs that it allows because it considers them “vulgar.” In the United States, you cannot turn on the t.v. without seeing some version of a reality program. It is mind boggling to realize that there are some governments that still have that much influence over the daily activities in their constituent’s lives. I recommend this article because many of us are not aware of the global censorship situation of other countries. It is eye-opening to see how severe the censorship is in other countries. All of the programs that have been put in place with regards to television and film in China are supposed to “better control culture,” although I am not sure how limiting the amount of reality and history-based shows will do this. I feel that culture comes from much more than simply what one watches on television or in movies.
Censorship is not as authoritarian in the United States as other countries like Chines. United States has always protected the freedom of speech and for people to let their voices to be heard. Every individual has the right to express themselves in any way they like as long as it cannot harm others or violate the law so it is a very simple statement for the society to understand. However, the key line in this essay that stood out which was not a surprise is, “In a blog post, the company said the Chinese government had been "crystal clear throughout our discussions that self-censorship is a non-negotiable legal requirement"” Almost everything, if not all, is monitor (censor) by the Chinese government in order to direct people and shape the society as the government pleases. The whole dilemma of “censor” reminds me of “Big Brother is Watching You,” and it sounds scary. However, censorship has been a stamp of “dictatorship” throughout history and unfortunately it’s still going. Censorship has been used by many countries for the purpose of altering that found to be obnoxious or invasive in anyway.
ReplyDeleteAn article that I found calls “Businessman is Happy with Twitter Censorship” on the LexisNexis Academic database stated that Twitter has decided to block certain post and what not on a “country –to country basis.” From my perspective, they should have done that long time ago because people post crazy things so I believe certain things have to be filtered from public views and it is to protect our kids. Only threaten post and whatever believed to be offensive will be filtered; however, some people seemed to object to such action due to the freedom of speech. In the end, ideas and other communication forms were suppressed under the appearance of protecting social institutions: law (state), church, and most importantly, family.
http://www.lexisnexis.com.falcon.lib.csub.edu/hottopics/lnacademic/?
In the first portion of the article, towards the end of that portion, there was a quote from the Chinese government stating that “self-censorship is a non-negotiable legal requirement”. This stood out the most to me as I read the article because it is a perfect example of what kind of censorship is unacceptable. If you read this portion from another article separate from what we have just read, it would be better because everyone should exercise some self-control. The unacceptable part of this is that China’s government is actually threatening people with unwanted consequences if they don’t. China is well known for the control that their government exerts on its people. Government censorship in that country exceeds far more than what is necessary to achieve successful living and relationship between its inhabitants with the government. What bothers me the most is that, Chinese has no fight against this over-controlling government; unless, I’m not aware of any incidence where the Chinese population had tried to fight against their government for such issues. As this statement entails that censorship is a “non-negotiable legal requirement”, the people of China is obligated to follow the rule to avoid unwanted consequences.
ReplyDeleteAs for the other article that I’ve read regarding the issue of censorship, China is not the only Asian country suffering from this dilemma. The article was entitled “Vietnam's awakening youth circumvent censorship” of Boston Globe. It talks about how the young people of the country defies to follow the censorship rules of their government about what they can read, what they can write, and how they can express their love for their country. The reasoning for applying such rules by the government was good; that is to maintain a close tie of the people to their country’s culture and practices without external input from foreigners, but the bad portion about it is that they exaggerate the applications of these rules to the point that everything that attacks the politics of that country is also banded. The truth is, with the technology today, young people will always find a way to get what they want, to express what they feel, and to show their opinions. Like it was stated in the article “The more the government tries to ban something, the more young people try to find out why” (www.Boston.com).
Chinese government officials had warned Google repeatedly that it would face consequences if it did not comply with the country's censorship rules.
ReplyDeleteIn the article, it seems that the Chinese government is still living the golden years. It wants to keep its people controlled—in everything. The Chinese government even “warned” Google that they HAD to obey their censorship rules when in reality? Google is doing their part. As Mr. Drummond said, "We very much hope that the Chinese government respects our decision, though we are well aware that it could at any time block access to our services.” For me, this is a red flag. If simple decisions can’t be made now, I wonder how this situation will settle? The SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act) act has been around the news for quite a while now. In this article, it states that it’s illegal to post copyrighted material which Google and YouTube try to avoid; however, they are not doing very well. SOPA, is all about closing these websites down. Although Google and YouTube (along with many other sites) are doing their best to play fair, SOPA would still close them down. The biggest concern is that people feel like their rights are being diminished over a non-significant cause.
http://www.freep.com/article/20120118/COL41/120118005/SOPA-blackout-day-Web-went-dark
In my perspective, the key line in this essay is the argument that Mr. Drummond posted in the blog. He stated, “We very much hope that the Chinese government respects our decision, though we are aware that it could at any time block access to our services”. This declaration reflects the authority and censorship that the Chinese Government has over the nation. Equally important, at the end of the essay, I identified that all the control that the Chinese government has over its population is alarming since it totally controls every single movement of the web activity. Additionally, due to the abundant quantity of police officers and automated systems that are constantly monitoring the web activity, everyone can think that visiting any website is secure, and maybe it is, however, were is the confidentiality of the citizens? All the web dominance that the government has indicates that the internet users have no privacy at all, since the authorities can identify what websites that users are visiting. In my opinion, this event is intolerable, due to the fact that the lives of each individual is controlled by a supreme authority, and consequently, there is no freedom at all.
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, the censorship that the Chinese government has over its population goes beyond our imagination. In the article that I read, “Must-see Chinese TV becoming a snooze” it demonstrate how the censorship rules that the Chinese government is establishing is driving away the audience of traditional t.v. programs. For example, in the traditional show of Chinese Year eve, which is compared to the Rose Parade, many television spectators turn off their t.v. because they see the program as a false situation that it is being lived in China. Moreover, the show viewers argue that this program tries to praise all the accomplishments that the government has fulfilled, which leads to a less entertaining and a more idealistic show. All this movements are controlled by the government, which totally disappoint the viewers. Overall, I think that the Chinese Government exaggerates with the dominance that they want to establish in their country.
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jan/20/world/la-fg-china-new-years-20120121
To me the key line is Google championing a cause, at cost to 2% of its revenue. The United States government was given a chance to support one of its largest companies, as well as promote freedom which we so often do, and instead they take a neutral yet condescending tone about Google not being able to resolve its differences with China. I like the reach around Google is using by offering the service to Hong Kong which has its freedoms protected when the United Kingdom ceded control back to China. The underlying message though is one of history, we saw it in Russia, Vietnam, Egypt, and soon to be Syria. A nation is only as strong as its people, when the people cannot take any more oppression and censorship the nation crumbles and a new one takes its place. Sometimes the new nation is just as oppressive as the old one but that too will collapse, humanity in general are moving more towards a world that is free of oppression and at least free of censorship on the surface. So the sad thing is the more China tightens its fist on its populace the more cracks and fissures appear. So why tighten the fist and hurt your own brother and sisters? The second article that I read had to deal with banned books in the United States, for a place that is supposed to be free to the written word (excluding libel), we have a surprisingly long list of banned book. One in particular has to do with our very own county, The Grapes of Wrath by J. Steinbeck was banned from Kern County for over a year due to how truthful, particularly the end painted kern county in the dustbowl era. It’s sad to think that our government feels it's necessary to blank out the past, instead of learn from it and ensure a future that would be free of past mistakes. I would recommend this article only as an eye opener to how far censorship can go, such as a county level!
ReplyDeletehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/02/ulysses-banned-book_n_1250050.html#s658339&title=The_Grapes_of
The part of the article that stood out to me the most was how they were “crystal clear… that self-censorship is a non- negotiable legal requirement”. The Chinese government is a totalitarian. They want control of their citizens and go to great lengths to enforce it. It was evident that the government in China was adamant about maintaining their control on the Chinese citizens and had “warned Google repeatedly that it would face consequences if it did not comply”. A country that governs as China does is too extreme. I understand that there are boundaries that must be set to regulate society but as human beings, we all deserve the right to have our own thoughts and ideas. Everything that they do online, watch on television, or hear on their news are monitored by their government which would block anything they feel would give their citizens a negative outlook on its government. Government censorship should have boundaries where it protects people’s privacy, but at the same time allow them access to a variety of information online as long as they don’t break any laws (hacking, fraud, etc).
ReplyDelete“Internet Censorship”, an article on the American Civil Liberties Union website had a slogan that caught my attention. It read, “BECAUSE FREEDOM CAN’T PROTECT ITSELF” hit close to home especially since it references censoring the internet in America. Luckily, according to it, the Supreme Court refused to review the COPA for a third time and supported the rights of citizens. It asserted that “the government has no right to censor protected speech on the Internet, and it cannot reduce adults to hearing and seeing only speech that the government considers suitable for children.” I just thought that if our government started to censor information from us and deny us our rights to freedom of speech, press, and just basically dictating what they thought we should know or not know, we would loose part of the foundation of what our founding fathers tried to establish years ago. I believe censorship should be within boundaries and total censor like China is unacceptable. For us in America, we have laws to help regulate society and the government shouldn’t push for more control. This is America, and we deserve our freedom of speech.
www.aclu.org/free-speech/internet-censorship
Forgot the link!!
ReplyDeletehttp://latitude.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/12/12/rumor-fever/?ref=internetcensorship
The key line in this essay is "China accused Google of violating a "written promise" it made when entering the market to abide by laws requiring it to filter its search service".Key line of accusations made by China stands out the most due to the fact that Google made a written promise and than decided to do what they please. In a moral standpoint, if Google made a written promise than they should of kept that promise. On the otherhand, people should be able to do whatever they want. Censorship should be up to the people as a whole not up to the goverment. China has too much control and it is clearly portrayed in article. For instance, China warns google demanding they comply with the laws and regualtions of China. The people in China should stand up for themselves and take control or their rights will diminish. Censorship should be in the hands of the people not the government. Futhermore in the article "Sopa Blackout Aims to Block Internet Censorship Bill" SOPA gives governement the right to shut down websites accused of copywright infringement without trial. The article in sense is protraying what the Chinese government is trying to do with censorship. Both goverments want control over peoples rights. Furthermore, it all comes down to standing up for ones rights.
ReplyDeleteArticle link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/18/sopa-blackout-internet-censorship_n_1211905.html
Delete[Apparently, the first submission did not fully go through.]
ReplyDeleteThe key line in the article is, "In a blog post, the company said the Chinese government had been 'crystal clear throughout our discussions that self-censorship is a non-negotiable legal requirement"' because it shows that the Chinese government is very strict about censoring certain information from their public. China take it seriously about what the public can view and can not view online. China has given Google warnings about their decision of not censoring certain information from the people of China. Even though everyone have different views and opinions, I believe that the respect of one another should always be there. Google should respect China's rules and regulations of censorship and not disregard the rules the Chinese officials implemented.
The article, "Rumor Fever" by David Bandurski is a very interesting article about censorship in China. This article shows that there is a lot of online activities in China; however, many posts and information are censored daily. The Chinese officials do their best to censor materials that they believe is a threat to their nation. Therefore, they would censor out all the information that is opposing their views. The key line that stands out in this article is, "it is couching its antirumor policy by sugarcoating censorship as a kind of public health measure" because it shows that China is doing whatever it takes in order to censor the unwanted information. It is amazing to see how much control a government has over its people. The government would feed its people information and tell them that those rumors are of a big health threat. In America, we believe in freedom of speech and many Americans would oppose the government to have top notch control over what we may and may not view online. Whereas in China the Internet control is seen as a healthy condition. For example, Chinese official, Wang Chen, says that China's top Interent control is a "healthy and upright online culture" see the Internet control as a "'healthy and upright online culture." Any rumors that are seen as a threat to the government is marked as a social disease and is in need of elimination. I would definitely recommend this article because it ties in with our conversation regarding the censorship in China. It shows how strict China is about the information that is leaked out onto the Internet. http://latitude.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/12/12/rumor-fever/?ref=internetcensorship
The message I get from the china versus Google article is that Google is finally sticking to its true beliefs. The company made an agreement with china that it knew went against its most sacred motto; "Do no evil". It wanted the Chinese audience and money so bad that it set aside its own beliefs, a sellout basically. Google claims to have been misled by the strict Chinese government, into how the servers and the data would be shared with the public. With that and the sophisticated cyber-attacks on the Chinese Google hubs, Google is going back to its original ways and not censoring. Google says do no evil, and by making this deal with the Chinese it did just the opposite, I feel they wanted to correct the evil that was done and give the Chinese fair and equal access to the internet. Let the people choose what they want to do with the information that is on the internet, instead of treating the Chinese like children.
ReplyDeleteThe second article I read was on ASU and change.org. ASU is forbidding access to the site which is up and running to petition tuition increases of recent and most likely future times at the university. The site itself was created by a current ASU student, but he and others are no longer allowed to access it on the schools network. This has led many to dub ASU as censorship U. I recommended this article to any college student and anybody who has ever been denied the right to do something. For our purposes it adds the knowledge that censorship is everywhere not just china but in the US. If someone is powerful enough and does not like what you have to say they will stop you from saying it. Or at least attempt and for your sake temporarily win. This country was founded on free speech, we shouldn't censor our citizens especially not its future leaders.
The key line in the reading is that China has the most advanced censorship systems in the world. This tells me that China spends so much time and money ensuring that their people are watched and controlled. The fight for power over their people is such a priority that China will not allow a search engine giant like Google to get in their way.
ReplyDeleteIn the article I read it dealt with self-censorship that is going on in many parts of Mexico. The people who are dealing with self-censorship are the reporters, journalist, and even police officers since they face violent attacks from drug trafficking mobs. I highly recommend this article since it details how reporters find themselves in the drug trafficking mess by doing their jobs. It also entails how all roads in Mexico lead to drug trade and most journalist do not sign their articles due to fear for their lives. This adds an extreme view of what censorship can become if we allow power and money to control us. We must choose our leaders wisely since they control our future.
http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=55462
What stood out to me the most from this article was the fact that China was so demanding in keeping the internet usage their way when google and the U.S. had already warned them that actions would be taking if they did not follow the regulations of the popular web site. I also found it surprising that googles cheif legal officer David Drummond said, "uncensored search" for Google.com.hk was a "sensible solution to the challenges we've faced-it's entirely legal and will meaningfully increase access to information for people in China". I don't believe that they sould have gave into them so easily. Google should have stood their ground. It's amazing how the internet affects countries literally halfway around the world from us. They shouldn't be arguing about thigs such as these. Everyone just need to follow the rules to make it easier on everyone.
ReplyDeleteI read several mini articles on censorship on http://articles.cnn.com/keyword/internet-censorship (CNN News) and it was interesting just to get different takes on the matter from differnt authors. Lara Farrar in "Cashing in on Interent censorship" explained that in palces where the government blocks pwpole from all access to things on the interent it makes people want to find ways to get around it and break rules to see what they are not allowed to. This is very true. Adults have that charcter trait just like children. The more they are told no; the more they want to do it.
The main point I got from the article given to read is that China is upset at Google due to the lack of censorship the website has provided. The web page is absolutely an open book, where we as users can find and see just about anything and everything. China has a government so such different than the one we have in the United States where we have more freedom of speech and opportunity to express ourselves.
ReplyDeleteThis article was about change.org a student made website to petition the increase of school tuition. The reason given to censor the website was because they argued that school computers should only be for school purposes as it states in the following quote given in the passage, "to protect the use of our limited and valuable network resources for legitimate academic, research and administrative uses." I find the reason given absurd and invalid due to the limitation of freedom of speech. I can’t seem to see how censorship plays a positive role in this case.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/josh-levy/arizona-state-censors-cha_b_1253155.html
What I got form this reading is that China is so obsessed with having full control over citizens that they have spent large amounts of money and time on censorship. Their obsession for full control has lead them to warning Google that they would regret not complying with them, because there would be big consequences. Yes I do believe that the government needs to have some control over its citizens. Censorship can be a way of protection and a way to keep things in order, but that does not meant that they should be allowed to keep people from having their own opinions and thoughts. People should feel free to expand their ideas without the fear of being watched by the government. Chinese government has gone way too far by threatening people. The job of the government is to protect citizens not to cause fear.
ReplyDeleteThe article that I read is about how students in New York protested against their schools because they were blocking sites on the internet that they considered were very useful. Blocking sites prevents students from doing real research when they have a term paper. For example, YouTube and other sites containing material on topics like weapons. I would recommend this article because it shows how those who are in control can prevent people from exploring things they might be interested in. For example, if a student is thinking about joining the armed forces, and wanted to look some information there would be a lot of sites he would not be able to visit, due to the fact that weapons is a restricted word.A student should be able to log into Facebook at school because social networks is a place where students share their thoughts, ideas and opinions. Students should feel free and should be able to express themselves.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/29/education/29banned.html?ref=censorship
This article gave us a lot information about how different governments rule the web sites. Of course, every government is completely different; however, they have something in common-all of the control of the censorship. One of the key line that I chose is "the Chinese government had been crystal clear throughout our discussions that self-censorship is non-negotiable legal requirements." Of course, Chinese government only wants to have the power to check everything and everyone. They do not accept Google statement about not interfere with any political laws. This situation will harm Google in different ways because it has so many people who use it; the company delay its future growth. There is another company competing with Google in China. I think the Chinese government wants to give the access to Baidu because probably this company is giving the money to the government. As we know, China does not have good relationship with U.S. and probably thinks that Google is spying for U.S. It was very interesting in finding out the governments around the world operate their political power. In the article "Cashing in on Internet censorship" it is easy to see how the web can control that people amount would pay by restricting access to the information. Of course, people would pay more if it is harder to get anything they need. No matter if the information is confidential or not. In my opinion, countries where the government does not have specific rules about web these people will continue to find a way to get the information. Some countries such as, Iran and China have imposed restrictions on the Internet access, so web surfers cannot communicate with friends and family online because they ban Gmail. Of course, I recommend this article because it has some important information about how government try to impose restriction on the web, and Google is the company who is in the line of fire.
ReplyDeleteThe key line in week four's article is that if Google ignores the warnings by the Chinese government to stop adhering to their censorship laws, they could ultimately be blocked from China entirely. This means that Google will loos a large amount of their profit, which could potentially lead to a failed business. This sticks out to me because it amazes me that one country can have so much power over whether or not a country will be able to succeed. A government has enough power to control businesses, in order to make them do what they want them to.
ReplyDeleteWhen I was doing my research for another article on censorship, I came across one that said Google was now taking a similar stand on censorship as Twitter has. Google will now be considering the amount of censorship on a country by country basis.
After reading this article, I realized that Google more than likely realized that if they were eventually blocked from China, they could risk going under. Ultimately, Google gave up the fight, and chose censorship over failure.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2095328/Google-joins-Twitter-censorship-storm-Site-block-blog-posts-line-requests-repressive-governments.html?ITO=1490
The reading for week 4 is about the censorships that china has with their country and controlling their people and blocking them in what they can and cannot do. China has warned Google that they need to show in reality what is really happening with Chian before they lose their profits to the rights of the wbesite. China wants to control what is going on and the china government is trying to ban the cesnorship laws completly.
ReplyDeleteA great censorship Article i found was censorship in schools from kindergarden to 5th grade about certain rules the kids had to follow in order to keep attending the school. This school in Vigina banned the kids from curse words and other things and if broken a first offese they get warned and a second time they are kicked out of the school. I find this very hard believe because the kids are put into school to learn the rules and learn to behave, to learn something you have to fail a couple times, life is all about failing, its how you overcome failing is what makes you who you are. So all in all, I feel the school should be able to let kids not obey the rules because thats how they will learn, if you kick them out they will never learn.