English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I know the origins of the internet was in college campuses, as an education enabler. It is now a good communication option. Should the content of graphic nature now available, be out to scrutiny and be edited ? especially phonographic sites

2007-02-10 07:14:14 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Computers & Internet Internet

14 answers

i for one wish it was banned!!

2007-02-10 07:21:53 · answer #1 · answered by onyx maiden 4 · 0 2

I do not think that pornographic content should be banned on the Internet for a number of reasons.

For one, what is pornographic? I used this comparison one time. If you have an oil painting of a nude woman reclining on a couch, that is considered art and is generally considered perfectly acceptable in a public place. If, right beside that, you have a photograph of that same nude woman reclining on that same couch, that is considered pornographic. If, beside that, you have that same nude woman in real life reclining on that same couch in that same position, that is considered public indecency. I have a real problem with that double-standard (or should I say "triple-standard"?).

For another, what is pornographic in one area may not be pornographic in another. In the U.S., we freak out when a woman flashes a breast for a half second on national television (and three years later, we are still hearing about it). In some other countries, a woman can walk down the streets of town without any clothing and nobody seems to notice. Clearly, there is a difference of opinion there.

I also don't support censorship. Once censorship starts, where does it stop? I heard once that sometimes the best way to decide where to draw the line is to not pick up the pencil.

Finally, who should do the banning? The Internet is an international institution. Every country in the world would have to pass the laws in order for the laws to mean anything. (In theory, that kind of thing would be the job of the United Nations, but in practice, the United Nations is a joke, so that won't work.)

2007-02-10 10:41:54 · answer #2 · answered by jkcorfy 2 · 1 0

What is phonographic content?

No, I don't think it should be edited or banned. You have a choice as a user of the internet whether you want to see it or not. As long as children can be properly protected, pornography should be allowed to exist. Such web sites should enact their own protection, ensuring that it isn't seen by impressionable eyes. Most just ask the user to verify their age. Any 15 year old boy will say he's 18 if it means seeing boob.

So, I think that pornographic web sites should enact their own self-censoring and parents should ensure that they do their part in protecting their kids.

2007-02-10 07:25:12 · answer #3 · answered by lostinne 2 · 1 0

the Internet would be in trouble without ****. it generates massive revenues, that ripple out trough out the Internet through ad dollars. much of the Internet that is beyond the original university and government grid (i.e. what we use.) was originally founded with money from ****.

that said, there is far too much, and it is far too unregulated. local laws are bypassed, and the end user honestly has no guarantee they are not looking at underage kids (which they can then go to jail for.) most malicious code, viruses, bots and spy-ware are tied to ****. and often, too many attempts to use age verification systems leads to credit card scams....

the easy answer.... stop looking at all the **** you freaks!!!! the only way to reduce the impact of **** is to reduce the amount of money people pump into it. even passing laws will only do so much, as you can always find ways to access other countries sites... (so it would suck even more money outside the country.)

2007-02-10 07:34:19 · answer #4 · answered by foo__dd 3 · 0 0

I guess that depends on who you ask. It would be virtually impossible to get rid of pornographic content on the internet...mainly because it is legal if you are over 18. The scrutiny should come from individual parents making sure their children are not subjected to it.

2007-02-10 07:18:44 · answer #5 · answered by hllywood72 5 · 2 0

I am against censorship of any kind for the simple reason that once it is implemented, its scope would expand to include works of art and literature which are deemed obscene by a minority of individuals who do not speak for the majority. The definition of obscene would be expanded to include media which offends this minority, including political opposition, religious postings counter to their beliefs, and other works of art that they simply do not understand.

It is up to parents and individuals to police what their children or themselves see or do not see on the internet. If they are too incompetent to do so, that is their problem - not the problem of the majority of people who have common sense.

Big Al Mintaka

2007-02-10 07:28:59 · answer #6 · answered by almintaka 4 · 1 0

I disagree with censoring and feel that all "non malicious" content has a right to exist on the internet. It is up to the internet users to determine what they search for and respond to.

2007-02-10 07:19:06 · answer #7 · answered by afreshpath_admin 6 · 1 0

Mind your language pls. Do you mean PHOnographic or PORnographic?

2007-02-10 07:36:33 · answer #8 · answered by believer 3 · 0 0

If all the **** was taken off of the internet there would only be one website on the whole internet and it would be bringbacktheporn.com

2007-02-10 07:18:33 · answer #9 · answered by alwaysmoose 7 · 2 0

What is phonographic content?

2007-02-10 07:23:00 · answer #10 · answered by jrsgurl62 4 · 2 0

I thought the internet had more to do with government, the services, etc. when it originated??

2007-02-10 07:23:20 · answer #11 · answered by Sunidaze 7 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers