Negative Effects of Internet Censorship

Across the world, government officials are given the choice to either censor websites deemed unsuitable for citizens or to allow access to any available website online. Unfortunately, it's very common for government officials to block access to individual websites and social media platforms of their choosing. These certain government officials should not have the authority to block access to websites deemed inappropriate or unsuitable due to silencing the oppressed, violation of free speech, and overall political bias. 

Oppression is virtually everywhere and many victims of said oppression are continually fighting to have their voices be heard, especially online. Victims of this include “Moroccan atheists, women discussing online harassment, ads featuring crucifixes, black and Muslim activists reposting racist messages they received, trans models, drag performers, indigenous women, childbirth images, photos of breastfeeding”. Ultimately, these government wants to uphold certain ideals, and wants to show it’s citizens only one perspective of everything. This creates human rights violations and leads to the unfair treatment for people who are deemed “inappropriate.” Now, these governments should intervene when it is necessary, such as whenever they threaten to cause harm to another individual. A way that this can simply be done is by moderation. “...we’re worried about how platforms are responding to new pressures. Not because there’s a slippery slope from judicious moderation to active censorship — but because we are already far down that slope”. 

The government is failing to understand the difference between this, because it is easier to censor. The easy way isn’t always the correct way. There needs to be more conversation and understanding in order to find middle ground. Furthermore, by shutting down people this is taking away from their inalienable rights as stated in the first amendments. This is currently being experienced on large platforms such as Youtube. Youtube users are quick to point out this, “When YouTube, Facebook, or Twitter cracks down on some form of expression — conspiracy theories, extremist rants, terrorist propaganda — some of the targets inevitably complain that their freedom of speech is under attack”. 

Overall, as everyone can see large platforms censoring, this means that censoring has been normalized. If the government censors what they chose, then they are presenting the people with a false dichotomy. A false dichotomy is being presented to the people, because the government is presenting you with two solutions or two sides to an issue, whenever there could be middle ground. Instead, the government chooses to censor and take away this middle ground, by silencing the weak. The weak that are being silenced are getting their rights violated as per the law. Whenever the government does allow speech of the other side, they allow the most radical form of it so that the people don’t correctly rationalize the other side. They radicalize the other side and make you lean towards the side that they want. The government is doing something even worse which is shifting your view to ensure that they want. This causes people to shift their political view.