Internet + Law = ??

The internet is one of those gray areas in life that we have no idea how to handle. In one sphere, the internet is your voices in a digital zone known as cyberspace. This would mean that we are entitled to our rights by the constitution within the cyberspace too. But in an entirely other sphere, the internet is one of those places where people can take advantage of other people, and our constitutional rights are pushed beyond limits that have been seen before. That is not to say that the rights entitled to us by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are not extended to us, for instance, reading our email would still be a breach of privacy, but that certain things, such as the pornographic websites, go to far. So the real question is, where does free speech draw the line? Is there even a line?
Unfortunately, this is one of those questions that does not really have an answer that seems right. To find the answer we think is best accommodating for the nation, I feel we need to look into the past. The nation has faced similar questions time and time again. In doing so, we have often had to compromise, and then build upon that compromise to create our answers. I am of course looking at the FCC. The nation faced similar questions to the one we face now when television and radio, the first broadcast entertainment technologies, were created. What could be said on them? What words should be said on the air, and what words should be banned? Is banning a word a violation of a DJ’s freedom of expression and freedom of speech? What about banning an X rated movie before a certain hour of the night on television? Where is the line?
The FCC was founded to construct and maintain that line. And in doing so, the idea of regulation was put into effect. So, is this what is best for our future in cyberspace? Should we have people who can regulate the internet websites, but cannot read our personal emails? China, meanwhile reads emails and hacks computers, regulating everyone and everything thing. Surely that is not the way to go. But to allow so many terrible websites that our nation’s children can access is surely a scary thought too, right? So that would mean a regulatory agency, like the FCC, would be best?
To a point, I would like to think so. But unlike the FCC, this agency would not just be dealing with big corporations and their broadcasts. It would be dealing with individuals and with startup online businesses, hackers, viruses, and a multitude of other variations. The internet is not as streamline as the broadcast media, it is more personal. This makes regulation take the form of big brother, and from there we can move to join the ranks of Stalin and complete the predictions in books such as Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell.
Where do you stand? Freedom, or safety? It seems like both are available, if we can compromise. If we can regulate the regulators maybe? But that’s an endless system. As said above, there is no set answer? Who is to stop a regulating agency from deleting your social networking status, while they also stay on the lookout for bad websites. On the other side of the coin, what is to stop a popup for the very same bad website to appear while your child is browsing on the web. The answer will be difficult to find. But I hope to help find it while blogging on this page. Answers don’t come easily, but they have to come right. We can’t afford to be wrong about something like that.

Blog 1

So why did I start a blog when it is never going to be read? Well, I will tell you! I need to practice writing and I figure if I get to write and have people read it, that would be better than just writing long paragraphs of nothing. So yeah, introductions! I'm Sean, and I will be writing about anything and everything on this blog. Which is exciting for me, and most likely bores you beyond all measures of known sanity. Anyway, I am in college, and this is going to be a way to talk to the world. Republicans took away the filibuster breaker vote this weekend by winning Ted Kennedy's seat. They were probably thrilled. Anyway, this means that Democrats now has to cater to Republicans, at least one of them, and due to their unity, it is safe to assume that most of agenda Democrats release will have at least a hint of conservative nature. This, I hope, will lead to a bipartisan campaign, which will help to get true legislation passed. Anyway, This is blog one, and I hope to but much more fun, and exciting, and...well, interesting in the next blog. Peace out!