Need Tomorrow 9pm Central Time 9/12/2021 Action Assignment 1.1. https://ecourses.pvamu.edu/courses/13763/assignments/153746 1/2 Action Assignment 1.1.

Need Tomorrow 9pm Central Time 9/12/2021 Action Assignment 1.1.

https://ecourses.pvamu.edu/courses/13763/assignments/153746 1/2

Action Assignment 1.1.

Due Monday by 11:55pm Points 10 Submitting a file upload
Available Aug 30 at 9am – Sep 13 at 11:59pm 15 days

Start Assignment

Action Assignment 1.1.

Please read the following case study (Cyberporn: The Current Controversy). Upon completion, please answer the questions

following the case study. Make sure your answers are well synthesized and grammatically correct. Your case study should

be at least 200 words long. .

The Communications Decency Act of 1995attempted to keep “obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy or indecent” material

off the Internet (Levy, 1995). Legal challenges arose immediately because the law was so broad and so vague that uploading

some classic literary works would become felonies, as would distributing certain information about contraception and

abortion. The central question was whether cyberspace should be as controlled as radio and television, or as free as

telephones, magazines, newspapers, and private conversations. Cyberspace experts point out that the Internet is more

comparable to a river of ongoing conversation among 30 million computers and thus should not and cannot be subject to the

same restrictions as other electronic media.

Trading sexually explicit images is one of the largest recreational uses of computer networks. (Yet such images constitute

only 3 percent of all messages on Usenet newsgroups). Because standard pornography is so easily available elsewhere,

“specialty” materials are in greater demand on the Internet. Paraphilic images, especially those involving pedophilia,

sadomasochism, and bestiality, are common. Most of the images are simply taken from preexisting print sources, but now

these are available in one’s own home. Knowledge of children’s heavy involvement with computers has led some child

molesters to use this means to contact children. But how should children be protected from such material? Is parental

guidance enough? Can software be developed that would allow such material to be screened away from children?

In June 1996, a federal three-judge panel produced a 175-page memorandum (it appeared online within minutes) extending

free-speech protections to cyberspace. The decision noted that because the Internet is in its infancy, still evolving, and one of

the most democratic of communications channels, it probably deserved even greater free-speech protection than broadcast

and print media (Nadler & Fong, 1996). They came to this conclusion after spending several weeks surfing around the Net

alone and under the guidance of experts. They searched for pornography and tested programs that allow parents to screen

or block certain materials. They concluded that parents, not government, should take responsibility for limiting their children’s

access to materials on the Net. To protect children, the panel called for voluntary content rating by PICS (Platform for Internet

Content Selection) as well as filtering and blocking software. SurfWatch and Canada’s Net Nanny are examples of such

software. Groups representing social and religious conservatives vowed to continue their fight for increased restrictions.

9/12/2021 Action Assignment 1.1.

https://ecourses.pvamu.edu/courses/13763/assignments/153746 2/2

In 1997, the U.S. Supreme Court declared the Communications Decency Act to be unconstitutional and a serious threat to

free speech. Noting the tremendously democratic potential of the Internet as a forum where every citizen’s voice can be

heard, the Court concluded that communications on the Internet deserve the highest level of protection. After learning how to

surf the Internet, the Supreme Court Justices determined that the Internet is not as invasive as radio or television and that

there are other ways to protect children from the pornography on the Internet. The Court found, in particular, that it is

extremely difficult to “accidentally” encounter pornography on the Internet (Levy, 1997).

Critical Thinking Questions:

How do you feel about cyberporn? What do you think about this study? What do you think about the Supreme Court

ruling? Do you believe cyberporn is harmful to children? Why or why not? Do you believe Cyberporn is harmful to

adults? Why or why not?

Submit a Comment

Open chat