Monday, January 26, 2009

In our class discussion today, following Kaley's seminar, the debate of who has the right to say what is wrong in regards to ethical and racial comments on webblogs. Racism comments are obviously hurtful and wrong, both morally and ethically, as well as homosexual comments; but who is to say what is an isn't acceptable for the web. Are indirect or subtle comments appropriate? Or what about funny jokes? Personally I believe blogs should be appropriate and welcoming to everyone. There is no need to attack or put anyone down when blogging, since it is open to all citizens in the public sphere.

Then comes up the big question of free speech, and to what extent should blogs be regulated? Is regulating blogs impeding on the right of freedom of speech?

There are regulations put in for such websites on the internet, such as the well know network of Facebook. On a Dr. Phil episode I watched the other day, there was a debate on the show because a female user of facebook posted a picture of her breast feeding her baby in public. Someone reported it to facebook, and the picture was removed. She went on the show to fight this debate, saying it was unfair and that breast feeding is a natural bonding moment with the baby and mother. This is a perfect example of a controversial photo being removed from the internet, and who is to say what is right and wrong for everyone to see. Then should every picture on facebook of a nipple showing be removed or every remotely controversial photo on the internet be flagged and taken down. I know this is a lot to take in one post, but I would like to hear everyone's thoughts on this matter. Censorship and the internet, how far is to far?