In reading Tooth’s April 22nd entry regarding violence and sex, I was nodding in agreement all the way down the post. I got to the last line and I was confused, “…if it is too violent in accordance to moral, ethical, state or federal laws than it should be banned, it’s that simple, yet controlling violence on the Internet is a whole different story.”
Why would controlling violence (obssenity/indecency) on the internet be any different from any other media types? If it violates a law, it’s punishable. Are you saying it is a different story because police agencies have not kept up with technology or because so far the Internet has been pretty much the wild west?
Thanks!
Like this:
Be the first to like this post.
This entry was posted on April 22, 2006 at 5:28 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
April 23, 2006 at 7:36 pm |
Blogging for class,
Hey, i’m really glad you read my blog on the topic of violence in pornography. The issue with the last line is simple to me, yet confusing to me just as it was to you. We have seen that the FCC can regulate every type of media that we as citizens have access to. But, what I wanted to portray at the end was that no one has control over the Internet and that it is harder to find these people who commit sex crimes, or produce obscene or offensive material. Even the United States can not just put laws out there to govern the Internet, as I’m sure you already know…so basically I stick to what I said at the end of my entry b/c I believe the Internet is a whole other issue, the Internet reaches millions of people all over the world, and can not be controlled as easily as other types of media such at television or the radio. So, again i appreciate that you read my entry and hope this clears up any confusion that you may have had.
-tooth