" More Government Involvement in Internet Means Less Freedom for Americans The internet has been around for twenty-six years. One controversial issue has been the duty of the government to monitor this fast-growing cyberspace. Three main concerns of governmental control of the internet are social media, network providers, and cyberbullying texts. The main protection against the government_Ñés regulations of the internet is the First Amendment of the United States Constitution: _ÑÒCongress shall make no law_Ñ_ abridging the freedom of speech._Ñù The main freedoms that pertain to internet regulations are the freedoms of speech and expression. Due to these freedoms, …show more content…
According to The Washington Post, _ÑÒ35 percent of respondents between ages 18 and 29 said that social media was the _ÑÉmost helpful_Ñé source of information about the presidential campaign_Ñù (Curry). As social media use continues to grow, people are becoming more skeptical of misinformation being consumed by public. However, according to Schenk v. United states, it was ruled that in order for the government restrict the freedom of speech and expression, there must be a clear and present danger. The solution to this issue is not to give governmental control but to inform the public of the dangers of retrieving information through social media. Other than social media, the government_Ñés control of network providers is also a …show more content…
There was a case in San Francisco where Michelle Carter was ruled guilty on account of manslaughter because she had sent her boyfriend, Conrad Roy III, texts telling him to kill himself (Cava). Although it seems that a local government monitoring text messaging could have possibly saved this young boy_Ñés life, it is only theoretical. The young woman who texted him could have told him these things in person, creating an almost identical situation. Also, it was Roy who chose to kill himself, not Carter (Cava). In reality, if any level of government were to be monitoring text messages of the public, the right to privacy established by the Supreme Court is being violated (Griswold v. Connecticut). Any text, however harsh it may be, does not present a clear danger because the government cannot decipher what is harmless teen banter versus a serious matter. If anything, it is up to parents, friends, and others to be watching out for their loved ones rather than the government, because after all, this is more of a moral than a political