Speak Up Project

Why do we have a tool so conducive to the power of free speech like the Internet, but we have such a hard time getting what we are entitled to?

Do we have the right to be protected from disturbing content? Do we have the right to make transactions online without giving out all our personal information and putting ourselves at risk? Do we have the right to access all the benefits of online content without being bombarded by advertising? Do we have the right to see what helps us and block what hurts us?

Yes we do.

Our knowledge is great and our power is potent. The voice of the people is what drives the Internet. Never before have extreme parties seen such a forum to promote their views. Many of these views are good for society. We are pushed and pulled all over while we try to make agreements in the middle. The Internet has promoted public discourse, freedom of speech, and an unbridled access to communication that has furthered our economy and development.

With great power comes great responsibility. Users of the Internet are finding it harder and harder to resolve their problems with harmful content and come to terms with the need to get online. Many web users live in fear, whether mild or otherwise, that they are being watched. The generation gap between the web 2.0 savvy generation and the rest is getting so wide, that there seems to be a disinterest in learning just how much the Internet effects us.

At Speak Up Project, we’re calling for a voice of the people to motivate those who have control to help us take charge of what’s ours. Those of us who spend our days on the Internet for work or pleasure know what we want. We know what is harming our families. We are calling people to action. We are asking for a voice to make sure that we can freely access information without the fear of what that information is.

The presentation of free media on the Internet that is controlled by users has been one of the most empowering innovations of the 21st century. In a sense, the promotion of public discourse through online media an awakening experience. Whether through reality television or viral video, Internet surfers are finding more and more entertainment and information that’s generated by their piers. This lack of filtering and editing in much of the media is a problem for some.
These “some” we’re talking about are foreign governments like those of Thailand. In an article put out yesterday by the International Herald Tribune, Thai officials are in a heated battle with YouTube about how to regulate the content that their citizens can access. Surfacing videos highlighting some anti-government propoganda are being accessed by the people of Thailand. The growing uneasiness has been spreading accross other boundaries as well, and different cultures are finding fault with the online video service’s unbridled access to content on the Internet.

There’s a moral conundrum shouting in the face of restraint here. It seems that everyone is terribly hands off about regulating the Internet for the sake of promoting total free speech. Who controls the Internet? What right do they have to that power?

What stands today is that ICANN indirectly controls the access to much of the Internet content that is causing this uproar. ICANN has the ability to control the structuring of the web. In its current state, domains and addresses are all available to users across the globe who get a dial up or more. The speedy pace of technology is making it more possible for youth and adults to access the web on their private devices.

By not taking any action at all, this freedom of information is proving to cause a serious problem in many different demographics of the world. People are claiming that this is a natural evolution. The anarchic qualities of the Internet give way to unparalelled progression. If those tools were to be bound into submission, then we would be robbing people of free speech.

However, the global attitude toward communication and free speech is not always in sync. Many countries frown upon the free distribution of pornographic content on the Internet. Other’s are uneasy at the public mocking of their civic leaders. By letting things like YouTube become a privately accessible forum for individuals to defy the standards set forth by the country they live in, hostilites toward the Internet grow.

The question is does this battle give way to solving a problem?

We’ll be exploring this topic and getting the voices of those who have been in this arena for a long time. What do they think? What are some of the solutions? Stick around to find out more.

Welcome to the new home of our site.

Grab on to your ideas and opinions. If you haven’t fleshed out exactly where you stand on issues regarding the Internet and its reflection on your private and family life I suggest you put our theories, ideas, and research to the test. Nobody ever made history by watching things pass them by. If you’re here, you are for a reason. Step up and speak out against the things that harm you. Gather the building blocks for a strong foundation of public voice and activity.

Welcome to the Speak Up Project.

Here’s an interesting site. It’s a frappr map where you can place your name with a declaration that you are willing to stop using your ISP if they don’t comply with the FBI standard to not provide child porn. The link is here, and you can add your voice, as well as digg the site for additional exposure and support.

Here’s a story that you might not have heard about. A Connecticut substitute teacher was “convicted of four counts of risk of injury to a minor for having exposed her middle school class to pornography in October 2004.” Convicted of FOUR counts of risk of injury. The conviction is up to 40 years in jail. The teacher made claims that she was getting uncontrollable pop-ups on the computer in the classroom. However, despite better judgment she allowed to leave the screen on to expose her students to the filthy material. The article I read basically called out the teacher to learn how to control her computer, and if not then to shut it off.

Now, I can picture in my mind the image of a classroom full of uncomfortable and confused children being exposed to this stuff. Well, maybe some of them weren’t confused and had bumped into pornography before. We all know it’s not uncommon.  What gets me is that this image is offensive enough to the legal boundaries of the harms of pornography, that it warrants a serious prison sentence. The question is this: Why are we so up in arms about children being exposed to pornography publicly, but are not willing to take more serious measures to restrict its exposure at the source a bit more?

The two major cases we face in this instance are that one side believes that restricting, not eliminating, pornography on the web is an infraction on freedom of information and speech. By placing any limits on the Internet, we effectually deny certain individuals the right to get what we want, when they want it. Surely, there is a case here, and people should be able to at least be given options. I would never argue against these rights.

However, there’s a small crack in the foundation, and I’ll ask a few questions to try to illustrate it.

Thinking about the story of the Substitute teacher, should it have been okay for those kids to have seen porn? Is it wrong for them to be exposed publicly to lewd material? Is it harmful? Would you want your kids to see it in their classroom?

When not even considering the issues of free speech, or access to information, or even Internet restriction most people find that situation plain wrong. So, then is it okay for the safety of children to be compromised at the hand of this essential freedom?

I leave this one open. I am in no way a legal scholar, but I am an individual with a voice. I’m a person who has to make more effort to simply avoid pornography than those who enjoy it have to make to access it. For whatever reason, we’re ready to deliver explicit pornographic material on a silver platter to those who want it, but we’re not willing to give those who despise it more tools to avoid it. I can’t find the logic.

If you had half a brain while you were in middle school, you noticed every schoolyard fight that broke out. My school was particularly interesting because it seems that it was mostly girls that got into the physical brawls. Maybe my class brought up some bona fide wussy guys, who knows.

Occasionally there would be a Casey or a Paul that would get in someone’s face just to do it. We all know the type. Maybe in your school it was a Rhett or an Alouicious that just went by “Big Al”. All up in one another’s grill, these fights were mostly a lot of talk. By the end of the day, everyone would gather at a pre-determined submarine sandwich shop for a parking lot brouhaha. Everyone stands around, the fighters take stage, and then…

Yeah, we’ve all seen it. A lot of talk, but no walk. Crowd enthusiasm evolves to off-topic chatter and total disinterest assumes focus among the once-loyal observers. In a flurry of egomania, one of the contenders will finally throw a punch to get people interested again. Wait, what were they fighting about in the first place?

Why are so many people who feel like they’re in fights with pornography not willing to take the first punch? Why do we wait for negative effects to settle in before we make ourselves known?

p.s. I do not condone playground fighting.

What if studies said that pornography would ruin your life? Would you believe them? Role play with me for a second.

What if there was a study that said using pornography would drive a wedge into your relationship and ruined it? Would you still get involved? Is it that important to you? What if studies proved that it made you susceptible to multiple psychological and social problems? What if studies proved that pornography was not only harmful to the individual, but to the society as well? Would you choose pornography over love if it had to be that way?

So knowing that it could ruin your relationships, hurt your family, and harm you socially, would you still do it? Would it be that good and that worth it?

Well, studies have proven this…

CALGARY, March 12, 2002 (LSN.ca) - A new study has found that viewing pornography is harmful to the viewer and society. In a meta-analysis (a statistical integration of all existing scientific data), researchers have found that using pornographic materials leads to several behavioral, psychological and social problems.

One of the most common psychological problems is a deviant attitude towards intimate relationships such as perceptions of sexual dominance, submissiveness, sex role stereotyping or viewing persons as sexual objects. Behavioral problems include fetishes and excessive or ritualistic masturbation. Sexual aggressiveness, sexually hostile and violent behaviours are social problems as well as individual problems that are linked to pornography.

“Our findings are very alarming”, said Dr. Claudio Violato one of the co-authors of the study. Dr. Violato, Director of Research at the National Foundation for Family Research and Education (NFFRE) and a professor at the University of Calgary, said “This is a very serious social problem since pornography is so widespread nowadays and easily accessible on the internet, television, videos and print materials”.

Studies have shown that almost all men and most women have been exposed to pornography. An increasing number of children are also being exposed to explicitly sexual materials through mass media. The rise in sexual crimes, sexual dysfunction and family breakdown may be linked to the increased availability and use of pornography. The rape myth (belief that women cause and enjoy rape, and that rapists are normal) is very widespread in habitual male users of pornography according to the study.

“There has been some debate among researchers about the degree of negative consequences of habitual use of pornography, but we feel confident in our findings that pornography is harmful”, Violato noted. “Our study involved more than 12,000 participants and very rigorous analyses. I can think of no beneficial effects of pornography whatsoever. As a society we need to move towards eradicating it”.

The authors of the study concluded that exposure to pornography puts viewers at increased risk for developing sexually deviant tendencies, committing sexual offences, experiencing difficulties in intimate relationships, and accepting of the rape myth. Dr. Elizabeth Oddone-Paolucci and Dr. Mark Genuis, researchers at the National Foundation for Family Research and Education, are co-authors of the study that was published in the scientific journal Mind, Medicine and Adolescence.

Article quoted from here.

Frankly it’s debatable that this term even truly holds weight. The truth is that there are a number of people out there who maintain that the Internet is completely decentralized. What controls the Internet, and who makes decisions about what happens on the Internet? Personally it sounds a bit like using the word organized anarchy to me.

Well, there actually is a governing body called ICANN. ICANN stands for “The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers”. What this means is that ICANN controls the technological organization of the Internet through managing the structure of addresses and ports. Here’s their Mission Statement taken from their site.

The mission of The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (”ICANN”) is to coordinate, at the overall level, the global Internet’s systems of unique identifiers, and in particular to ensure the stable and secure operation of the Internet’s unique identifier systems. In particular, ICANN:

1. Coordinates the allocation and assignment of the three sets of unique identifiers for the Internet, which are

a. Domain names (forming a system referred to as “DNS”);

b. Internet protocol (”IP”) addresses and autonomous system (”AS”) numbers; and

c. Protocol port and parameter numbers.

2. Coordinates the operation and evolution of the DNS root name server system.

3. Coordinates policy development reasonably and appropriately related to these technical functions.

On a basic level, this means that ICANN does not make policy based on the content of the Internet, but simply controls how it is all structured. This, in effect provides ICANN with power to make decisions based on content without taking responsibility for it. Is this fair?

Here’s my proposal. It’s important for each person to decide for themselves exactly what Internet Governance should be. Should there be a multi-national body that agrees on terms universally set? Should the Internet be completely chaotic? Is the Internet in a perfect state as-is? Whatever your ideas are, you must make a personal decision.

Governing the Internet with laws may make people feel like their information is getting restricted by a body of people who may not properly represent the true voice of the people. However complete Internet anarchy will not protect people from content that is harmful. What’s your stance?

Thinking about writing for this blog has taxed my mind unlike any other. Trying to strike a balance between prudence and honesty tends to sytematically cancel out most of the thought provoking ideas I come up with. It just tells me that maybe I shouldn’t be prudent, or perhaps honest.

Well, surely I will never let honesty suffer at the expense of prudence.

This blog will be about Internet governance, freedom of speech, freedom of information, the question about pornography on the Internet, the effects of communication without boundaries both good and bad, the exposure of those who “run” the Internet, and whatever else I deem as appropriately interesting and specifically pertaining to the matter.

This is your Internet, but as of right now you have no control and all the control in the world at the very same time.

You have no control because the haphazard way of regulating the internet gives way to a “hands-off” approach at protection. There are too many things that can be said without consequence. I think of a time one of my old room mates who served in Iraq decided to show me videos of people getting their heads blown off… as a joke. Where maybe his desensitized view of death made it humourous, I was bothered. I had to wonder, “how does this stuff make it online?

However, you have complete control because the Internet depends on you to thrive. The fact that I can start a blog like this, get people to read it, and generate opinions about what I do is purely indicative of the raw power that resides online. I can say something real personal, and if enough people take to it, it can become a standard. You have complete control because people will listen to you, sometimes to your expense.

The modern day thrust towards bigger, better, faster, and more is fed by the Internet. I will explore the ideas behind how this works. I will explore the different measures that are or are not being taken to protect us from letting the Internet get completely out of hand. I will reveal the strengths of the tools we have and expose their abilities to make us better. I will also try to point out its failures and weaknesses, and provide an option for solutions to allowing the information to take over the user.

I’m no expert, but I have a voice and I have the Internet. According to our standard today, that more than qualifies me to be an authority on these matters.