2014년 12월 6일 토요일

Final Draft

Censorship is not necessary on the internet


 Every day's chatter are coming from the internet news or issues. People use the internet naturally without considering about 'censorship on the internet.' (In fact, censorship on the internet is very important problem and it can also control people's thinking and decision.)



However, after the 'Sinking of the MV Sewol' -(it is recent Korean issue that about 300 people who took a ship, Sewol, were sunk into the ocean. After that happened, Korean government censored media, so media didn't report government's fault in that accident)- happened, people began to consider about lots of things about Korea government and 'censorship on the media' is one of them. Especially people have to think about whether 'censorship on the internet is necessary or not.'



 Through the experience of issues that are 'Sinking of the MV Sewol' and 'issue of Yoo Byung eun',-(it is recent issue that media reported that Yoo Byung eun who is related to the 'Sinking of the MV Sewol' is died. However, people didn't believe it and they are finding evidences that indicate he is alive. People's distrust against the government and media is because of the issue of 'Sinking of the MV Sewol)- especially Korean could recognize riskiness of censorship on the internet. As a result, people trying to recognize and decide whether the censorship is necessary on the internet. 

  

Internet censorship in China is very oppressive, so it's most popular example of internet censorship. 
(China government censors all social media. Also removes some information on the Google that the government think it's dangerous for China's history and Chinese. As the result, it made conflict between China and Google.)
From China's internet censorship, not only Korean but also people all around the world already knew the risk of the internet censorship. Then, people have to know that internet censorship makes people fool. In addition, if people ignore the riskiness of internet censorship, they won't enjoy their freedom anymore. Also, they have to be conative against internet censorship around them. Therefore, from now on I will explain reasons why internet censorship is not necessary.



 First, to decide whether internet censorship is necessary or not, people have to consider the basic purpose of censorship on the internet and netizen's duty of deciding actively about issues. Especially netizens have their duty of deciding whether a source is reliable. People already know that through 'Sinking of the MV Sewol' and 'issue of Yoo Byung eun' that were also issued because of the media's reliability. In this situation, Korean government censored the internet. Also media regarded citizens as fool who can't decide whether the information about those issues are reliable or not. Therefore, as a result, people could reconsider their duty to decide whether a source is reliable. In addition, there is an example-one person revealed a wrong thing through SNS, and then lots of people could know that problem-that shows netizens can receive information actively and have a duty of deciding whether a source is reliable. From this, netizens can recognize that the basic purpose of censorship on the internet is just to help netizen's self-decision(whether the source is reliable)and they have own ability to decide it.(Recent governments and media have misused their power that disturb netizen's self-decision.)

Second, internet censorship limits 'netizen's right to know'. Most important part of netizen's right is 'right to know'. Most popular and reliable examples that show problems of limiting netizen's right to know is 'China's internet censorship'. And most seriously, it limited not only netizen's information but their thinking and basic rights. Also, it affected to China's reputation(many external media and journalists criticize China's internet censorship system). In addition, internet censorship occurs a side effect, 'Streisand effect' that makes unintended consequence of publicizing the information more widely, usually facilitated by the Internet. If the government continue their censorship on the internet, as the unintended result, more various and amount of information will be spread for people. Rather than be suffered by intended result as information spread through censorship, primarily provide and ensure various information for people is more effective and easy. Also, if government stop censor and ensure lots of information, people must decide the harmfulness of information themselves more effectively.


Third, internet censorship ruins 'netizen's freedom'. There are an internet declaration and laws confirm that internet must ensure netizen's freedom. In addition, there are lots of experts' opinion that ask whether internet access a netizen's right to be free. Netizens are ensured their right to be free. In the middle of the information revolution, the fact that netizens still in the censor by whom is contradictory. Not just thankful to lots of information and Interactive communication, netizens have to consider whether they are enjoying real and enough freedom on the internet. 




 Recently, many major issues related to media and internet make discussions about my argument. There are some people who refute my argument. 
Some can say that internet censorship protects netizens from toxic information. However, as I mentioned, netizens have their ability to decide whether a source is harm and reliable, even childrens can get this ability by learning. In addition, if hard(or over) censorship on the internet, it will make a lack of netizen's self-decision and control conversely. Seriously, it will occur lots of problems occurred by anonymity. These problems will be the results of lack of netizen's self-decision and control.

Others also can refute my argument as saying that recent netizens are enjoying enough freedom. However, we can know through major issues as 'Sinking of the MV Sewol' and 'issue of Yoo Byung eun'. Most netizens recognized lack of information and one-biased information which are the results of censorship. It seems like recent netizens are enjoying their freedom enough, but it's just result of adaptation in censorship on the internet. Netizens have to be sensitive to their real freedom and rights.



 Most people, especially netizens are seemed sensitive to lots of issues as 'Sinking of the MV Sewol' and 'issue of Yoo Byung eun'. However, that's when the issues is major and become popular. This pattern is a common life around netizens, but they have to be sensitive to this pattern. Netizens have to recognize the basic purpose of internet censorship and netizen's duty of deciding actively about issues. Also, they should recognize internet censorship ruins 'netizen's right to know' and 'netizen's freedom'.

Also some people think that recent netizens don't need more freedom. Yes, they are ensured their basic rights. However, those are the results of adoption on internet censorship. Most netizens feel risk of hard and over internet censorship only when the major issues happen. However, netizens have to sensitive on their recent situation. In the middle of the information revolution, it's weird and contradictory that netizens still in the limits of their right to know and to be free.


Netizens have their duty and ability to decide lots of sources' reliability and harm. If censorship continues on the internet as now, it only makes netizens fool. Before experiencing the side effect as 'Streisand effect', netizen have to recognize that they have to get out of censorship on the internet themselves. People is not children who can't do anything without their parents. All have their own judgment. They don't need over care by the government anymore. Censor include the government should recognize the basic purpose of censorship and they are violating 'netizen's right to know and netizen's freedom'!



Bibliography

6. http://www.cdc.gov/des/consumers/research/understanding_deciding.html

Research 10

Research 11 for final draft

About 'Yoo byung eun' and 'Sewol ferry' for more detail





Research 9

Research 9 for final draft

About 'Sewol ferry' for detail

http://www.i24news.tv/en/news/international/asia-pacific/140504-south-korean-divers-struggle-to-open-blocked-ferry-cabins

Research 8

Research 8 for final draft

About internet censorship in China

http://www.scmp.com/news/china-insider/article/1603869/record-censorship-chinas-social-media-references-hong-kong


Research 7

Research 7 for final draft

About internet censorship




APA Citations

References


1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship 
2. http://chineseculture.about.com/od/mediainchina/a/Internet-Censorship-in-China.htm
http://chineseculture.about.com/od/businesseconomy/a/China-Internet-Sector-What-You-Need-To-Know.htm
http://www.hrichina.org/en/content/3244
3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect
http://smallbusiness.chron.com/disadvantages-internet-censorship-28293.html
4. http://www.internetdeclaration.org/
http://rights.jinbo.net/english/expression.html
5. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_Internet_access
http://www.theguardian.com/law/2012/jan/11/is-internet-access-a-human-right
6. http://www.cdc.gov/des/consumers/research/understanding_deciding.html
http://technology.inquirer.net/34333/netizens-to-fortun-you-did-the-right-thing


2014년 11월 16일 일요일

Second Draft

 
Censorship on the internet is not necessary on the internet


 Every day's chatter are coming from the internet news or issues. People use the internet naturally without considering about 'censorship on the internet.' However, after the 'Sinking of the MV Sewol' -it is recent Korean issue that about 300 people who took a ship, Sewol, were sunk into ocean. After that happened, Korean government censored media, so media didn't report government's fault in that accident- happened, people began to consider about lots of things about Korea government and 'censorship on the media' is one of them. Especially we have to think about whether 'censorship on the internet is necessary or not.'


 Through the experience of issues that are 'Sinking of the MV Sewol' and 'issue of Yoo Byung un',-it is recent issue that media reported that Yoo Byung un who is related to the 'Sinking of the MV Sewol' is died. However, people didn't believe it and they are finding evidences which indicate he is alive. People's distrust against the government and media is because of the issue of 'Sinkin of the MV Sewol- especially Korean could recognize riskiness of censorship on the internet. As a result, people trying to recognize and decide whether the censorship is necessary on the internet. 
 
Internet censorship in China is very oppressive, so it's most popular example of internet censorship. From China's internet censorship, not only Korean but also people all around the world already knew the riskiness of the internet censorship. Then, we have to know that internet censorship makes another side effect and also makes people fool. Streisand effect- it makes unintended consequence of publicizing the information more widely, usually facilitated by the Internet- is one of that. Therefore, if people ignore the riskiness of internet censorship, they won't enjoy their freedom anymore. In addition, we have to be conative against internet censorship around us. Therefore, from now on I will explain reasons why internet censorship is not necessary.


 It's hard to find logical evidences that support my argument. Therefore, I'll use expert opinions and relevant examples from news and also relevant declarations.

First, to decide whether internet censorship is necessary or not, people have to consider the basic purpose of censorship on the internet and netizen's duty of deciding actively about issues. Especially netizens have their duty of deciding whether a source is reliable. We already know that through 'Sinking of the MV Sewol' and 'issue of Yoo Byung un' that were also issued because of the media's reliability. In this situation, Korean government censored the internet. Also media regarded citizens as fool who can't decide whether information about those issues are reliable or not. Therefore, as a result, people could reconsider their duty to decide whether a source is reliable. In addition, there is an example-one person revealed a wrong thing through SNS, and then lots of people could know that problem-that shows netizens can receive information actively and have a duty of deciding whether a source is reliable. From this, netizens can recognize that the basic purpose of censorship on the internet is just to help netizen's self-decision(whether the source is reliable)and they have own ability to decide it.(Recent governments and media have misused their power that disturb netizen's self-decision.)

Second, internet censorship limits 'netizen's right to know'. Most import part of netizen's right is 'right to know'. Most popular and reliable examples that show problems of limiting netizen's right to know is 'China's internet censorship'. As a result, it made conflict between China and Google. And most seriously, it limited not only netizen's information but their thinking and basic rights. Also, it affected to China's reputation(many external media and journalists criticise China's internet censorship system). In addition, internet censorship occurs a side effect, 'Streisand effect' that makes unintended consequence of publicizing the information more widely, usually facilitated by the Internet. It isn't the purpose of censoring internet hard, but as a side effect, it expand netizen's exposure extent on internet information.

Third, internet censorship ruins 'netizen's freedom'. There are an internet declaration and laws confirm that internet must ensure netizen's freedom. In addition, there are lots of experts' opinion that ask whether internet access a netizen's right to be free. Netizens are ensured their right to be free. In the middle of the information revolution, the fact that netizens still in the censor by whom is contradictory. Not just thankful to lots of information and Interactive communication, netizens have to consider whether they are enjoying real and enough freedom on the internet.



 Recently, many major issues related to media and internet make discussions about my argument. There are some people who refute my argument.
Some can say that internet censorship protects netizens from toxic information. However, as I mentioned, netizens have their ability to decide whether a source is harm and reliable, even childrens can get this ability by learning. In addition, if hard(or over) censorship on the internet, it will make a lack of netizen's self-decision and control conversely. Seriously, it will occur lots of problems occurred by anonymity. These problems will be the results of lack of netizen's self-decision and control.


Others also can refute my argument as saying that recent netizens are enjoying enough freedom. However, we can know through major issues as 'Sinking of the MV Sewol' and 'issue of Yoo Byung un'. Most netizens recognized lack of information and one-biased information which are the results of censorship. It seems like recent netizens are enjoying their freedom enough, but it's just result of adaptation in censorship on the internet. Netizens have to be sensitive to their real freedom and rights.



 Most people, especially netizens are seemed sensitive to lots of issues as 'Sinking of the MV Sewol' and 'issue of Yoo Byung un'. However, that's when the issues is major and become popular. This pattern is a common life around netizens, but they have to be sensitive to this pattern. Netizens have to recognize the basic purpose of internet censorship and netizen's duty of deciding actively about issues. Also, they should recognize internet censorship ruins 'netizen's right to know' and 'netizen's freedom'.

Those who disagree with my argument can refute as recent netizens don't need more freedom. Also, they are ensured their basic rights. However, those are the results of adoption on internet censorship. Most netizens feel riskiness of hard and over internet censorship only when the major issues happen. However, netizens have to sensitive on their recent situation. In the middle of information revolution, it's weird and contradictory that netizens still in the limits of their right to know and to be free.

Netizens have their duty and ability to decide lots of sources' reliability and harmless. If censorship continue on the internet as now, it only makes netizens fool. Before experiencing the side effect as 'Streisand effect', netizen have to recognize that they have to get out of censorship on the internet themselves.


 

Bibliography
 

Self Evaluation

1. What score do you think you deserve?

I think 1 point is appropriate for my first draft. It is because I did use proper and various materials to support my opinion, but I must check some grammar mistakes and so on.

2. What did you do well?

I think as my topic is persuasive and proper, so I could make my creative first draft. I use lots of materials as credible and various research from experts.

3. What could you have done better?
I think I chould have checked gramma
r better. It's because I had poor score on grammar and teacher also said I have to check my essay again.

4. Which part of the argument did you use the best?

I think I did refutation very well. It's because i found lots of research to make my refutation strong.

5. Which part of the classical argument did you use the most poorly?

I think I make up my introduction. I could explain the Korean recent issues.


6. What's your strategy to make your second draft better?

My strategy for second draft is 'to make up my introduction'. Also, as I have continued my research, if the time permits, I will add some additional explanation about my essay's background information.

2014년 10월 26일 일요일

First draft

My First Draft

 Everyday's chatter are came form the internet news or issues. People use the internet naturally without considering about 'censorship on the internet.' However, after the '세월호 사건' happened, people began to consider about lots of things about Korea government and 'censorship on the media' is one of them. Especially we have to think about whether 'censorship on the internet is necessary or not.'


 Through the experience of issues which are 'Sinking of the MV Sewol' and 'issue of Yoo byung eun', especially Korean could recognize riskiness of censorship on the internet. As the result, people trying to recognize and decide whether the censorship is necessary on the internet. 
Internet censorship in China is very opperssive, so it's most popular example of internet censorship. From China's internet censorship, not only Korean but also people all around the world already knew the riskiness of the internet censorship. Then, we have to know that internet censorship makes another side effect and also makes people fool. Streisand effect is one of that and if people ignore the riskiness of internet censorship, they won't enjoy their freedom anymore.

In addition, we have to be conative against internet censorship around us. Therefore, from now on I will explain reasons why internet censorship is not necessary.



 It's hard to find logical evidences that support my argument. Therefore, I'll use expert opinions and relevant examples from news and also relevant declarations.
First, to decide whether internet censorship is necessary or not, people have to consider the basic purpose of censorship on the internet and netizen's duty of deciding actively about issues. Especially netizens have their duty of deciding whether a source is reliable. We already know that through 'Sinking of the MV Sewol' and 'issue of Yoo byung eun' that were also issued because of the media's relibility. In this situation, Korean government censored the internet, also media regarded citizens as fool who can't decide whether informations about those issues are reliable or not. Therefore, as the result, people could reconsider their duty to decide whether a source is reliable. In addition, there is an also example that shows netizens can recieve informations actively and have duty of deciding whether a source is reliable. From this, netizens can recognize that the basic purpose of censorship on the internet is just to help netizen's self-decision(whether a source is reliable)and they have own ability to decide it.(Recent governments and media have misused their power that disturb netizen's self-decision.)

Second, internet censorship limits 'netizen's right to know'. Most import part of netizen's right is 'right to know'. Most popular and reliable examples that show problems of limiting netizen's right to know is 'China's internet censorship'. As a result, it made conflict between China and Google. And most seriously, it limited not only netizen's informations but their thinking and basic rights. Also it affected to China's refutation(many external media and journalists criticise China's internet censorship system). In addition, internet censorship occur an side effect, 'Streisand effect' that makes unintended consequence of publicizing the information more widely, usually facilitated by the Internet. It isn't the purpose of censoring internet hard, but as an side effect, it expand netizen's exposure extent on internet informations.

Third, internet censorship ruins 'netizen's freedom'. There are an internet declaration and laws confirm that internet must ensure netizen's freedom. In addition, there are lots of experts' opinion that ask whether internet access a netizen's right to be free. Netizens are basically ensured their right to be free. In the middle of information revolution, the fact that netizens still in the censor by whom is contradictory. Not just thakful to lots of information and Interactive communication, netizens have to consider whether they are enjoying real and enough freedom on the internet.



 Recently, many major issues related to media and internet make discussions about my argument. There are some people who refute my argument.
Some can say that internet censorship protects netizens from toxic informations. However, as I mentioned, netizens have their own ability to decide whether a source is harm and reliable, even childrens can get this ability by learning. In addition, if hard(or over) censorship on the internet, it will make lack of netizen's self-decision and control conversely. Seriously, it will occur lots of problems occured by anonymity. These problems will be the results of lack of netizen's self-decision and control.


Others also can refute my argument as saying that recent netizens are enjoying enough freedom. However, as we can know through major issues as 'Sinking of the MV Sewol' and 'issue of Yoo byung eun', most netizens recognized lack of informations and one-biased information which are the results of censorship. It seems like recent netizens are enjoying their freedom enough, but it's just resulf of adaptation in censorship on the internet. Netizens have to be sensetive to their real freedom and rights.



 Most people, especially netizens are seem sensetive to lots of issues as 'Sinking of the MV Sewol' and 'issue of Yoo byung eun'. However, that's only when the issues is major and become popular. This pattern is common life around netizens, but they have to be sensitive to this pattern. Netizens have to recognize basic purpose of internet censorship and netizen's duty of deciding actively about issues. Also they should recognize internet censorship ruins 'netizen's right to know' and 'netizen's freedom'.

Those who disagree with my argument can refute as recent netizens don't need more freedom and they are ensured their basic rights. However, those are the results of adaption in internet censorship. Most netizens feel riskness of hard and over internet censorship only when the major issues happen. However, netizens have to sensitive on their recent situation. In the middle of information revolution, it's weird and contradictory that netizens still in the limits of their right to know and to be free.

Netizens have their duty and ability to decide lots of sources' reliability and harmness. If censorship continue on the internet as now, it only makes netizens fool. Before expriencing the side effect as 'Streisand effect', netizen have to recognize that they have to get out of censorship on the internet themselves.

Conclusion

Conclusion
Most people, especially netizens are seem sensetive to lots of issues as '세월호 사건' and '유병언 사건'. However, that's only when the issues are major and become popular. This pattern is common life around netizens, but they have to be sensitive to this pattern. Netizens have to recognize basic purpose of internet censorship and netizen's duty of deciding actively about issues. Also they should recognize internet censorship ruins 'netizen's right to know' and 'netizen's freedom'.

 Those who disagree with my argument can refute as recent netizens don't need more freedom and they are ensured their basic rights. However, those are the results of adaption in internet censorship. Most netizens feel riskness of hard and over internet censorship only when the major issues happen. However, netizens have to sensitive on their recent situation. In the middle of information revolution, it's weird and contradictory that netizens still in the limits of their right to know and to be free.

Netizens have their duty and ability to decide lots of sources' reliability and harmness. If censorship continue on the internet as now, it only makes netizens fool. Before expriencing the side effect as 'Streisand effect', netizen have to recognize that they have to get out of censorship on the internet themselves.

Refutation and Concession

1. What is my thesis?
Censorship is not necessary on the internet.

2. What is the opposite position?
In some cases, censorship is needed on the internet.

3. What arguments can I anticipate?
a) internet censorship protects netizens from toxic informations.
b) recent netizens are enjoying enough freedom

4. How will I counter those arguments?
a) even childrens, they have own ability to decide whether a source is harm or not.
result - problems occured by anonymity(lack of self-decision and control)
b) In major issues as I mentiond('세월호 사건' and '유병언 사건'), most netizen recognized lack of informations and one-biased information which are the results of censorship.

My Refutation and Concession
Recently, many major issues related to media and internet make discussions about my argument. There are some people who refute my argument.
Some can say that internet censorship protects netizens from toxic informations. However, as I mentioned, netizens have their own ability to decide whether a source is harm and reliable, even childrens can get this ability by learning. In addition, if hard(or over) censorship on the internet, it will make lack of netizen's self-decision and control conversely. Seriously, it will occur lots of problems occured by anonymity. These problems will be the results of lack of netizen's self-decision and control.
Others also can refute my argument as saying that recent netizens are enjoying enough freedom. However, as we can know through major issues as '세월호 사건' and '유병언 사건', most netizens recognized lack of informations and one-biased information which are the results of censorship. It seems like recent netizens are enjoying their freedom enough, but it's just resulf of adaptation in censorship on the internet. Netizens have to be sensetive to their real freedom and rights.

The confirmation

1. What is my thesis?
Censorship is not necessary on the internet.

2. What types of source am I using to defend my thesis?
I am using expert opinions and relevant examples from news and relevant declarations.

3. Are my arguments mostly based on evidence, logic or emotion?
There are recent issues and some opinions from experts that argue like me. However, my argument is little weak at logical evidences.

My Confirmation
It's hard to find logical evidences that support my argument. Therefore, I'll use expert opinions and relevant examples from news and also relevant declarations.
First, to decide whether internet censorship is necessary or not, people have to consider the basic purpose of censorship on the internet and netizen's duty of deciding actively about issues. Especially netizens have their duty of deciding whether a source is reliable. We already know that through 'Sinking of the MV Sewol' and 'issue of Yoo byung eun' that were also issued because of the media's relibility. In this situation, Korean government censor the internet, also media regarding as citizens as fool who can't decide whether informations about those issues are reliable or not. Therefore, as the result, people could reconsider their duty to decide whether a source is reliable. In addition, there is a also an example that show netizens can recieve informations actively and have duty of deciding whether a source is reliable or not. From this, netizens can recognize that the basic purpose of censorship on the internet is to help netizen's self-decision whether a source is reliable and they have own ability to decide it.(Recent governments and media have misuse their power that disturb netizen's self-decision.)

Second, internet censorship limits 'netizen's right to know'. Most import part of netizen's right is 'right to know'. Most popular and reliable example that show problems of limiting netizen's right to know is 'China's internet censorship'. As a result, it made conflict between China and Google. And most seriously, it limited not only netizen's informations but their thinking and basic rights. Also it affected to China's refutation(many external media and journalists criticise China's internet censorship system). In addition, internet censorship occur an side effect, 'Streisand effect' that makes unintended consequence of publicizing the information more widely, usually facilitated by the Internet. It isn't the purpose of censoring internet hard, but as an side effect, it expand netizen's exposure extent on internet informations.

Third, internet censorship ruins 'netizen's freedom'. There are an internet declaration and laws confirm that internet must ensure netizen's freedom. In addition, there are lots of experts' opinion that ask whether internet access a netizen's right to be free. Netizens are basically ensured their right to be free. In the middle of information revolution, the fact that netizens still in the censor by whom is contradictory. Not just thakful to lots of information and Interactive communication, netizens have to consider whether they are enjoying real and enough freedom on the internet.

The narration

My persuasive argument thesis is : Censorship is not necessary on the internet.

1. What do people already know about my topic?
Everyone knows that censorship is always around our living. Recently, through '세월호사건', Korean often recognize government's censorship on the media. Korean government misreported outline of the issue and disappeared and losses. Media act as citizens are fool and soon citizens are mad for that. As the result of media censorship, citizens didn't trust the issue of '유병언 사건' - 유병언 is a person related to '세월호 사건' and has reponsibility of the issue. In addition, '유병언 사건' is that media and government reported the hot issued person, 유병언 is dead. However, citizens didn't believe that. - So, recent citizens, especially netizens are considering whether censorship on the media, especially on the internet is necessary or not.

2. What research has already been done about my topic?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship 
Based on this souce, I made own definition of censorship and I could know more information about censorship and specific examples of each countries' status of cencorship.
http://chineseculture.about.com/od/mediainchina/a/Internet-Censorship-in-China.htm
http://chineseculture.about.com/od/businesseconomy/a/China-Internet-Sector-What-You-Need-To-Know.htm
http://www.hrichina.org/en/content/3244
Internet censorship in China is very oppressive and China should control their oppressive internet censorship for Chinese netizens.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect
http://smallbusiness.chron.com/disadvantages-internet-censorship-28293.html
Status after internet censorship is enforced.

3. What are the implications of my argument?
If people ignore me, we can't get out of the censorship. We won't enjoy our right to enjoy free on the internet and government use their power of censorship to discover lots of facts related to the government. It will make people just fool on the internet.

My Narration
Through the experience of issues which are '세월호 사건' and '유병언 사건', especially Korean could recognize riskiness of censorship on the internet. As the result, people trying to recognize and decide whether the censorship is necessary on the internet. 

Internet censorship in China is very opperssive, so it's most popular example of internet censorship. From China's internet censorship, not only Korean but also people all around the world already knew the riskiness of the internet censorship. Then, we have to know that internet censorship makes another side effect and also makes people fool. Streisand effect is one of that and if people ignore the riskiness of internet censorship, they won't enjoy their freedom anymore.

In addition, we have to be conative against internet censorship around us. Therefore, from now on I will explain reasons why internet censorship is not necessary.

2014년 9월 24일 수요일

The introduction

The introduction
Everyday's chatter are came form the internet news or issues. People use the internet naturally without considering about 'censorship on the internet.' However, after the '세월호 사건' happened, people began to consider about lots of things about Korea government and 'censorship on the media' is one of them. Especially we have to think about whether 'censorship on the internet is necessary or not.'

1. Attention grabber
I attracted the audience by describing a situation everyone is already familiar with, Korea government's censorship on the media as '세월호 사건.' Then I pointed out something that most of them can't recognize - There is government's censorship around them even on the internet.

2. Explains the topic


In the attention grabber I introduce all the elements of my topic : Censorship, and I explain why you have to consider 'censorship on the internet.'

3. My thesis
My topic is that 'Censorship is not necessary on the internet.' I think it's clear to describe reasons for this topic.

2014년 9월 10일 수요일

Classical argument outline

1. The introduction
I will start by describing the situation everyone is already familiar with :
Government's censorship on the media is becoming more and more tight. Even the censorship is enfored on the internet. Like Korea's '세월호 사건', there are lots of countries enforcing internet censorship.
As asking 'what do you think about these status of internet censorship?' and I will end with my thesis, "Internet censorship is not necessary."

2. The narration
I will summarize the research I've done and provide a definition of internet censorship and specific examples of countries which enforcing internet censorship especially China. In addition, I will explain the effects of enforcing internet censorship.

3. The confirmation
I will start by mentioning the problem of internet censorship as it disturbs internet freedom and I will provide my researches about internet freedom. Then, I will mention the right to know with my researches that shows the examples that disturb netizens' right to know. Finally, I will mention that deciding whether the internet information is harmful or not is up to netizens' own judge, not up to government.

4. The refutation and concession
I will concede that there are lots of harmful information and internet censorship is for protecting those. However, as I mentioned above(number3), I will refut as deciding those is just up to netizens and making ideal internet society is netizens' duty as providing my research about an example, netizens' duty.

5. The summation
I will close with a summary of my previous points and make an aftereffect that makes readers think about whether internet censorship is necessary or not. In the end, I will mention my thesis again.

Research 6

Source:
Deciding information's reliability
http://www.cdc.gov/des/consumers/research/understanding_deciding.html
Netizens' duty
http://technology.inquirer.net/34333/netizens-to-fortun-you-did-the-right-thing

What I hope to learn from this source:
What is netizens' duty and what should netizens do to make ideal internet society?

Notes:
1. How netizens decide whether informations reliable or not
2. What is netizens' duty

Final Toughts:
I realized that there is some categories that netizens have to do as their duty. Also I thought that netizens are very important to make ideal internet society.

Research 5

Source:
Right to know
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_Internet_access
http://www.theguardian.com/law/2012/jan/11/is-internet-access-a-human-right

What I hope to learn from this source:
Does internet censorship disturbs the right to know?

Notes:
1. What is the right to know? - the law
2. Is internet access a human right?

Final Toughts:
Internet censorship not only disturbs internet freedom but also the right to know like the China's censorship on the goggle.

Research 4

Source:
Internet freedom
http://www.internetdeclaration.org/
http://rights.jinbo.net/english/expression.html

What I hope to learn from this source:
Does internet censorship disturbs internet freedom?

Notes:
1. Internet censorship disturbs the freedom of expression
2. There is an internet declaration that against thight censorship on the internet

Final Toughts:
Netizens have to concentrate on the internetdeclaration to regain the freedom of expression on the internet.

Research 3

Source:
Internet censorship effects
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect
http://smallbusiness.chron.com/disadvantages-internet-censorship-28293.html

What I hope to learn from this source:
Status after internet censorship is enforced.

Notes:
1. The purpose of internet censorship is disturbed
2. Internet censorship occur massive problem that disturb the right to know and express

Final Thoughts:
Netizens have to struggle to be ensured the rights against internet censorship. Also people have to think about the basic purpose of internet censorship.

Research 2

Source:
China's internet censorship
http://chineseculture.about.com/od/mediainchina/a/Internet-Censorship-in-China.htm
http://chineseculture.about.com/od/businesseconomy/a/China-Internet-Sector-What-You-Need-To-Know.htm
http://www.hrichina.org/en/content/3244

What I hope to learn from this source:
The specific status of internet censorship in China

Notes:
1. Google against China's internet censorship
2. China banned SNS as facebook, twitter etc
3. China made their own internet service against google
4. Firewall on the internet

Final Toughts:
Internet censorship in China is very oppressive and China should control their oppressive internet censorship for Chinese netizens.

2014년 9월 8일 월요일

Articulation

1. My argument
: Censorship is not necessary on the internet
I want to know diffrent countries' status of censorship on internet and decide whether censorship on the internet is right or no based on the status. In addition, lately in Korea, the big issue is censorship on the media should be allowed, so I'd like to research on this issue especially censorship on the internet.

2. How I found my argument
My first research question was, how different countries enforce the censorship on the internet? It was obvious that today's Korea government censors some informations on the internet and also censors the media as TV and radio and so on. In addition, Korean censorship even tighter after an incident called '세월호사건'. So, I just wanted to know other counties' status of censoring the media, especially internet censorship. As I continued researching, I found that there is very tight internet censorship in China. I shocked after knowing that even Chinese can be killed just becaused of emailing sensative informations to others. Then, I thought that 'internet censorship is not necessary' and also I expected that it will be interesting and it will lead other's focus. Therefore, I choosed this argument, 'internet censorship is not necessary.'

3. New research questions
I have several questions that need to be resolved.
1) Countries especially China have to continue the internet censorship?
2) What is the effects of enforcing internet censorship?
3) Does internet censorship block the internet freedom?
4) Does internet censorship disturb the right to know?
5) What is the netizens' duty to make ideal internet siciety?
I'll continue searching the internet and looking for interesting articles and keeping track of my research with blog posts.

4. Connections to the Harvard Sampler
This argument can be connected to 'chapter 5.The Internet : Liberty in Cyberspace.' It's because the internet censorship is related to netizens' liberty in cyberspace and this topic is about a happening on the internet.

2014년 9월 7일 일요일

Research1

Source:
Internet censorship
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship 

My Topic: 
Censorship is not necessary on the internet.

What I hope to learn from this source:
I want to know the definition of the internet censorship and each countires' status of the internet censorship including the North Korea.

Notes:
1. Definition of internet censorship : Internet censorship is the control or suppression of what can be accessed,published, or viewed on the Internet. It may be carried out by governments or by private organizations at the behest of government, regulator, or on their own initiative.

2. Goal of internet censorship : some countries enforce an internet censorship to block some information that threat public safety or system.
 
Final Thoughts:
Based on this souce, I made own definition of censorship and I could know more information about censorship and specific examples of each countries' status of cencorship.

2014년 8월 27일 수요일

Research Proposal

1. What is my current topic?
- Censorship is not necessary on the internet

2. What are my guiding questions?
- Should countries have to enforce censorship on the internet?
- China have to continue the censorship on the internet?
- What is merits and demerits of the internet censorship?
- What is effects of the censorship on the internet?

3. What are my current thoughts?
- The censorship should not be on the internet.
- We have to ensure the right of freedom to netizens. 
- Deciding which are good and harmful information is up to netizens.

4.What is the opposition?
- There will be lots of harmful and baseless information on the internet.

2014년 8월 19일 화요일

Research Question


 Research questions about Internet & Media

1. Should internet be censored by government?

2. What is the good way to use internet in media?

3. What roles internet do as a part of media?

4. How can we maximize the effect of internet in media?

5. Why can't we separate the internet in media?