The control and method of bad speech on the Internet

 

The control and method of bad speech on the Internet

The Internet, one of the greatest technologies of the 20th century, has significantly altered our environment and, while it has accelerated the advancement of human civilisation, it has also resulted in numerous issues. A challenging issue facing all governments and society in the age of the pervasive Internet is how to regulate it. A completely unrestricted Internet is not just dangerous, but it doesn’t even exist. Countries all over the world have been researching Internet governance models that work for them recently and have begun to gain some experience.

 

The Internet was developed about 50 years ago, in the last century during the U.S.-Soviet Cold War, when Soviet satellite liftoff accelerated the development of the Internet in the United States. The history of the Internet has also evolved from the prehistoric era to the ancient era, then to the pre-Web era and post-Web era, and only in recent years to the mobile Internet era and the current artificial intelligence era (Cohen-Almagor, 2013).

The sharing economy model has had a lot of room to grow because to the Internet era’s ongoing development and advancement (John, 2016). People are starting to consider the economic implications of sharing as the sharing economy, which is based on Internet technology, expands, and the value of utilising diverse social resources has increased. Along with the quick development of shared bicycles, shared rechargeable batteries, and shared vehicles, the sharing economy is spreading to include eateries, beauty parlours, and a larger range of service businesses. The sharing economy has been fueled by the proliferation of Internet businesses that provide users the option to rent or share products.

With the change of the Internet, modern people are in an era of information explosion, and it is because this information is spread fast enough that many people have access to all kinds of information on the Internet, which also has a lot of influence on the understanding of culture. For example, in ordinary life there will be a lot of homosexuality, but when homosexuality appears on the Internet, there will be a lot of abusive voices appear, which is bound to have a very bad impact on the culture of homosexuality. Of course, the disadvantages of the Internet are much more than that.

The Internet is a platform for everyone to share their opinions and views, which, of course, contain a lot of negative content, such as pornography, violence and harassment. The spread of these contents can be as fast and difficult to control as a virus, and they will certainly have a lot of negative effects on many groups. Therefore, the main thing is to control the leakage of these negative contents at the very beginning of the content proliferation.

For how to control the leakage of negative content, the state must play a very important role. First, the state should promulgate a series of laws and policies to target the publishers and disseminators of negative content, which can not only play a certain deterrent effect, but also play some role in urging the platform companies. Second, the platform should review the publisher’s content to ensure that the content does not contain negative content such as pornography before it can be released, even if it is still because of poor supervision so that negative content leaks, the platform should also be the first time to block the content. The government can also control negative content. The government can arrange public classes in every school to explain the harm that bad content can bring, as well as to urge students and teachers not to spread it themselves and to report bad content on the Internet in a timely manner (Gehlbach, 2014).

The state could implement a real-name Internet access system to control the output of negative content, for example, South Korea, one of the most developed countries with the highest Internet penetration rate, has been promoting the “Real Name Internet System” for many years, and this attempt has attracted much attention from other countries in recent years. The Korean government has been pushing for the implementation of real names on the Internet since 2002, but the results were not obvious at first. It was not until 2005 that a series of Internet incidents occurred that rocked Korean society, such as a large number of so-called “X-Files” about the privacy of Korean celebrities being wildly reprinted on the Internet, and “shit girls” being “flesh-searched” by netizens and causing mental disorders. From 2005 to 2006, the Korean National Assembly passed a series of legislation to promote the real-name system on the Internet. The implementation of the real-name system has not only reduced the spread of false information, malicious messages, and the resulting cyber violence, but also provided a “technical guarantee” for the Korean government to combat social problems such as “cyber poisoning” (Oh, 2010). The effectiveness of Korea’s real-name system has drawn the attention of other countries to follow suit. In recent years, some mainstream commercial websites in the United States have also begun to encourage and guide users to use their real names. The online version of the Wall Street Journal explicitly requires readers to use their real names in its comment management rules. Jim Brady, editor-in-chief of the online edition of the Washington Post, also said that websites should require readers to comment under their real names and be responsible for their own comments. These U.S. websites, while not mandating real names, have adopted several policies to encourage users to use their real names. For example, e-tailing giant Amazon.com gives priority to real-name consumer reviews, with the word “real name” specifically marked below the user name. The Huffington Post, known as the Internet’s number one newspaper, gives readers a “medal” for using their real names and speaking up, giving exemplary readers a higher reputation among its users.

Controlling negative online information can also establish a sound online public opinion management system. The first one is to establish an organizational system that can be linked up and down, set up a public opinion leadership team, including a working group for monitoring and response, establish a well-trained public opinion supervision team, study and develop special systematic plans and workflows, and clarify the division of responsibilities. Working meetings are held from time to time to collectively study the main public opinion events in the region and form joint efforts to deal with public opinion. Second, a scientific monitoring and early warning mechanism should be established. Negative management should be used as a basis to establish human-machine monitoring, graded warning, and bottom-up monitoring and warning mechanisms. The negative management company reminds to fully use information technology means to analyze the reports and comments of administration work in various media and network platforms, accurately judge the hot spots of public opinion, pay attention to the direction of development, and timely propose countermeasures. Thirdly, we attach importance to the accountability mechanism of post-evaluation (Kadushin, 2014). After the public opinion has stabilized, it is necessary to summarize and sort out the occurrence, dissemination and disposal of public opinion in a timely manner, form a written report and establish an effective public opinion evaluation and feedback mechanism. At the same time, departments with outstanding performance, negative monitors and network commentators are commended and rewarded, and departments with unexpected public opinion incidents and ineffective responses are investigated and pursued.

 

In conclusion, in the era of internet information explosion, internet is a communication platform shared to everyone, there is not only good content but also bad information, so the state, platform and government should do their part to control negative content. The state can implement a real name policy to reduce the appearance of negative content, and the government or platform can also set up a monitoring group to control negative content.

 

Reference list:

John, N. A. (2016). The Age of Sharing (Vol. 169). Polity Press. https://ebookcentral-proquest-com.ezproxy.library.sydney.edu.au/lib/usyd/detail.action?docID=4770940#

 

Cohen-Almagor, R. (2013). Internet history. In Moral, ethical, and social dilemmas in the age of technology: Theories and practice (pp. 19-39). IGI Global.

 

Gehlbach, S., &Sonin, K. (2014). Government control of the media. Journal of public Economics, 118, 163-171.

Oh, Y., Obi, T., Lee, J. S., Suzuki, H., &Ohyama, N. (2010, October). Empirical analysis of internet identity misuse: case study of south Korean real name system. In Proceedings of the 6th ACM workshop on Digital identity management (pp. 27-34).

Kadushin, A., & Harkness, D. (2014). Supervision in social work. Columbia University Press.