While it is understandable the reason and intent behind the call for internet censorship to help the fight against terrorism, it is an opinion that I cannot fully agree with, owing to the difficulty in the execution of such a proposal.
In this modern age of internet, dissemination of information that could be a threat to national security is seen as a real concern and it is a fair opinion that there should be some sort of control imposed. A simple search on the internet yields countless results of terrorist materials such as contents with promises of an 'rewarding afterlife' if one commits themselves to some wretch terrorism cause under the guise of religion. These material could well radicalising people, especially innocent youths and it is a reason
However said, an international body regulating the internet should not be seen as a panacea to the ever growing problem with terrorism. It is difficult to differentiate and discern what constitutes terrorist information and materials. A website containing information and steps demonstrating how one can go about making explosives might seem like an obvious candidate for censorship, but it is not as clear cut as it seem. This information can serve a chemistry student interested in thermodynamics well just as much as how the same information falling into the hands of a terrorist group can be catastrophic.
How the international body go about censoring the content will have varying responses and might result in unwanted consequences. For example, if the international body decides that Youtube has videos that are deem to be a safety threat and should be removed, they might issue a notice warrant for the website owners to remove the contents. However, what is the appropriate step to take if Youtube refuses to remove the video, citing freedom of information on the internet? Should the organisation completely blocking the access to the entire website? This might not be the wisest of choice as it will effectively shut down access to other useful contents.
Furthermore, an international body regulating the internet might be subjected to pressures from many different countries, each having their own agenda and political purposes. It will be difficult to appease the wishes of each and every country. As an example, an Asian country might view contents disseminating information about Western values and religion as being terrorism in nature and an assault on the values of the country. Multiply this scenario many times over for each an every member country of the international regulatory body and it will result in an organisation will be too crippled to achieve any tangible targets.
As a conclusion, it can be reasoned that having a body regulating the internet is a good step towards the global effort of the war against terrorism. Yet, it is not as clear cut as demonstrated by the examples above. There are perhaps other better ways in helping address the issue of terrorism worldwide.
- "Davis Technologies, a computer-chip maker, could solve its problem of declining sales by dropping its prices. This would make Davis better able to compete in the highly competitive computer chip market. The sales of chips would increase and this would su 86
- "Some people believe that corporations have a responsibility to promote the well-being of the societies and environments in which they operate. Others believe that the only responsibility of corporations, provided they operate within the law, is to make a 54
- People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers. 83
- "Following the September 11th attack, where the Al-Queda acquired bombmaking and terrorist knowledge over the internet, many lawmakers have proposed that an international body regulate the internet so that sites which provide information to terrorists cou 50
- The best way for a society to prepare its young people for leadership in government, industry, or other fields is by instilling in them a sense of cooperation, not competition. 54
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 322, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'a' instead of 'an' if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. 'a sentence', 'a university'
Suggestion: a
...rials such as contents with promises of an rewarding afterlife if one commits them...
^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...y innocent youths and it is a reason However said, an international body regulating ...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 418, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'seems'?
Suggestion: seems
...rship, but it is not as clear cut as it seem. This information can serve a chemistry...
^^^^
Line 7, column 210, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'deemed'.
Suggestion: deemed
...ecides that Youtube has videos that are deem to be a safety threat and should be rem...
^^^^
Line 9, column 97, Rule ID: NUMEROUS_DIFFERENT[1]
Message: Use simply 'many'.
Suggestion: many
...et might be subjected to pressures from many different countries, each having their own agenda...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['but', 'furthermore', 'however', 'if', 'so', 'well', 'while', 'for example', 'sort of', 'such as']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.239463601533 0.240241500013 100% => OK
Verbs: 0.151340996169 0.157235817809 96% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0919540229885 0.0880659088768 104% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0344827586207 0.0497285424764 69% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0306513409962 0.0444667217837 69% => OK
Prepositions: 0.128352490421 0.12292977631 104% => OK
Participles: 0.0555555555556 0.0406280797675 137% => OK
Conjunctions: 3.01929056445 2.79330140395 108% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0287356321839 0.030933414821 93% => OK
Particles: 0.00191570881226 0.0016655270985 115% => OK
Determiners: 0.13601532567 0.0997080785238 136% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0421455938697 0.0249443105267 169% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0134099616858 0.0148568991511 90% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2977.0 2732.02544248 109% => OK
No of words: 487.0 452.878318584 108% => OK
Chars per words: 6.11293634497 6.0361032391 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.69766713281 4.58838876751 102% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.388090349076 0.366273622748 106% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.29363449692 0.280924506359 105% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.217659137577 0.200843997647 108% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.156057494867 0.132149295362 118% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.01929056445 2.79330140395 108% => OK
Unique words: 242.0 219.290929204 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.496919917864 0.48968727796 101% => OK
Word variations: 57.7982136345 55.4138127331 104% => OK
How many sentences: 19.0 20.6194690265 92% => OK
Sentence length: 25.6315789474 23.380412469 110% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.4734634812 59.4972553346 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 156.684210526 141.124799967 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.6315789474 23.380412469 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.526315789474 0.674092028746 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.94800884956 121% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.21349557522 96% => OK
Readability: 54.9950286394 51.4728631049 107% => OK
Elegance: 1.95575221239 1.64882698954 119% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.382615604766 0.391690518653 98% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.129138409569 0.123202303941 105% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0492103666725 0.077325440228 64% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.591481827999 0.547984918172 108% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.145733652498 0.149214159877 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.17485140229 0.161403998019 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0802391784914 0.0892212321368 90% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.337488414508 0.385218514788 88% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0518451986604 0.0692045440612 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.263136227684 0.275328986314 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0699341787257 0.0653680567796 107% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 10.4325221239 38% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 14.0 5.30420353982 264% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.88274336283 20% => More neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 3.0 7.22455752212 42% => OK
Negative topic words: 10.0 3.66592920354 273% => OK
Neutral topic words: 1.0 2.70907079646 37% => OK
Total topic words: 14.0 13.5995575221 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. The e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.