Freedom of Speech or Moderated Content on Community Sites?

One of the major problems faced in regulating the internet today, is who should decide what is and what is not appropriate for us? Where should the line be drawn between what the regulator thinks is appropriate and what I personally believe is appropriate? Who will appoint the regulators? Should regulators be chose in a democratic process, or should they be simply appointed by those who believe themselves to be the guardians of our morals and know what is best/worst for us?

Freedom of speech and expression, is every citizen's right. However, this does not mean that the people can 'say anything they want to'. In a political context, freedom of speech means, the right to dissent; that is, the right to disagree with what the government says, and not be assaulted in any way for that. Freedom of speech does not give you the right to say anything you want; in fact, the law limits us, and what we can and cannot say. However, freedom of speech, the responsibility of speaking the truth as we know it, is given to us. We have every right to disagree with what someone has to say, however, we are in no way permitted to spread false information about another person. We are not free to make racial claims, or condemn other people's religion, gender, their nationality, or their physical look.

Freedom goes hand in hand with responsibility. As an example, most western country have freedom of press. However, the press is free to print only that material which they know for sure, is true. They are responsible for what they publish, they have the responsibility to tell the truth. Freedom of press becomes meaningless if newspapers are allowed to make up their own stories. In fact, in this case, reading newspapers would be meaningless, since nothing would be authentic, or true.

The same is the case with freedom of speech. If people are allowed to say whatever they want, freedom of speech will hold no importance. We have every freedom to tell the truth, and nothing else. However, suppose I say something, which I personally believe is true. However, the regulator, thinks it is inappropriate, and thus, deletes it. Or maybe, I say the same truth, however, I use too many explicit words in it, and the regulator deletes it. In both the cases, my freedom of speech, is compromised.

The efforts, of regulating the internet, should be resisted. People blame the internet for a lot of things. They believe the internet is responsible for the spread of child-pornography, the stalkers targeting teen-aged girls, and spamming and fraud. However, what they do not realize, is that the internet is not responsible for all of this. Suppose, a drunk driver, drives a Mercedes, and hits a pedestrian on the road. No one, in their right mind, would sue or even think of suing Mercedes for providing the car.

All the evils that we blame on the internet, will still continue, even if we regulate the internet. Predators will still stalk teen-aged girls, child pornography will still be distributed, and criminals will still commit fraud.

We need education, more than regulation. Users of the internet, need to be educated in the secure and acceptable use of the internet and the tools they have. People need to determine their comfort and ease levels, and need to maintain them. We should have freedom of speech, but, only within limits.