Tuesday, Jan. 11, 2005 7:19 A.M.
The Question. Actually 2 of Them. Ok, here is the question. Let's pretend it is hypothetical. You have a web page. You are told you cannot make a banner that is, shall we say, adult in nature. Then you are directed by a friend to this web page on the same site with a very graphic picture on the template. You go to said web page and peruse the pictures on the page. Pictures are not your personal taste, but basically, not your business. You get to the bottom of said web page and find a picture that leaves absolutely nothing to the imagination, as is a very close up pic of a very private part. At first you shrug and say; "Hey, freedom of speech." "Hey, not my business."
But then you start thinking. You realize that there are kids on this site. They could be the kid next door, or even a daughter or grandchild. You are also aware that if you wanted to do one of these pictures and use it as your banner, (Though I sure as hell wouldn't) it wouldn't be allowed on this site. Yet this picture is allowed on a template. One would argue, and I agree, that you can simply click the "X" and leave the site. One would also argue that, and yes I agree with this too, that it is a parent's responsibility to monitor their kids internet viewing. In this day and age of working parents, this is not always an option. I guess my question is this. Where does the line fall between minding your own business and getting involved with something you think isn't right? Where is the line between not allowing censorship and protecting our kids? Just for the record, I am asking the question out of curiosity. I already took a stand and e-mailed the administrator and voiced my opinion. I expressed my opinion that said page should at least be locked umm, password protected. Later,
Cosmic
|
yesterday's gone/tomorrow's coming- - 2009-07-27
- - 2009-07-07
- - 2009-06-29
- - 2009-06-26
- - 2009-06-09
MY PERSONAL HEALTH PROGRAM
� kmurray 2007 - 8
|
