Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Weekly Debate/Discussion Topic Suggestion
#1
WEEKLY
INTELLIGENT 

DISCUSSION or DEBATE


SUGGEST ALL FUTURE TOPICS HERE


The purpose of this thread is to collect topics which we can intelligently debate and discuss on a weekly basis. You must follow all forum rules when posting, and each post must serve a purpose. Any posts that do not add to the conversation will be removed and you will be notified. The weekly basis of this is to keep this area of the forums active and it is NOT disallowing you to post your own topics of discussion/Debate. 

New topics will be posted every 7 days after the last.
Each topic will have a Topic Leader. By default, you will be topic leader of each topic you submit. 
Being the Topic leader means that you have to keep the discussion/debate flowing.
Me or Kelly will be posting the weekly Topics until further notice.
Either me or Kelly will contact you Via PM before your topic is posted requesting some information regarding your topic and if it is a debate we will ask for some research (not a lot, just a few links or so).



For the sake of structure, Me an Kelly are going to continue to use Frewency's method when suggesting a Topic, this will be changed in due time: 

Code:
[color=#00cc00]Topic:[/color]
[color=#00cc00]Your Relation:[/color]
[color=#00cc00]Research: <--- if needed in your Topic[/color][spoiler][/spoiler]

An example:
Topic: Internet Censorship. 
Your Relation: I use the internet.
Research:[spoiler]
SOURCE: http://idebate.org/debatabase/debates/sc...r-internet

The Internet is growing at a fantastic rate and is a huge resource for mass communication and information distribution. It can be used to spread information anywhere in the world at a minimal cost[1] and, due to the increase of computers or other electronic devices in the home.[2] It is one of the most accessible forms of information in the world. However, not all the information on the internet has a benevolent use. In the past few years, there has been growing concern over information available on the Internet which could be used to attack or damage society and vulnerable individuals; for example, radical political or opinion websites, including social networking sites, which can be used to attack and bully individuals[3] or to promote group violence[4].

           Currently, countries which censor such culturally controversial internet sites include China[5], Vietnam[6], Pakistan[7], North Korea[8], Syria[9], The United Arab Emirates[10] and Saudi Arabia[11]. These often focus on seemingly low-risk sites such as social networking sites like Facebook[12] and Weibo[13]. While the specific sites which are banned by each country varies according to what these countries deem to be a threat, the general case in the debate is to argue that the government should have a right to censor whatever material they see fit. This makes the debate an interesting discussion of the harms or benefits of censorship, and government power over the freedom on information.

           This debate will focus on the concept that a government should be able to ban whatever internet material they feel is not in the public interest to view, or which may actually pose a threat to that nation. For example, it would be legitimate for the government in a strictly Muslim country such as Iran to block overly ‘Westernised’ websites such as http://www.amazon.com and http://www.youtube.com, which indeed they already do[14] as they believe that it threatens their culture. Countries would also be allowed to block social networking sites if they believed that it was having a negative impact on the population, for example inciting violence[15] or losing work hours through procrastinating on Facebook[16]. Websites which feature things such as child pornography are already banned within the EU[17] for violating child rights and in countries across the Middle East[18] as it is seen to ‘mock Islamic beliefs’[19], therefore while some debates on increasing censorship would include it for the purposes of this debate it is excluded.

[1] Thinkquest, ‘The Impact of the Internet’, http://library.thinkquest.org/C0124364/i...ternet.htm, accessed 03/09/11
[2] Thinkquest, ‘The Impact of the Internet’, http://library.thinkquest.org/C0124364/i...ternet.htm, accessed 03/09/11

[3] Salkeld, Luke, ‘Facebook bully jailed: Death threat girl’ 18, is first person put behind bars for vicious internet campaign’, MailOnline, 21 August 2009, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...reats.html on 16/09/11

[4] Pollard, Ruth, ‘Elite college students proud of ‘pro-rape’ Facebook page, The Sydney Morning Herald, 9 November 2009, http://www.smh.com.au/technology/elite-c...-i3js.html on 16/09/11

[5]  Branigan, Tania, ‘Internet censorship in China’, guardian.co.uk, 14 January 2010, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jan...ship-china on 09/09/11.

[6] AsiaNews.it, ‘Internet censorship tightening in Vietnam’, 22 June 2010, http://www.asianews.it/news-en/Internet-...in-Vietnam... on 09/09/11

[7] GlobalVoices, ‘Internet Censorship in Pakistan’, 8 May 2006, http://globalvoicesonline.org/2006/05/08...-pakistan/ on 09/09/11

[8] Zeller jr., Tom, ‘In North Korea, the Internet is only for a few’, The New York Times, 22 October 2006, http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/22/techno...51122.html on 09/09/11

[9] Opennet Initiative, ‘Syria’, 7 August 2009, http://opennet.net/research/profiles/syria on 09/09/11

[10] Opennet Initiative, ‘United Arab Emirates’, 7 August 2009, http://opennet.net/research/profiles/uae  on 09/09/11

[11] Black, Ian, ‘Saudi Arabia leads Arab regimes in internet censorship’, guardian.co.uk, 30 June 2009, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jun...ab-regimes on 09/09/11.

[12] AsiaNews.it, ‘Internet censorship tightening in Vietnam’, 22 June 2010, http://www.asianews.it/news-en/Internet-...in-Vietnam... 09/09/11

[13] Tibetan Review, ‘New Chinese censorship targets social networking sites’, 29 August 2011, http://www.tibetanreview.net/news.php?id=9454 on 09/09/11

[14] Tait, Robert, ‘Censorship fears rise as Iran blocks access to top websites’, The Guardian, 4 December 2005, http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/200.../news.iran on 12/09/11.

[15] BBC News, ‘England riots: Two jailed for using Facebook to incite disorder’, 16 August 2011, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-man...r-14551582 on 12/09/11.

[16] BBC News, ‘Facebook ‘costs businesses dear’’, 11 September 2007, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/6989100.stm on 12/09/11.

[17] BBC News, ‘Child web porn law updated by EU to erase images’, 15 February 2011, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-12463290 on 16/09/11

[18] Ramezanpour, Ali Asghar, ‘Iran rounds up ‘porn site bosses’’, BBC News, 16 April 2009, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7997997.stm  on 16/09/11.

[19] Ramezanpour, Ali Asghar, ‘Iran rounds up ‘porn site bosses’’, BBC News, 16 April 2009, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7997997.stm on 16/09/11[/spoiler]

Research is not a full basis requirement for all topics but it is a great asset to have because you will be providing potential replys with necessary information.

The example I provided by Frek goes to into extreme dept. This is not required. Provide as much research as you would like. The more research, the better the debate but can also be boring for people to read so I say a few links are fine Tongue. For the purpose of showing an example, I ripped all this information directly from the source provided. DO NOT DO THIS. Please provide unique information. 

If you are reading this thread, make an effort to submit a topic. It can be anything you like. Hell, google debate topics and pick something that interests you.

Regards,
Leon[/center]
[Image: jinx_forum_signature_by_outcry16-d6o8xdb.png]
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)