Government officials around the world have the choice of either censoring websites deemed inappropriate for citizens or allowing access to any website available online. Unfortunately, it is very common for government officials to block access to individual websites and social media platforms of their choosing. These government officials should not have the power to block access to websites deemed inappropriate or unsuitable due to the silencing of the oppressed, violation of free speech, and political bias in general. Say no to plagiarism. Get a Custom Essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”?Get the original essayOppression is virtually everywhere, and many victims of this oppression continually fight to have their voices heard, especially online . Victims include “Moroccan atheists, women discussing online harassment, ads showing crucifixes, black and Muslim activists reposting racist messages they received, trans models, drag artists, indigenous women , childbirth images, breastfeeding photos.” Ultimately, this government wants to uphold certain ideals and wants to show its citizens one perspective on everything. This creates human rights violations and leads to unfair treatment of people deemed “inappropriate”. Now, these governments should intervene when necessary, such as whenever they threaten harm to another individual. A simple way to do this is through moderation. “…we are concerned about how platforms are responding to new pressures. Not because there is a slippery slope between judicious moderation and active censorship, but because we are already very far down that slope.” The government doesn't understand the difference because it's easier to censor. The simplest solution is not always the right one. More conversation and understanding is needed to find common ground. Additionally, by shutting people out, it deprives them of their unalienable rights as stated in the First Amendments. This is currently happening on large platforms like Youtube. Youtube users are quick to point this out: “When YouTube, Facebook or Twitter repress a certain form of expression – conspiracy theories, extremist diatribes, terrorist propaganda – some of the targets inevitably complain that their freedom of expression is being attacked.” Keep in mind: this is just a sample. Get a personalized article from our expert writers now. Get a Custom Essay Overall, as everyone can see the censorship of major platforms, it means that censorship has been normalized. If the government censors what it has chosen, then it presents the people with a false dichotomy. A false dichotomy is presented to the people, because the government presents you with two solutions or two sides to a problem, when there could be common ground. Instead, the government chooses to censor and suppress this middle ground, silencing the weak. The weak who are silenced have their rights violated according to the law. Every time the government allows speech from the other side, it allows the most radical form of it so that the people will not properly rationalize the other side. They radicalize the other side and make you lean towards the side they want. The government is doing something even worse, changing your perspective to secure what it wants. It causes people to change their political minds.