Group Discussion

Topic: Content on Internet Should Be Censored

A) Background:
Internet censorship is the control or suppression of the publishing of, or access to information on the Internet. It may be carried out by governments or by private organizations either at the behest of government or on their own initiative. Individuals and organizations may engage in self-censorship on their own or due to intimidation and fear. Internet censorship in India is selectively practiced by both federal and state governments. While there is no sustained government policy or strategy to block access to Internet content on a large scale, measures for removing content that is obscene or otherwise objectionable, or that endangers public order or national security have become more common in recent years.

B) Points in Favor of the Topic: 1) The words and images users post on the Internet may be available for years, and one’s profile may be viewed by future employers and school admissions officials, as well as identity thieves, spammers, and stalkers. This information can be used for the different purpose without any acknowledgement to user. 2) Many individuals and groups are using the social networking sites to provoke the users against the government. It's all politically motivated. They are using the tactics which are not acceptable in real world. 3) Apart from political motives many terrorist and racist organizations are using the social media for hurting the emotions of people and spewing hate against the castes, religions and races. 4) Internet is in a completely in chaos due to less censorship. There is need to censor the content and usage or the internet. People are abusing each other anonymously there is no one out on internet who can take care on these Problems. People need internet police. 5) Internet censorship is not at all about the hindering the freedom it is about the mapping the virtual world with the real world ethics.

C) Points Against of the Topic: 1) Internet is an open and free medium. It can be accessed by anyone by anywhere. That is the power of internet. If government start censoring voices of the people then internet will lose its charm. 2) People agree that on internet and on social media websites lot of content available which could be against few groups or government. But content available is a view of another group. We cannot stop people of keeping a different perception. We can't hinder the freedom. 3) The content available on different forums or social networking sites should always have a report feature. If a person or group finds it offensive they can report it. And the site could take action on the content. Need is to make generic standards for all sites to filter the content based on the hate. This mechanism is already there so what is need to censor further. 4) Why government needs to control the content. Political parties can be use the content for their personal profit. Parties would censor only content what is against them not against the opposition. So if required to regulate there must be a third party censorship firm or agency or regulatory body, which can take action without partiality.

D) Conclusion: 1) There is no need to censor the internet. What is required is require is to setup a mechanism or regulatory body which can take care of websites to manage their content. 2) Internet is free medium and no one should have right to censor things on it.

Topic: Is it Reasonable to Hold Celebrities Liable for Endorsing False Advertisements?

A) Background:
We see a lot of celebrities advertising for various products. While in that process they claim about the authenticity and effectiveness of that product with great confidence. But many a times, customers who buy the products because of their favorite celebrity endorsing it; are disappointed with the reality of it. The million dollar question over here is, Should celebrities be held responsible for false ad or no?

B) Points in Favor of the Topic? 1) A lot of customers buy the products because their favorite celebrities endorse for it and declare its effectiveness. If the product is not what it promises to be, the celebrities must be made liable for making false promises. 2) Celebrities endorse for various products in lieu of heavy money. So, they automatically become a part of the product marketing and sales. Thus, they must be held responsible if customers are cheated and they must pay fine out of the money they earned. 3) Now-a-days endorsement has become very competitive among celebrities and to remain ahead of others, celebrities endorse for products without checking its quality. 4) False advertisements by celebrities in nothing but exploitation of their fan following and their popularity. They must be held answerable for this. 5) Ads leave a strong impact on the society and celebrities become a part of customer preferences. There must be some regulation and monitoring in the process. 6) If a doctor can be sued for improper surgery, why a celebrity can’t be charged for false endorsement?

C) Points Against the topic: 1) Celebrities endorse a product as a part of their professional obligation, there is no personal liability for the quality of products. 2) Even customers now-a-days are aware that celebrity advertising is only to catch eyeballs and has nothing to do with quality authentication of the product. 3) In such advertisement, there is no direct contact between the ultimate customer and the celebrity endorsing for it. So, the celebrity can’t be held liable as he doesn’t force any personal insistence to buy the product. 4) The celebrities have nothing to do with the way a product is made or manufactured. They only endorse the product with terms and conditions applied. Only manufacturers and company of the product can be held liable and not the celebrities.

D) Conclusion:
Celebrities endorse for the products as their profession and holding them liable for every false advertisement will be way too much. But there must be some monitoring and legal regulation on the part of celebrities before signing any advertising contract.

Topic: Advertising is All Glitter and Little Truth A) Background:
Advertisement is important part of a business and it makes business success and bright, in case not only business but also it useful for our life as well as whole world. so one can say it is like a gold.

B) Points in Favor of the Topic: 1) Stars are promoting products which most of the time they don't use, so it's just like cheating with viewers. 2) Advertisers have to depict what customers like, enjoy keeping in mind clients requirements. 3) As products increase and so the ads, glitter is a way to ensure brand recall, a very important factor for the advertising firms. 4) Most of the time companies over showcase their product qualities which is not fair. 5) There are lots of examples like a person eating a chew gum and becomes so cool that girls start following him or take example of a famous perfume, if guys use that perfume girls will start running behind them. All these ads are total fake. 6) Advertising is a business and not charity. Companies hire advertisers for promoting their products and it is not vice versa.

C) Points Against the Topic: 1) Advertising firms carry responsibility of providing customers with unbiased information about products. 2) In order to have a healthy bottom line the ad firms cannot shun their responsibility towards the society. 3) Ad firms have to develop ethical content to ensure fair deals. 4) There are advertisements available which show the notice that it is medically proven or they are having proof.

D) Conclusion
Advertisements are somewhat made to attract the customers and some time they might only glitter but sometimes they are true also