The Instigator
mongaakshay
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
burningpuppies101
Pro (for)
Winning
26 Points

Should we put constraint on media for national security

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/23/2009 Category: Politics
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,152 times Debate No: 6623
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (4)

 

mongaakshay

Con

I am for the against the topic....

MEDIA Should be allowed un-restricted access to anything that effects the public....

please comment and present your views...
burningpuppies101

Pro

I would like to thank my opponent for this debate. I hope that it will be a educational and entertaining debate for the both of us. I would also like to thank the voters for voting based upon the arguments, and not based upon the debaters themselves.

To the debate at hand:


The resolution is about whether or not we should put constraint on media for national security. My job is to affirm, and say that we should, and my opponent will try to prove we should not.

My opponents points: He argues one point. He says that we should allow un-restricted access to anything at affects the public.

REFUTATION:
1. Under your world that you suggest, the media will have access to anything they want. My arguments that I'm about to make will directly counter this, so keep reading.

C1. The government will become less effective. You can't be effective as a governing body if you are constantly having to look over your shoulder and worry about what the media will think. The media will become a block to society, and intead of providing more information, they will become an issue of the government's effectiveness. That leads me to my second contention.

C2. The governmet has to protect some information, but if the media has unrestricted access, that could jepordize national security. Information about war, battles, logistics, and other matters of national security could come under the scrutiny of the media. This poses a security risk to any country, since their enemies only have to look at the media for their opponents next move, or number to troops, or how much we has spent, etc.

C3. This sets a deadly precedents because nations will never feel safe with anything they do, knowing their enemies will be watching all their moves.

Thats it for now, but theres 4 rounds left.
Debate Round No. 1
mongaakshay

Con

if government puts constraint on media then it will al go under their dictatorship....in the present world the link between a journalist and the people is internet, paper, radio, tv...if constraint is put on media then indirectly the constraint is being put on all these mediums...
the government would regularise or in other words control the
burningpuppies101

Pro

SO my opponents only response to my arguments is to say that the government will become a dictatorship, and he leads off to say about the present world, internet, paper, radio, and tv are the only links between news and the people. He leads off on a doomsday, saying that the government will be able to control all of humanity.

WRONG. Look at it today. Perfect example. Look at the US. We have constraints on the media from finding out about military secrets, and yet we are still ourselves. No government dictatorship. Last time I checked, we still have freedom of speech, and the Bill of Rights. So really , my opponents still hasn't made a valid point. We can extend all my arguments.

I urge an affirmative ballot.
Debate Round No. 2
mongaakshay

Con

mongaakshay forfeited this round.
burningpuppies101

Pro

Extend all my arguments.
Debate Round No. 3
mongaakshay

Con

mongaakshay forfeited this round.
burningpuppies101

Pro

I think I can extend all my arguments.
Debate Round No. 4
mongaakshay

Con

mongaakshay forfeited this round.
burningpuppies101

Pro

Extend everything. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by mongaakshay 8 years ago
mongaakshay
more consideration is on the coverage media did during the 26/11 attack at the Taj hotel and other hotels in INDIA in 2008
Posted by RoyLatham 8 years ago
RoyLatham
Things currently prohibited from publication by the media: war plans, secrtcodesfor accessing and enabling nuclear weapons, the identities of secret agents in the CIA (terrorists) and FBI (drugs), competitive bidding information in procurements, trade secrets disclosed to the government for the purpose of bidding on government projects, intelligence data on the whereabouts and capabilities of terrorists and foreign enemies. Be could if you guys debated some of these specifics.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Epicism 8 years ago
Epicism
mongaakshayburningpuppies101Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by Debate.Com2 8 years ago
Debate.Com2
mongaakshayburningpuppies101Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by DiablosChaosBroker 8 years ago
DiablosChaosBroker
mongaakshayburningpuppies101Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by burningpuppies101 8 years ago
burningpuppies101
mongaakshayburningpuppies101Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07