• More educated, tech-savvy users
• Sheer diversity in the collage of perspectives expressed
• Moderation of views, i.e., deviants who wish to cause harm rather than engage in productive discussions will leave after facing the ignominy of having the majority of views hurled against himself. (point wasn't elaborated too well as said by the judges)
• Curtailing piracy or harmful advertisements is not an issue of censorship but of restraining criminal activity
• Government is usually lagging behind in terms of technological knowledge

Government is less effective in regulating information onsites compared to service providers

• Interaction is crucial in new media, exposure to and subsequent discussions on the topic can bring benefits like shedding light on homosexual behaviour, resulting in greater acceptance of their kind. (All this would not have been possible if censorship were dominant)
• Lack of liberal expression of views can lead to unrest-USA's online forums vs lack of free expression in France-Riots in France over the attempts to censor scathing Muslim cartoons.
• Censorship supports paternalism, stifling legitimate views-society should move on its own momentum

• Societies are changing and advancing-greater use of the new media, speed, ease and vastness of content the new media provides is increasing in importance.
• Societies' paradigms are shifting in this age, can government still impose their moral judgements apporopriately? -the need and desire for free expression.
• With regard to sexual content, autonomy should be given to parents to teach their children what's right and wrong. Maturity of older people to decide if such content suits them.
• Information on new media is better off being self-regulatory.

Points brought up by the opposition:

-Censorship is needed to control the unbridled freedom of speech

• Censorship cannot stop a coffee shop uncle from making undesirable racial remarks but can prevent the comments from reaching too many people.
• Censorship's function in preserving racial and religious harmony-extent of free expression needs to be closely watched. Certain societal norms like harmony must stay.
  

• Government is needed to represent what society stands for including their moral values
• Self-regulation on new media is dangerous and idealistic-has and can result in liable and slandar loss.
• Website hosts tend to be profit-motivated and regulation of content (including the removal of injurious and derogatory remarks/content) may not be their priority.
• Sheer power of the media-without the government, who can curb harmful information from reaching a critical mass? Governement can do so through laws and censorship.
• Censorship is needed to protect minority groups-examples includes the incident of the racist bloggers in Singapore and the riots resulting from the circulation of undesirable Danish cartoons.

• The young are especially susceptible. Thus sexually immoral and seditious content should not be shown to them.
• Are parents always able to ensure that their children are not exposed to such information? Some parents may lack jurisdiction over their children.
• Minority racial/ethic groups need to be protected. Self-regulation (as described by the proposition) is inadequate as these people are the minority and have less say in areas like online forums.

-The relevance of censorship will stay:

• Although societies change, certain moral values are perennial. Thus the importance of having the government ensure that the new media does not undermine society's foundation of moral values.
• The sphere which censorship can operate is not exactly shrinking. It is precisely due to the increased use of the new media that the great diversity of information is ubiquitous. This increases the chances of undesirable content being circulated. Censorship is the tool used by the government to carry out imperative checks and balances on the new media.
• Even if this sphere is shrinking to some extent, it does not mean that it is irrelevant, it is just playing a smaller but nonetheless crucial role.
• The government reflects the views of the people. The Turkish government had to stop people from viewing the YouTube videos which criticised Turkey's founder as the videos had created much unhappiness. The government has to defend the peoples' views.
• Abuse of censorship does not contribute to any irrelevance of censorship. For instance, using censorship to block off legitimate views for pro-government purposes (paternalism at work). Anything if abused isn't good anyway.

-Censorship is still effective

• All online information goes through the domestic Internet Service Provider (ISP) through which the government has control over and can execute censorship where necessary