Here in the US much of our beliefs and culture are based on the notion that all should have unfettered access to the internet and other news sources without censorship of any sort. The practice of censoring the web and other news in China is one of the things that many in the US think China needs to change the most. In England, the country is facing some of the worst rioting it has ever seen and the government seems to have no idea how to stop it.
Prime Minister David Cameron has insinuated that the fix to the rioting may in part involve the censorship of the internet. Specifically Cameron has stated that he wanted to "stop people from communication on social media [when they are using it to instigate violence]." Britain generally follows the same principles that the US holds dear when it comes to censorship. The statement by Cameron may have seemed innocent and a decent idea on some level.
That is until China came out in support of the plan to censor the web. Suddenly China sees a chance to use Cameron's plan to support its own history of censorship of the web. Observers think that Cameron wants to block the use of social networking sites when civil unrest is suspected. What do you think, is it ever acceptable for a government to block access to a website for any reason?