Final answer:
The question of advocating greater government control over internet content to combat the use of the internet by terror groups is complex and subjective. It involves balancing national security with individual rights and freedoms.
Step-by-step explanation:
In response to the question of whether greater government control over internet content should be advocated to combat the use of the internet by terror groups, the answer is subjective and depends on various factors. Some may argue for greater government control as a means to prevent the spread of propaganda and recruitment of fighters. They might believe that giving agencies a free hand to shut down websites would be necessary for national security. On the other hand, others may argue against it, citing concerns about freedom of speech and potential abuses of power.
One example of a government's response to this issue is the United States, where the court system decides what needs restricting. However, globally, governments' responses vary. It is critical to strike a balance between security and individual rights, ensuring that any measures taken do not infringe upon basic freedoms and are supported by due process.
In conclusion, the question of whether greater government control over internet content should be advocated to combat the use of the internet by terror groups is complex and subjective. It involves weighing the need for national security against the preservation of individual rights and freedoms. It is a topic that requires careful consideration and deliberation.