The Internet Content Debate!
One of the hottest debates in the ICT realm these days worldwide is who controls online content. The debate recently reached a boiling point when Google told the Chinese government it would not filter search results.
For some, control of internet content should rest with policy makers and government regulators, while many others believe there should be no restrictions and individual internet users should be able to make their own decisions on what to access. Still others believe it is the responsibility of the internet service provider (ISP) to monitor content.
What do you think and which side do you agree with?
The debate continued at ictQATAR's recent Digital Communications Literacy Forum, co-hosted with the International Institute of Communications (IIC) on February 9th, 2010, with both adults and youth voicing their views on internet content.
During a session titled "The Future Challenges for Digital Communications Literacy", Abdul Aziz Al Mahmoud, a journalist from Qatar and Jeff Cole, Director of the World Internet Project, shared their thoughts, and then engage in a dialogue with Mohamed Farid and Lolwa Al Jefairi, students from Northwestern University in Qatar.
Read what the speakers and participants said about the control of Internet content, by reading ictQATAR's latest e-newsletter issue: http://www.ictqatar.qa/output/page1692.asp
I remember when the internet first started in the states and there was no control over it. It was beautiful soooo beautiful finally real freedom. Not the freedom people talk about but real freedom of which no one has ever seen before. Imagine you can say what ever you want and show what ever you want. if people wanted to see it they saw it and if they dont they dont. Absolutly keep the internet free its the last place on earth that is free.
this discussion....
I'm not sure I want instruction manuals for making dirty bombs floating around the internet, or advice on how to make your own amyl nitrate. Pamphlets urging religious groups to kills other people aren't my idea of bedtime reading either.
But there are people who will write, distribute and download such things.
Do people also think that anyone should have the right to write slanderous and untrue things about you on the internet? Acuse you of crimes you've never committed, or engaging in behavior that is out of character? Should there be no protection from this?
As to whether or not the censorship should be via a democratically elected government, or a dictatorship (or not at all) that's an entirely seperate issue.
I'm sorry rahsoft, sarcasm tends to get lost on the net at times.
The discussion is all well and good (I can't believe some people here support banning books. I guess some people like being slaves.)
But then there is this little thing called a VPN and you can see anything you want and the government has no control over it.
Private individuals always have leg up on the government in the field of technology, because on top of all problems with politics and bureaucracies, governments are incompetent.
David
The internet is no different to existing published, filmed, photographed and/or produced content, and should be subject to the same levels of censorship/restriction that would apply to printed, photographed or filmed media.
If a government has the right to restrict what can be published (for reasons of decency etc) then why should the internet be any different?
I don't understand why the people and governments all over the world feel that monitoring and censoring the website is any different to the other forms of media control that have been in place for generations.
And if people feel that the internet should be free from any restrictions then perhaps we ought to ask why certain books, movies and artworks are also banned/restricted.
Ultimately it's the same content delivered via a different medium; that's the only difference.
Agree with Intlxpatr and Slip - Mostly free but not practical to assume self-monitoring. Most people are not mature enough and think nothing of harming other people. Slander laws? How to prove it? Easier said than done.
Because there are immature and/or mentally challenged / predatory people, etc..the internet needs to be regulated to a reasonable extent for law and order / protection of people.
Total freedom is anarchy and total honesty is brutality.
*****************************************
Beauty lies in the eyes of the beerholder.
simple...my life, my choice.
deepb said
People have no Idea what is right and wrong.
then how do they get by in life? how do they live their lives and not constantly break the law ?
were such people raised in a barn ?
I believe censorship control should NOT be in the hands of ISPs, that makes them publishers and QTEL gets their censorship rules from an american company!
never understood why qtel bans a website on ear,nose and throat medical advice ( and I have complained... just get ignored )
if you have to give control to an authority then give to the govt with transparency and accountability.
censorship control should belong to the end user. the companies, the parents ( you have filters provided for you now ), the individual personal taste belongs to the individual.
violent( by legal standards ) and criminal material belongs to an authority censorship( cybercrime )
1. Can the government actually protect you?
No, absolutely not. The government does not protect you from crime. The largest governments in the world have worse crime than ever. Did the U.S. government protect its citizens from 9/11? Did the German government protect its citizens from Hitler? Do American cyber security cops protect citizens from watching porn or planning nefarious activies? No. No. No. and No.
2. What is the government?
Governments like to tell people they are your friend. They are not. As Murray Rothbard stated in 'Anatomy of the State', "we" can not be the government. That is an illogical delusion. If "we" really are the government, then everything the government does to us, we did it to ourselves. I suppose all of the people slaughtered by governments over the last 200 years, during the rise of the Nation-State, were actually committing suicide. Ha! Who knew?
3. How did we get governments?
Are governments some form of social contract, some higher stage of societal consent? Heck no. Governments emerged around the world through conquest and subjugation. Franz Oppenheimer, the brillinat German sociologist, proved conclusively that in every corner of the world, government is the Political Means of extracting wealth from a society. It is robbery. This, as opposed to the Economic Means of gaining wealth through mutually beneficial and voluntary exchange.
4. Does regulation work?
No. No. Double Heck No. When has regulation ever worked? Regulation does nothing but take the stupidest people in school and place them in charge of regulating the smartest. What smart kid grows up to be a regulator? It doesn't make sense. Regulation is a tax. It has to be paid for, one way or the other. The best regulation is the family, the law, and bankruptcy. Everything else is a cover for greater government control over the lives of its citizens.
5. Why does the government want to regulate the Internet?
Because it has allowed the free exchange of ideas that undermine government legitimacy. All across the world people are questioning their governments, their intellectual "leaders", and the second hand peddlers of ideas (the media). This governments will not stand for, which is why they want to "regulate" it. They don't want you to see the works of Rothbard, Oppenheimer, or even Hayek for that matter.
I will be happy to exchange information on this subject with anyone interested.
David
There should be no govt control on internet People should be able judge what they want ...... if you are looking for crap you will get crap...
on second thought contents which may lead to bodily harm of other indivisual like how to make bombs etc should be restricted . any other content is individuals right of self expression.
People have no Idea what is right and wrong. The government needs to step in and protect them by censoring information. If left to themselves, they cannot make the right judgement.
For me it should be restricted!..for me freedom should have limitation especially on the internet.
__________________________________________________
The one who stays calm is the one who is in control
I think it is silly to expect people to police themselves whether online or offline. Just like the real world, even the cyber-world needs regulation (by government) to ensure law and order in a society. One just needs to make sure the restrictions imposed are reasonable. I think Qatar does a reasonable job in this regard. While I disagree with what China does, I also disagree with a lot of their other forms of regulation. There is no reason to regard Internet regulation as different from any other form of government regulation; if you want to tell a government how to regulate (or not regulate) the internet you may as well go ahead and tell them how to run their country.
I would like to see the minimal amount of controls, and for most to self-monitor. I think QL does fairly well. It's interesting to see what other people are thinking and experiencing, even though I find some of the comments offensive. Sigh. Actually, if everyone agreed with me, what a dull world this would be. We all need a little challenge now and then.
I agree with making a control in the adult content by the ISP. Also this control should be on websites that attacks other religions.. and on websites that advertise harmful goods for the youth. Other than that the internet space should be free.
____________________________________________________
I dream things that never were; and I say, "Why not?"
mmyke and whyteknight - Thanks for your comments, waiting for more comments, everyone!
Supreme Council of Information and Communication Technology (ictQATAR)
Website: http://www.ictqatar.qa
Blog: http://www.digitalqatar.qa
absolutely no restrictions whatsoever placed on internet information by any government, unless such information could foreseeably cuase physical harm to someone. All other transgressions can be handled by slander laws etc.
The best societies in this world have these freedoms, and you cannot have one of the best sociteies without such freedoms.
Government should control.
We don't get to make our own laws as individuals so why make an exception with virtual content.
"Live with passion, Die with style"