As this assignment covers censorship in various countries, I have included links to numerous articles. The vast majority of the articles are short, but informative.
For a general overview of censorship worldwide, read chapter 2 of "Access Denied: The Practice and Policy of Global Internet Filtering", by Jonathan Zittrain and John Palfrey, at http://opennet.net/sites/opennet.net/files/Deibert_03_Ch02_029-056.pdf
"Instead of a world wide web...it is more accurate to say we have a Saudi wide web, an Uzbek wide web, a Pakistani wide web, a Thai wide web and so forth..."- Jonathan Zittrain and John Palfrey
The following articles are examples of censorship by governments. Consider whether cyberspace should be an alternate jurisdiction that the long arm of a government cannot reach. Is there is truth in the argument that as a result of governments asserting control over web content within their respective countries, "the future of the internet, if not all geopolitics, hangs in the balance"?
TURKEY: "YouTube banned"
This is an article regarding censorship of YouTube by the government of Turkey: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/aug/26/turkey.youtube ; and
THAILAND: "Thai government tries to shut down 400 websites"
The following article from the online Guardian newspaper concerns censorship conducted by the Thai government: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/sep/03/digitalmedia.thailand .
GENERAL: "Pension fund nudges Google, Yahoo on censorship"
Although censorship is ostensibly carried out by companies such as Google and Yahoo, consider whether such censorship constitutes indirect government censorship. Is it fair to expect the conduct of ISPs to be motivated by anything other than money?
See this news blog from CNET News:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-6143860-7.html ;
INDIA: "Google guides cops to police Web 2.0"
This article from a television news site in India concerns Google's collaboration with police to monitor a popular Indian social networking site: http://www.televisionpoint.com/news2008/newsfullstory.php?id=1222266024 ; and
ISRAEL: "Google Israel Head Rejects Censor Role"
In the following article the head of Google Israel rejects the notion that Google would monitor its sites to prohibit free speech: http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8SS8UO00&show_article=1
PORNOGRAPHY: AUSTRALIA
Go to the Australian Electronic Frontiers site at http://www.efa.org.au/category/censorship/ and familiarize yourself with the debate regarding the government sponsored filtering of pornography in Australia.
The following is a news article from Arstechnica.com, which provides a useful summary about the Australian government's proposed national "clean feed" program to filter porn from the Australian web. The article also contains links to further articles about the "clean feed" program: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070814-australia-to-spend-189-million-on-anti-porn-initiative.html (optional)
Also skim through http://libertus.net/censor/debate/pcontrov.html for an alternative view on the issue of pornography.
The following article by Sally Burnheim entitled "The right to communicate" provides a brief overview of the Internet in Africa:
http://www.article19.org/pdfs/publications/africa-internet.pdf :
HATE SPEECH: SOUTH AFRICA
Section 16(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, protects certain types of expression (as opposed to just speech), while section 16(2) sets out the exclusions to such constitutional protection.
Despite (occasional) calls for governmental regulation of the internet, section 8(1) of the Constitution provides that the government (legislature, executive and the judiciary) is bound by the Bill of Rights provisions of the Constitution. Any laws that infringe upon a right must be justifiable in an open and democratic society based on dignity, equality and freedom.
See http://www.info.gov.za/documents/constitution/1996/96cons2.htm#16 for sections 8, 16 and 36 of the Constitution)
Also go to http://www.fxi.org.za/content/view/97/52/ , for an article written by the South African Freedom of Expression Institute in response to a call made by a Member of Parliament for the government to regulate MXit, as well as blogging in general.
Take a look at MXit at http://www.mxit.co.za/web/index.htm
See news article, "MXit angered by De Lille's call for censorship", from the Mail & Guardian newspaper:
http://www.mg.co.za/article/2007-05-23-mxit-angered-by-de-lilles-call-for-censorship
Lastly, read the following article by the Freedom Institute entitled "Internet Regulation: No consensus in sight" concerning the trans-border censorship of hate speech:
http://www.fxi.org.za/pages/Publications/Medialaw/internet.htm
Consider the following site, which is set up and maintained outside of South Africa. The site has been taken down by Google numerous times and has reincarnated as:
http://whitereference.blogspot.com/2008/07/internet-censorship-strikes-again-south.html .
At http://imod.co.za/2008/09/14/support-south-africa-and-vote-against-za-sucks/
South African blogger Chris M recommends flagging of "South Africa Sucks". Does flagging constitute "censorship" and is it a valid means of dealing with sites that are deemed to contain unsavoury content?
NAZI PARAPHERNALIA: GERMANY
Read the following chapter from the book by Michael Shermer and Alex Grobman: "Denying History: Who Says the Holocaust Never Happened and Why Do They Say It?" http://www.ucpress.edu/books/pages/8295/8295.ch01.php
Germany bases its filtering of sites containing national socialist paraphernalia upon various legal documents and institutions. See the following Worldfuture site for a basic summary of the provisions and institutions:
Also see a treatise by the German anti-censorship organization ODEM.org http://odem.org/material/internet-censorship-germany.pdf
See the New York time article at http://www.writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/Holocaust/censor-nazi-net.html on Germany's censorship of neo-nazi websites.
Shermer and Grobman suggest that a decision on how to deal with holocaust denial is one of strategy, which will be different for different people. Consider whether this justifies Germany's filtering of internet access to holocaust "revisionist" sites such as http://www.codoh.com/ .
"East is east and west is west and never the twain shall meet" - Rudyard Kipling
Internet censorship, whether it is conducted by governments or ISPs appears to be symbolic of a deeper problem: a clash of cultures. This is especially evident in India, a country deemed to be the second largest emerging economy, after China, where economics may be a factor that strongly influences Google's decisions to comply with calls for censorship. In your perusal of the following cites, consider whether justifications for censorship exist. Should web content be regulated to reflect the norms and cultures of a society? Consider whether the Internet promotes a homogenization of the world along American cultures and norms. Is censorship a means by which people are permitted to opt out of the global (American) village?
UNITED ARAB EMIRATES: "Face book may be too popular"
This is a newspaper article from the National: http://www.thenational.ae/article/20081002/NATIONAL/993708887/1043
INDIA: "Google, Microsoft pull sex ads after India legal threat" This is an article from Breitbart concerning an advert on Google's Indian site: http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=080918062030.n6tjt4fb&show_article=1
INDIA: "American Values and American Tech Companies Overseas"
This is an article from the Inquisitor, off a Google India site: http://www.inquisitr.com/418/american-values-and-american-tech-companies-overseas/
TURKEY: "Internet sparks culture clash among Turks"
This is an article from The Digital Voice about the Turkish governments concerns over the influence of the internet on Turkish youths:
http://media.www.buvoice.com/media/storage/paper227/news/2001/02/08/Nationworld/Internet.Sparks.Culture.Clash.Among.Turks-26839.shtml
UNITED KINGDOM: "Should the internet game Muslim Massacre be banned?"
This is a news blog from the British newspaper, guardian.co.uk, regarding a game which can be downloaded from the internet for free: http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/blog/2008/sep/11/technologygames
Return to the syllabus