« Microsoft's Russia problem highlights a bigger problem | Main | Consent of the Networked »

September 27, 2010

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c609853ef0133f4a4e673970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Internet freedom is dead. Long live Internet freedom.:

Comments

Hesus Fish

The internet has become a propaganda place for terrorism, thereby I agree with the government to monitor whats happens on the internet, ther can be some oversight but for the the rest the government is right, if we are holding them account for our safety.

vpn

i just discovered your blog and really like it

Nick Raymon

Hi,
thank you for your great post. I really appreciate the efforts you have put in your blog .It is interesting and helpful.
Good luck with it!!!
Pardons Canada

Alan Johnston

I just saw the Committee to Protect Journalists reversed its position on COICA. I was suspicious ... until I saw who was on the board of directors. Then it all seemed clear. Aren't you on the board? Don't they have conflict-of-interest rules there?

Rebecca MacKinnon

Hello Alan. Are you saying that I have a conflict of interest because I am opposed to COICA while CPJ has decided not to take a position after a staff member published an eloquent and well-reasoned post criticizing it? It is no secret that some board members work for organizations that strongly support COICA. I strongly oppose it, though I don't believe it can be argued that I have any financial interest in its defeat. I am new on the board but it is CPJ's policy that any matter regarding U.S. policy needs to get board approval. While I agree 100% with the original blog post warning that COICA could undermine a secure uncensored Internet, and I agree that if passed as currently proposed it would very bad for the future of global free expression, the board is not unanimous on COICA. Therefore it instructed the staff that CPJ as an organization must take no position. Am I thrilled about the whole situation? No. Do I have a conflict of interest? Please explain exactly how you think I have one. Or are you implying that other people have conflicts of interest?

Stanton

Fight the power! U.S. - you're no more qualified to criticize China Communist Party (CCP)'s Internet censorship since you are doing the same thing.
amazon.com; paypal... all flunkies of all those politicians. Disgusting!!!

Where's the famous iconic American-style "Freedom of speech."?!
Now I know it's American-style censorship and Internet-block, just exactly the same as China Communist Party's The Great Firewall does in China.


I'm from China where is strictly controlled by dictatorial and autocratic China Communist Party (CCP).
So, there is no freedom of speech and press freedom at all in China.
China's known as CCP's The Great Firewall, which blocks, censors Internet content within China.
The CCP government can shut down any website at will as long as CCP thinks it jeopardizes so-called "state security or state interests".
The CCP government can invade and deprive people's rights to know the truth.
I've been thinking the situation of freedom of speech much worse in China than in the U.S.
I've always respected the U.S. for it's famous "freedom of speech and press freedom."
But now, I don't respect the U.S. anymore,and I feel very very disappointed.

The U.S government now is doing the same thing to WikiLeaks as CCP does to Chinese people.
The U.S government's using a lot of political powers to intervene and destroy WikiLeaks' operation.
Before WikiLeaks Event, I thought Chinese people are deeply, badly brainwashed by CCP's government-controlled media, but American people are not.
Now I realized that American people are ALSO deeply and badly brainwashed by their government in another way, but the result is same.
I don't believe American style so-called democracy anymore. It's so fake and hypocritical.

By the way, America is fully ruled by Jews behind curtain. America is only a servant of its master Israel.
And in the world ruled by Jews, there is no justice and fairness at all either.
An open secret in America is that Jews is America's real ruling class.
No freedom of speech at all. Who can tell me is there anybody dare to criticize Jews in America without fearing the pressure and persecution from Jews?
Freedom of speech, press freedom, democracy are all conditional in America.

Politicians - Full of lies. All lies!!!

Stanton

So called "State security and state interests" are just the excuses of scandals.

WikiLeaks Event torn down American mask of fake Freedom of Speech.
It's the same thing which is happening under China CCP's The Great Firewall.
America, please don't blame China's Internet censorship anymore.

U.S. politicians - Do you call scandals "State security or State interests"?
Come on, give me a break.
The same way China CCP does. You're learning from China CCP.

America! You're now standing with China's CCP.
Finally, don't claim yourself your value is Freedom of Speech.
Congrats! America The Great Firewall was born.
It's fake! So fake!

Joe Holt

Caught the C-Span Program this morning and attempted to get through, but unfortunately the program ended before I could get my ducks in a row! I am certainly no expert on the law, simply a Risk Management Professional, which in itself hints how I am wired. Like others in this field, I tend to sit in the corner taking in bits and pieces, researching the issues and allow the chips fall in place. Eventually a path will form in the order created by this chaotic process, and more often than not we find that history follows the trail.

I am very concerned with government surveillance and oversight. With probable cause founded on reasonable suspicion big brother should be able to take a peek, but only after Due Process and under the veil of a court signed search warrant. Unfortunately, it appears that we are heading down a slippery slope og government oversight without any of the above. Hesus, please think about what you are stating.

Above all of this, I am concerned about "Cloud Based" Computing and the slow march toward "our" licensed software living in the cloud and not on our personal PCs. The push is weakly justified by "making the hassles of software upgrades" a thing of the past. Imagine what will happen when this becomes a reality, allowing the government to essentially shutdown anyone or any business by removing them or it from the cloud! We will not have to worry about Google, Yahoo or Facebook censorship, regulating these services will no longer be necessary as the IE link on your desktop will not work! The program is not on your PC or Mac but rather "in the cloud" and you have been removed.

One C-Span caller raised an excellent point of today's young generation not being familiar with the old Soviet Union. Our freedoms are under attack, an is is a fact that our children are growing-up in a much different world. With the technology comes access the the world and as parents we are asked to police our children against a corruption that often does not come into our neighborhoods and to our children, but rather dangers and risks that our children either seek-out via the or inadvertantly stumble upon, not understaiding the risk. On the other hand, used wisely and under proper parental supervision, the information available to them can be a godsend!

To protect "the public" the government enacts regulations that some may feebly rally against, but since any one regulation is not be deemed overly restrictive, the masses do not object in-force. Through this continual process, younger generations grow-up under restrictions that are considered "normal", and the process repeats itself. Eventually the covert end goal is achieved.

I digressed a bit, but I believe that many issues we face today are related and play into the big picture and long term plan, and we havent a clue of what that plan entails. We can only imagine...

Catherine Fitzpatrick

Well, that was a neat move, putting more pressure on the CPJ board that is split over this.

And thank God it *is* split and I hope it remains so because that means we can still expect that this very important and respected organization will continue to think critically, keep an open mind, and not stampede to do what the "progressives" instruct as the party line.

Rebecca, do you believe that telephones and the telephone system have "baked into them" the surveillance methods needed by law-enforcers to track criminal suspects?

Whether you conceive in the telephone system in that manner or not -- and it's useful to ponder it -- in fact, as long as land lines have existed, law enforcers have gained the cooperation of telephone companies in the pursuit of criminal investigations. Wiretapping is legal although of course it has legal restraints on it under the law.

So if you can accept that, can you simply reason by analogy and accept that yes, cell phones, and yes, the Internet also have to have that same capacity so that law-enforcement can pursue criminal investigations of suspected crimes? Why not?

You don't seem willing to grant them that legitimate right.

You seem to treat the Internet as some Autonomous Zone or Magic Realm where legitimate law-enforcers from a liberal democratic state such as our own cannot pursue criminal suspects, whether drug dealers or bank robbers or terrorists -- merely because some authoritarian state out there misuses these powers on this new technology -- as if "something new" takes place when in fact it is merely "something old" -- that repressive state's already-existing intrusiveness.

And guess what, those kinds of states have always misused their powers in these ways. But we never stopped using the telephone or blocking the police from the telephone system because the KGB bugged dissidents and hounded them on that basis. That would be absurd.

You seem scared that our own state will gravitate to misusing these powers -- although the same forces that prevent their misuse on the telephone system -- the courts, lawyers, NGOs, the media, ordinary citizens -- didn't go away just because the Internet got built.

But I think if you just conceive of the Internet as a giant phone with a lot of trucks attached to it, it will not seem so evil and horrible if the police request chatlogs or any kind of communication, because of course they are subject to restrictions by law.

One of the problems with today's generation not being aware of the Soviet Union is that facile comparisons to it can be made by people like Joe Holt, who can't seem to grasp the freedoms and the rule of law he in fact lives under in America, so unlike the Soviet and post-Soviet states. I don't know where to start.

If the "masses" do not object, maybe it's because they have a sense of normalcy about this that the anxious and twittering "progressives" are lacking. Datamining companies and Google have more of your communications right now than the government is going to dream of having. Your curious lack of concern about that and over-anxiety about the Obama Administration somehow bugging your Blackberry just doesn't make sense.

There is nothing to say that due process and probably cause would somehow magically evaporate. Where do you see that? You have no basis for that claim. The law is the law, and remains so over the telephone has much as the Internet, and civil rights are as protected

The key to this hysteria on the left I think comes in Rebecca's claim that this is "baked into" architecture and the evil Amerikan state will put in "back doors" and evilevilevil blah blah. Well, what do you call the ability to tap a telephone? Baking in a back door? Or just a wiretap that is legal in certain circumtances? Why the magic thinking?

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

Global Voices


  • Global Voices Online - The world is talking. Are you listening?

  • Donate to Global Voices - Help us spread the word
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 10/2004

license

My book:

Consent of the Networked
Coming January 31st, 2012, from Basic Books. To pre-order click here.
AddThis Feed Button