10 Aug 2012 | Asia and Pacific, Digital Freedom, India
Although only 10 per cent of India’s population is online, a divisive national debate over internet freedom has implications for the country’s economic and political growth.
In December 2011 journalist Vinay Rai filed a complaint under sections 200 and 156(3) of India’s Criminal Procedure Code against Google and Facebook (among others) for hosting “objectionable content”. The content, according to the complainant, “seeks to create enmity, hatred and communal Violence amongst various religious communities; is demeaning, degrading and obscene, and will corrupt minds and will seriously affect religious sentiments.” (more…)
9 Aug 2012 | Russia
Next week will bring the verdict in the trial of feminist punk band Pussy Riot, who now face up to three years in prison for “hooliganism” motivated by religious hatred for performing a “punk prayer” against Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow’s Christ the Saviour Church.
(more…)
9 Aug 2012 | Digital Freedom, Uncategorized
The nice people at the New Statesman asked me to take part in a debate on web filtering with Conservative MP Andrea Leadsom this week. You can read the whole thing here. It’s certainly worth reading Leadsom’s arguments, as she does represent a significant body of opinion.
What I find interesting about the viewpoint of Leadsom and others is a curious faith in technology. It’s an odd take on cyber-utopianism. While they clearly do not believe that technology is the ultimate liberating force, they still seem to believe that the best way to counter the great wash of “inappropriate” [Leadsom’s word] content on the web is more technology. It’s as if they’re engaged in a pornographer versus guardian arms race, and have long lost sight of the actual aim.
Contrast this with what our China correspondent Dinah Gardner writes today on how the Communist Party, which is far more serious about censorship than Andrea Leadsom, handles the issue. While they do employ technology, they also employ thousands of people to monitor and delete content. They’ve realised that algorithms can only achieve so much.
Humans in the main resent authoritarian regimes because they treat us like we’re children: but when we are talking about actual children, then the debate changes slightly. We’ve pretty much accepted that we can put some limits on the rights of children — particularly on what information they can access. But the most developed filtering program in the world is no replacement for an interested adult taking care of a child’s education and entertainment.
9 Aug 2012 | Europe and Central Asia, Index Index, minipost
Two Italian journalists have been sentenced to four months in prison and fined 15,000 Euros (11,700 GBP) for libel. Orfeo Donatini and Tiziano Marson, of newspaper Alto Adige, were convicted in June of alleging in a 2008 article that local politician Sven Knoll had taken part in a neo-Nazi summit. The claim was based on a police report and appeared in weekly magazine L’Espresso. Knoll lodged a criminal defamation complaint, and although the journalists were acquitted, the case was reviewed by the court of cassation and referred back to the Bolzano city tribunal. In a statement, press freedom organisation Article 19 said criminal defamation provisions in Italy’s Penal Code were “incompatible” with international standards of freedom of expression.
