ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> International Law Blogs -> Freedom to Differ

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

International Law

: Freedom to Differ

Censorship workarounds

ADVERTISEMENTS

CNET's Graham Webster explains why he posts censorship workarounds:

Does posting censorship workarounds help the censors? That's the question I've been mulling for the last few days. I asked for your comments, and the verdict is in: Almost no one thinks we should keep these tricks to ourselves. I agree.

I started grappling with this question after I posted a now-defunct workaround for Mainlanders to access the still-blocked Chinese language Wikipedia ...

In the end, however, commenters and colleagues in various branches of the China technology world unanimously responded to my call for comments with support for publishing workarounds. I articulate my argument for posting them at length in my previous post, but for me it comes down to this: As a journalist and member of the online community, I feel it would be unacceptably selfish to keep to myself the means to open information. If I heard about it, it wouldn't be hard for authorities to hear about it. And if they fight back against our workarounds, we'll find more.

I am sympathetic to concerns of those like Ted Chien, but barring any danger to individuals, I think it's more important to share tools to assist in global discussions than to protect them against government detection. This argument holds an embedded assumption that makes me a little uncomfortable: that is, that my U.S.-born affection for absolute freedom of speech is more right than the belief that the government should keep an eye on public discourse.

Why does this make me uncomfortable? As much as I believe the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution has been positive for the United States, a large portion of Chinese citizens do indeed believe that some censorship is necessary, and that the government should do it. Deborah Fallows found in a major public opinion poll that 80 percent of respondents said the internet should not be totally open. Depending on how you ask the question -- say, do you include child porn -- you may get similar numbers from the United States. But data doesn't support the common assumption that Chinese people all want a wide open internet.

I'm going to keep posting workarounds and tell myself that it's for the benefit of people who share my desire to read things from China, not for the sake of promoting my sense that the internet ought to be wide open.

Read more here.

Full post as published by Freedom to Differ on April 15, 2008 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0155 secs (new cache)