Blogging has been a way for people to express their thoughts and opinions. Throughout the years, the issue of freedom has been addressed, over and over again, in many countries, as well as Malaysia. The very controversial issue dwells around this
"Can censorship on traditional media applied on the internet?"
Let's take a closer look at what traditional media are and how censorship applied:
1. Television & Radio
- Delay of transmission
Well, it is almost impossible to have censorship or delay of transmission on the internet. Take the infamous Janet Jackson & Justin Timberlake's wardrobe malfunction incident for example,
Justin Timberlake ft. Janet Jackson - Rock your body
Source: youtube.com
The 'exposure' part is not censored, not cut, and nothing is done even years after the video is uploaded on Youtube.com. This all the more shows the freedom that one can have, in the internet. On the internet, what is done, is done. The censorship that is applied on traditional media, cannot be applied on internet.
Then, we have
2. Magazines & newspaper
- Most publications are self-regulated as most are under surveillance with enforcement of Printing Presses & Publication Act (PPPA), Sedition Act, Internal Security Act (ISA) and so on.
The issue raised then, can PPPA, Sedition Act and ISA be enforced on bloggers?
Apparently the answer is YES.
This is what happened when Raja Petra Kamarudin, a Malaysian blogger who runs the independent news website Malaysia Today blogged about some sensitive issues. (Hamid, 2008)
He has, however, been released several months after that. (Jong, 2008)
So even if he was arrested and jailed, the materials that he wrote, was not taken away from his blog. In other words, as much as power is exercised over him, censorship is not able to take place fully over bloggers. Though stress can be asserted, there is still freedom of speech in the world of blogging.
In addition, Walker (2006) has support this statement well with this, 'Blog is not the only one thing that could spead information. There's also email, websites, community forums, SMS, etc etc ... How many thing they could control?'
In the world that craves for freedom, it is impossible to imposed the old method, to the new trendy media. The features of internet simply do not allow means to restrict freedom. Chapman (1997) stated his point of view intelligently, 'All these features (such as anonimity and encryption)of the internet make censorship technically impossible'. Besides, blocking and censorship is interpreted as damage and error, so how is it possible to censor something that by nature, prevent censorship?
One of the most arguable point for censorship over the web, is to protect the minor against the harmful materials that is easily accessible on the internet. Thus, people tried to 'protect', by rules and laws. This is not applicable as there is just NO same standard for EVERY human being, especially in this whole wide world of internet. There is no way that one standard, can serve the global diversity.
Thus, the ball is in your hand. It is really up to your own that you do not abuse the freedom that is given to you. Yee (1997) has justiied this well, 'the global society that is the Internet has its own rules and its own methods of enforcing them -- rules and sanctions which have been developed over the decades of the Net's existence and which reflect technological and social realities in a way alternatives imposed from outside cannot'.
Blant as it is, there is simply no way that force from 'outside' of the internet, can ruled over internet.
To conclude, I shall end with what the author of 'The Blogging Revolution', Antony Loewenstein has said,
'So the filtering process(from regime) in a place like China is sophisticated to the point where a lot of websites are blocked. People can always find a way around it, and I suppose one of the things that amazed me in the writing of the book was that regimes in some ways are fighting a battle (of restricting freedom of speech online) they can never win. You can block websites, you can put people in jail, you can do all that kind of thing, as they are doing in every country I went to, but ultimately, as clichéd as it might sound, people's freedom will actually speak out in the end, despite all the restrictions that may happen.'
(Loewenstein, 2008)
References:
1. Chapman, G., 1997, Censorship: Opposing Viewpoints, Greenhaven Press Inc, San Diego.
Hamid, J., 2008, Malaysia blogger in jail over sedition charges, viewed 20 June 2009, at http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKKLR29580020080506?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0
2. Jong, R., 2008, Course release of Raja Petra, The new straits time online, viewed 20 June 2009, at http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Friday/Frontpage/20081107100630/Article/index_html
3. Loewenstein, A., & Funnell, A., 2008, The Blogging Revolution, viewed 20 June 2009, at http://www.abc.net.au/rn/mediareport/stories/2008/2351985.htm
4. Walker, P., 2006, Malaysia's Mission Unbloggable, Guardian.co.uk, viewed 20 June 2009, at http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/blog/2006/dec/05/malaysiablogb
5. Yee, D., 1997, Internet censorship: an Australian Press Council Seminar, Electronic Frontiers Australia, viewed 20 June 2009, at http://www.anatomy.su.oz.au/danny/freedom/APCspeech.html
Youtube.com, 2006, Justin Timberlake ft. Janet Jackson - rock your body, viewed 20 June 2009, at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOLbERWVR30
No comments:
Post a Comment