Censoring Of Internet Is 'Spreading Like Virus'

The Telegraph (UK) ^ | 6-7-2007 | Rihard Spencer

[blam]

Censoring of internet is 'spreading like virus'

By Richard Spencer in Beijing
Last Updated: 1:38am BST 07/06/2007

Dozens of countries are copying China's methods of censoring the internet, Amnesty International said yesterday.

In advance of a live webcast to discuss internet freedom, Amnesty gave warning that censorship was a "virus" that was infecting countries round the world.

Tim Hancock, Amnesty's international campaigns director, said: "The 'Chinese model' of an internet that allows economic growth but not free speech or privacy is growing in popularity, from a handful of countries five years ago to dozens of governments today who block sites and arrest bloggers."

China's 144 million internet users face the most sophisticated controls in the world. Software filters hundreds of millions of emails, web-pages, and mobile phone text messages for key words that trigger either automatic blocks or further investigation by censors.

In addition, internet companies in China, including overseas firms, have to operate systems of self-censorship. The Chinese government claims that the rules are in line with international norms for countering crime such as pornography, but does not deny that they also cover political activity.

Shi Tao, an award-winning reporter on a central Chinese newspaper, is serving 10 years in jail for sending details of one censorship order to Human Rights in China by email.

His details were handed over to police by the American internet firm Yahoo!. Amnesty said such practices could change the internet "beyond all recognition" as they are taken up by other countries.

It cited research by an academic study group, the Open Net Initiative, that at least 25 governments employed filtering for censorship. They included Iran, Burma, and Saudi Arabia but also Western-oriented democracies such as India and South Korea.

The webcast discussion will feature Martha Lane-Fox, the dotcom entrpreneur, and Jimmy Wales, the founder of Wikipedia, the internet encyclopedia, which is one of thousands of sites permanently blocked in China.

[period end of story]

Thank gawd for the internet; while we still have it as free as we do.

[peteram]

His details were handed over to police by the American internet firm Yahoo!

What the?!?! Why would an American company rat on an international journalist like that? Would Yahoo get into trouble with the ChiComs if they don't?

[IllumiNaughtyByNature]

___________________________________________________________

Comment #3 removed by moderator

___________________________________________________________

There's no censoring of the internet? What?

/h

[Tainan]

account banned or suspended

I have no idea what you're talking about...

[MrEdd]

Are you two logged on?

[Paperdoll]

>Why would an American company rat on an internaltional journalist like that?<

Uh, because Communism is thicker than water?

[backtothestreets]

Amnesty International, the same group that criticizes our incarceration of criminals and states that employ the death penalty in capital crimes.

While I dislike censorship, I respect the right of each nation to self-govern. The exception would be if a nation were threatening another nation. Leave China to do what they will and leave the USA to do as we will.

[Cold Heart]

I started using Scroogle a couple of days ago after I read a posting here on FR about Google (and Scroogle).

[listenhillary]

[timm22]

While I dislike censorship, I respect the right of each nation to self-govern. The exception would be if a nation were threatening another nation. Leave China to do what they will and leave the USA to do as we will.

I can respect that position so long as the country in question is democratic. When a nation is not democractic, I challenge whether or not "self-governing" is really going on.

For the people of China to choose not to use Wikipedia is one thing...a small clique of Communist officials imposing that choice on the Chinese masses is a different matter.

[BlazingArizona]

While I dislike censorship, I respect the right of each nation to self-govern.

As a libertarian, I count Internet censorship as a good thing because it presents an irresistible challenge to hackers. Instead of wasting their time on Sudoku tournaments and Everquest marathons, it puts them to work inventing new ways to encrypt information and make life hell for those who would suppress free speech. Even here in the land of the free, hackers have methodically and within days broken every attempt by the entertainment industry to impose DRM on our media formats.

[IllumiNaughtyByNature]

There was a surge that caused my beeber to get stuned. I’m all right now. :o)

[AnotherUnixGeek]

While I dislike censorship, I respect the right of each nation to self-govern.

Me too, on both counts. I look forward to the day when China is able to "self-govern", instead of laboring under the rule of a gaggle of Communist dictators and censors.

[TheBethsterNH]

LOL....censorship? No not here

[backtothestreets]

"When a nation is not democractic, I challenge whether or not "self-governing" is really going on."

Even the most tyrannical of governments draws it power from the people. Hitler rose to power in a democracy, as did Mussolini.

The Communist governments of East European nations fell to the will of the governed before they became western style democracies. Once enough citizens of a nation rise up against tyranny, the tyranny cannot survive. The required number and circumstance differs from nation to nation.

I don't care for the present government of Iran, but do respect Iranians for instilling a form of government of their choosing that replaced the rule of the Shah.

If we succumb to way of thought that one nation has the right to invoke a form of government upon another, we must realize that we open our own nation to such influence by other nations.

China will bend, but it will bend from within. External pressure will only stiffen resistance to change.

[timm22]

If we succumb to way of thought that one nation has the right to invoke a form of government upon another, we must realize that we open our own nation to such influence by other nations.

Let me make it clear that I am not advocating a policy of forcing regime change on countries at the drop of a hat. That presents a number of practical and moral difficulties. I don't see any problem, however, with using persuasion and peaceful support to help countries change from within.

Of course, to be consistent I have to be open to persuasion and peaceful intereference from outside countries into my own as well. I don't have a problem with that. If a Canadian wants to tell me why socialized medicine would great for America, I'll simply tell him why he's wrong. It might bug me, but in the end I recognize his right to voice his opinion. I wouldn't even think of trying to get the government to censor his message.

China will bend, but it will bend from within. External pressure will only stiffen resistance to change.

You may be right. Of course, given that the Chinese government is so afraid of external pressure that they must censor the internet suggests otherwise.