There are obviously many ethical, social and moral issues associated with online censorship by the government. First and for most is the limitation it puts on the freedom of expression. Second, it restricts people’s access to materials on the Internet, which is against the Internet’s fundamental idea of sharing. Third, it signifies government’s increasing control over its citizens.
From a government’s standpoint, there are reasons for controlling its citizens’ Internet usage. Social and political instability is a government’s worst nightmare, which is often the result of spreading discontent among the population. As the Internet becomes an increasingly popular tool for people to communicate, it also becomes the breeding ground for such discontent. But if this is a global phenomenon, why are some governments, such as the ones in China and the Arab world, so worried and resort to online censorship while other governments seem less affected? In China, people are mostly aware of government’s tight control over traditional news outlets such as television and newspapers. Therefore, they tend to view the Internet news as more genuine source of information, the less official looking the better. As a result, the government feels increasingly losing control: all their address to outside accusation sounds like cover ups. Sadly, instead of rebuilding the credibility of official news outlets by increasing transparency, the government decided to tighten its control over the online informal news outlets. In the Arab world, the impact of social media poses a more immediate threat to the regimes and the stability of the region. As stated in the article The truth about Twitter, Facebook and the uprisings in the Arab world, pictures and videos posed on social media sites including facebook and twitter have contributed to the revolutions in significant ways. Some people even called the Tunisian revolution “the twitter revolution”.
In order to exercise online censorship, China built the “Great Firewall of China”, which blocks access to facebook, twitter, youtube along with many other sites that contains “sensitive material”. Governments in the Arab world, with less resources, often operates on a smaller scale. The article mentioned above states that, “the Tunisian authorities attempted to harass those posting on Facebook. If they became aware of you on Facebook they would try to divert your account to a fake login page to steal your password.”
Compared to the measures mentioned above, a “more polite” way of exercising Internet censorship is to ask the technology companies to take down materials they deem inappropriate. In my opinion, it would be unethical and immoral for a company to follow these requests. The mission of tech companies should be promoting Internet access not restricting them. If the companies lose their independence from the government, the Internet environment we enjoy today may soon disappear.
Luckily, online censorship measures such as Firewall can never block all Internet traffic. There are tons of tools that can circumvent such restrictions. They are even publicly advertised on Baidu, the Chinese Internet search engine. I think these tools are neither unethical nor illegal. The tools provide services that help their users use the Internet to a fuller extend. Online censorship is about blocking access to certain materials on the Internet not making accessing these materials illegal. Therefore, these circumventing tools are not breaking any laws. I think it is important that governments exercising online censorship understand the unique nature of Internet communication and see it as a channel for listening to their citizens’ concerns, instead of trying to control it with elaborate measures. Technology companies should also play a more active role in defending against limitations of freedom of speech and maintaining a censor-free Internet environment.
xuanyilicse40175 