Internet Censorship

ysabel

/ˈɪzəˌbɛl/ pink 5
#1
After seeing Hybrix's thread on facebook page ban by Iran, it reminded me of a recent article I read about Internet Censorship. Basically it says that censorship used to be easy to spot (ex: China blocking youtube or prohibits anything on the Tianenmen square; same with NK blocks) but governments and commercial firms are getting savvier about the internet and censorship has become more subtle. What would be a slow website could be an accidental glitch or something else....intentional. So some people launched a web site (Herdict) to study and "reveal" these things.

It also says that it's not just governments that do censorship but private corporations or even your very own internet service provider!

The Censors Right Here at Home

A new Web site now promises to add some much-needed data to what's so far been mainly anecdotal evidence. The Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University has for years produced reports on filtering practices by country. In March it launched Herdict (a combination of "herd" and "verdict"), a Web site that uses the power of crowd sourcing to produce just-in-time data about what's blocked and what's not. Users report sites that are unavailable or slow. This information appears in Herdict's "herdometer"—a kind of annotated map of the world that reveals online censorship as it unfolds. Incoming reports pop up in windows across the map.

When China (once again) began blocking YouTube back in March over video of Tibetan protests, Herdict was among the first to know as reports came flooding in from the field. Another test came in March, when the popular muckraking Web site Wikileaks landed on Australia's list of censored sites. Wikileaks became suspiciously inaccessible for a few hours that same week. Users from across the world barraged Herdict with hundreds of reports. As it turned out, Wikileaks was down for maintenance—but the false alarm served as proof of the integrity of Herdict's reporting system.

Herdict's creator, Jonathan Zittrain, believes that the Web site will help uncover subtle forms of censorship in the West—not by governments, but by commercial firms. Internet service providers and Web sites are continually making decisions about what makes it onto the Internet and what doesn't—largely behind closed doors, and not always in the public interest. In Britain, for instance, service providers formed the Internet Watch Foundation, a private nonprofit that informs them of which sites host online gambling, hate speech and child pornography. This self-policing has headed off legislation, but very little is known about what lands on Internet blacklists.

Activists worry that such unmediated systems for monitoring the Web can be abused, mainly by mission creep, and that the public would be none the wiser. "Once you've built that infrastructure," says Zittrain, "you see it starting to get used for other things." ISPs in several countries, including Britain, have already begun blocking the Pirate Bay, the well-known Swedish file-sharing site in Stockholm, whose founders were handed prison sentences in April for stealing intellectual property. But they've appealed, arguing that they were only serving as a directory for downloading sites and thus weren't breaking the law; last year ISPs won a ruling in Italy against the music industry.

It's still early, but Herdict may also detect if and when service providers begin violating "Net neutrality" rules by restricting or slowing down access to Web sites depending on which ones they do business with. Herdict is also good at revealing cases of geolocational filtering, such as when YouTube blocks content critical of Thai royalty specifically in Thailand. One of the most inaccessible sites, Herdict has found, is the Australian Broadcasting Corp., which, for copyright reasons, prevents users outside Australia from viewing videos online. In time, Herdict may wake up Westerners to the censorship in their backyards.


URL: Technology: Internet Filtering Processes | Newsweek Technology | Newsweek.com
 

ExpectantlyIronic

e̳̳̺͕ͬ̓̑̂ͮͦͣ͒͒h̙ͦ̔͂?̅̂ ̾͗̑
#2
Hopefully people will be watchful for this sort of stuff. I've considered before that ISPs could block the websites of their competitors and those of their parent companies, and it seems like something that should preemptively stopped imho, via net neutrality legislation.
 

Merc

Certified Shitlord
V.I.P.
#3
Like EI, I hope people will be watchful of this sort of thing. Censorship is just something I can't stand period and to know that this crazy sort of censoring happens behind the scenes really angers me.
 

pro2A

Hell, It's about time!
#4
Censorship is one of those things that irk me. It's basically a restriction on the free exchange of ideas and free speech. Something in America that is a protected right. You can already see it happening in certain aspects of our society with movie and game ratings. The internet could be pretty easy to censor and I'm sure it happens.

Shit I know AOL used to ban gun websites... so if a company can do it, the government can too.
 

Mirage

Administrator
Staff member
V.I.P.
#5
This issue has come up recently in Europe. While I disagree with censoring opinions, I do agree with preventing outright illegal activities. Seriously though, censoring the internet is not necessarily censoring free speech. There is legal precedent for blocking torrent sites and file sharing sites already. It just hasn't been tested yet. Is seizing illegal drugs at sea ports unconstitutional? Then what would be wrong with preventing illegal digital media from being brought into the US through the internet?

Personally I would be in full support of a nationwide censoring/block of torrent, file sharing and illegal download sites. I'd back it 100%. It's about time cheapskates stop driving up the cost of media for everyone else by pirating it.

I realize it could set a bad precedent but I'd still support it in this case. This is one issue where me and Joe Biden are on the same page. :)
 
Last edited: