Here's an article about Google caving in to pressure from Beijing to restrict content provided on their new chinese portal. Apparently the Chinese government didn't want links to Tianmen square and other "banned" sites to be displayed. Google obeyed and now stands accused by the US democrats of "putting profits before free speech". Don't the democrats realize that in trying to police Google they are impinging on free speech themselves. Google can block/filter/distil/change or do whatever it wants with their site or can they not? Apparently Yahoo and MS have also bowed down to the Chinese. In fact Yahoo went one step further and recently helped the Chinese government track down one of its "miscreants" who accused them of human rights violations.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4672518.stm
In a broader context: Media should be given freedom of expression but policing it cannot be ignored. Imagine if tomorrow the headlines of the ToI erroneously and knowingly said "Pakistan declares war on India". Given its massive circulation it would create immense chaos and probably bring the country to a grinding halt even if there were no war. Should we pardon them saying they can publish what they want or whip them for knowingly disrupting the country? Where do we draw the line between freedom of speech and policing the media for responsible journalism?
No comments:
Post a Comment