The recent crackdown on bloggers in Malaysia and the debate over lawful internet censorship reminded me of a similar situation that happened in Australia last year. In November 2007, a new legislation was put forth the Federal Parliament to tighten the classification procedures on publications, films and computer games. Federal Attorney General, Phillip Ruddock, says the legislation is aimed to curb materials containing terrorist connotations (ABC, 2007).
However, the government’s move to filter and block any material that it deems as a threat infringes the people’s freedom to information and expression (ABC, 2007). Besides, the nature and level of threat a context has is highly subjective. Is stripping
the fundamental right to freedom of expression and information justifiable in the name of national security? That question is still being debated from time to time.
Australian government tightens censorship laws to curb terrorist threat. (ABC Radio, 2007)
In our Malaysian context, the government has also launched a crackdown on bloggers whom are deemed as a threat to national peace and racial unity. The Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission ordered all 19 of the country's Internet service providers to block the political portal Malaysia Today, a controversial site that boldly criticizes government policies (Lee, 2008). Ironically, the government had pledged to ‘no Internet censorship’ when it launched its Multimedia Super Corridor strategy in 1996 (Lee, 2008).
Controversial political blogger, Raja Petra Kamarudin says the government 'has definitely broke its promises (Lee, 2008)
Although the intention of the government to ‘protect’ the people may be genuine, there should be balanced provisions to ensure that freedom of speech and mainstream popular culture is not impinged. Besides, whether the contents threatens or harms a reader is subjected to his or her own interpretation. There could a hidden ulterior motive of the government to rule out materials that opposes them. After all, Schirato and Yell (2000) have pointed out that the social semiotic approach to communication sees it as a social practise, carried out by social agents within a social context. The meaning making process is not merely text but knowledge driven (Schriver, 1997). Arguably, a person who lost his family member in the 9/11 attack will hold more prejudice against Muslims than someone who has not.
Reference List
Australian censorship laws tightened, Media Report, Radio National, ABC Radio, Melbourne, reviewed 11th November 2008, http://www.abc.net.au/rn/mediareport/stories/2007/1998822.htm
Lee, M.K. 2008, With site blocked, Malaysia seem to break promise, Politics and Law, CNet News, viewed 10th November 2008, http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10030325-38.html?tag=mncol
Schriver, K.A. 1997, The interplay of words and pictures, Dynamics in document design: creating texts for readers, Wiley Computer Publications, New York, Ch. 6, pp. 364-440.
Schirato, T & S. Yell. 2000, Communication and Cultural Literacy: An Introduction, Allen & Unwin, Australia, Chapter 3, pp. 43-65.
No comments:
Post a Comment