Burma’s junta can’t escape from the net

By Tsering

Flickr Creative Commons | Preetam Rai

By Phoebe Kennedy | The Independent | September 14, 2010 

Cyber-activists plan to scrutinise the country’s elections

Burma‘s military rulers won’t be inviting foreign observers to monitor November’s general election – a poll already dismissed as a sham by Western governments – but the country’s network of bloggers and “citizen journalists” is planning to do the job for them.

Despite internet censorship and harsh punishments for those caught criticising the junta online, Burma has a lively cyber community of bloggers and Facebookers who believe the internet is the strongest force for change in a country which has been locked under military dictatorship for half a century. The 7 November election won’t be free or fair – senior general Than Shwe has already seen to that by bankrolling a huge proxy party stuffed with ex-military candidates, while intimidating and financially squeezing the small opposition parties which have dared to stand.

But gathered in an internet café in central Rangoon, a group of young cyber-activists say they are taking the vote seriously, even if the result is a foregone conclusion.

“The regime is going to keep power after the election – we all know that – but boycotting the election will not help. We need to grab any opportunity to bring change,” said Aung, a 27-year-old female blogger and author of the popular Burmese-language blog “Me and My Stuff”.

Optimistic and sometimes painfully idealistic, the bloggers are strongly opposed to the government but are fed up with what is written about Burma from outside the country: media reports, blogs written by political exiles and human rights websites are all damning of the junta but offer nothing positive, they say.

“They are just attacking the regime and nothing else,” said Eugene, a 30-year-old blogger. “They don’t show us a way out. They talk about the problems but not the solution – many people are searching for more, and we want to give them that.”

Like everyone under the age of 38 in Burma, none of the bloggers has voted before. The last national election in 1990 was won overwhelmingly by Nobel Peace Prize-winner Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy, but the generals overturned the result.

Despite their inexperience of democracy, the bloggers see their role as educating and informing.

“We want to explain how the election will work,” said “Timpler” the cyber name of a 30-year-old IT consultant and father of two. “I already post information about political parties, the election commission and other things about politics. Some people can be quite outspoken, making fun of the government politicians, or saying that they are lying.”

On election day itself, the bloggers plan to spread out across Rangoon and other cities and towns to create an network of election monitors.

“Our role as bloggers, or CJs (citizen journalists) will be to individually monitor the election,” said Aung. “We plan to organise ourselves to phone in from the polling stations and use SMS and Twitter to get information out and to say whether the voting is free. This as our responsibility.”

The bloggers are well aware of the risks. Fellow blogger Nay Phone Latt was arrested in early 2008 and sentenced to 12 years in prison for breaking the Electronics Act. The 30-year-old was a prominent blogger during the September 2007 “Saffron Revolution” and documented the uprising led by Buddhist monks and its violent aftermath, in which dozens of peaceful protesters were shot dead.

Nay Phone Latt, named this year as one of Time magazine’s 100 most influential people, is serving his sentence in the remote Hpa’an prison in eastern Burma. His family is able to visit him occasionally, but the only communication he now has with his online community is by hand-written letter.

The bloggers plan to be careful. Their individual blogs can be easily traced to them, so they may use a group blog such as Burmese Bloggers without Borders, the site they set up in 2007 to record the uprising. The regime has tried to block blog sites inside Burma and they cannot always be viewed. But the bloggers say the government’s haphazard approach to controlling the internet and their own superior technical knowledge keep them a step ahead.

“We can get around their controls and blocks, it’s easy for us. We use anonymity software and proxy servers outside the country. That’s just natural for us,” said Aung, an English language graduate and IT trainer. The bloggers’ hope for the election is that a civilian-fronted government will bring some new freedoms, small cracks in the system that can be wedged open by their drive and activism.

“There will be no revolution, but even a little change will be good for us,” said Aung. “We don’t want to be politicians, we see ourselves as social activists. We believe in the power of new media to make a difference in our country.”

From the blogs

Simple loss of faith, February 2009

We no longer have faith in the government, the education system and the health-care system, etc. A visit to any government office will require a string of briberies to get things done, starting from the lowest-rank. Many educators and health practitioners have traded in their sense of integrity in exchange for the pursuit of materialistic goals or simply the need of survival. Schools have lost their essence of education and nurturing. Our educational certificates no longer hold much worth. People no longer have a sense of pride at being “educated”. Corruptions and lies have crept into Burma over the decades and slowly but surely, settled into the daily lives of our people.

Past is haunting, present is daunting, July 2008

So, what is the present situation in Burma now? Burmese civilians did try their best whenever the circumstances favoured. Then military regime has repeatedly tortured and killed whomever is against them. Many families were broken and destroyed under this oppression. Mothers are crying. Sons are dying. Political prisoner are lying in the darkness. Political crisis makes ever-deepening social crisis and in turn it’s causing political unrest again. Moreover, Nargis cyclone pushes Burma to the edge of the worst. Everything seems hopeless and unimaginable what would happen to worrisome and desperate 50 million souls. Will it be another revolution? Will it be another cyclone to make us sufferer? Will it be another earthquake to punish dictator? Will it be any betterment? Will it be even worse? One thing for sure is present is daunting.

All of Burma is a prison, June 2008

Why is my brother in Insein [prison]? On Feb. 15, the military raided the offices of the Myanmar Nation and took my brother, the weekly journal’s editor in chief, to jail. His crime? Possession of a UN report on the military’s brutal crackdown on last September’s demonstrations by monks and democracy activists – known around the world as the “Saffron Revolution”.

My brother’s name is Thet Zin, and he is one of hundreds of Burmese citizens who struggle to tell the truth about what is happening in their country – whether through traditional forms of journalism or through the internet – under threat of arrest or worse by the military regime. Along with my brother, his office manager, Sein Win Maung, was also arrested.

Source: Burmese Bloggers w/o Borders

Cuban blogger Sanchez calls media prize a ‘shield’

By Tsering

Flickr Creative Commons | Jared Tarbell

AFP | September 5, 2010

HAVANA — Cuban blogger Yoani Sanchez said winning the media watchdog IPI prize of World Press Freedom Hero is a “protective shield” that will help her break “the wall of censorship,” she told AFP Sunday.

“For someone who three years ago started opening cracks in the walls of censorship, my first feeling is that of enormous gratification,” Sanchez said of the award she was given Friday.

The recognition from the Vienna-based International Press Institute, which hailed her defiance of press restrictions and commitment to free speech, is “also a shield to keep daring” to put out news from the closeted Communist isle.

Sanchez began her blog Generation Y, which now counts over one million readers, in 2007. However, access to the site was banned in Cuba in 2008.

To bypass this, Sanchez, who celebrated her 35th birthday Saturday, emails her comments to friends abroad who post her notes on the Internet.`

In 2008, Time Magazine in the United States named her one of the 100 most influential people. The following year, her blog was listed as one of the 25 best blogs of the year by the magazine.

The future of Cuba is “where the power of the Internet can be used to promote freedom of expression,” Sanchez told AFP, adding that the IPI prize was an additional “incentive” to keep going.

“Gradually the circle of censorship is in the process of breaking down. I am very happy. I will continue,” she said.

Alison Bethel McKenzie, director of the Vienna-based International Press Institute, said Friday that Sanchez’s “tremendously important work provides a glimpse into what is otherwise a closed world.”

She “represents a future where the power of the Internet can be harnessed to promote free speech,” McKenzie said in a statement.

Harassed and beaten on separate occasions, Sanchez has noted on her blog that she is constantly watched by state security agents.

But she refuses to stop writing: “If you are insulted by the mediocre, the opportunists, if you are slandered by the employees of the powerful but dying machinery, take it as a compliment,” she has written.

Google, Skype targeted in India security crackdown

By Tsering

Flickr Creative Commons | McKay Savage

 By Erika Kinetz | Associated Press | September 2, 2010

MUMBAI, India — India has widened its security crackdown, asking all companies that provide encrypted communications — not just BlackBerry-maker Research In Motion — to install servers in the country to make it easier for the government to obtain users’ data. That would likely affect digital giants like Google and Skype.

“People who operate communication services in India should (install a) server in India as well as make available access to law enforcement agencies,” Home Secretary G.K. Pillai told reporters. “That has been made clear to RIM of BlackBerry but also to other companies.”

On Monday, India withdrew a threat to ban BlackBerry service for at least two more months after RIM agreed to give security officials “lawful access” to encrypted data.

Indian officials have for some time also been concerned about Google and Skype, neither of which maintains servers in India. Google has an Indian unit, but Gmail is offered by Google Inc., a U.S. company subject to U.S. laws. Luxembourg-based Skype has no India operations.

India began a sweeping information security review after the November 2008 terror attack in Mumbai, which was coordinated with cell phones, satellite phones and Internet calls. Officials are also eager to avoid any trouble at the Commonwealth Games, a major sporting event to be held in New Delhi in October.

At the same time, India seems to be gaining confidence in its own attractiveness as a market, taking a tougher stance with international companies, not just in telecommunications — where it is the world’s fastest-growing major market — but also in mining and nuclear energy.

“Our stand is firm. We look forward to get access to data,” Home Minister P. Chidambaram told reporters. “There is no uncertainty over it.”

The U.N. technology chief expressed support for the Indian demand on Thursday. Hamadoun Toure, secretary-general of the International Telecommunication Union, told The Associated Press in an interview that officials fighting terrorism had the right to demand access to users’ information.

RIM maintains that the geographic location of a server has no bearing on a government’s ability to crack encrypted data.

But placing a server in India does allow the government to access user content more easily, using Indian laws, rather than waiting for the cooperation of a foreign company or security agency, Indian experts say.

“The moment you will be in Indian land, you will be able to be controlled by the government’s ruling,” said Rajesh Chharia, president of the Internet Service Providers Association of India. “National security is supreme over privacy.”

He said there have been conflicts over data access in the past.

“Right now the server is located outside India. And despite our best efforts to require them to access data, they say we are not governed by your system, we will not be providing it to you,” Chharia said.

He said the government wants everyone — including RIM, Skype, Google, Nokia and MSN Hotmail — to give Indian security agencies more access to their user content.

Skype, Google and Microsoft all said Thursday they’ve yet to receive any notification from the Indian government.

Nokia has already agreed to place a server in India by Nov. 5.

The government says BlackBerry is exploring the possibility of installing a server in India, as part of ongoing negotiations that narrowly avoided a ban on its services on Aug. 31.

One possible compromise could be to set up a BlackBerry Messenger server in India for instant messaging, but keep key corporate enterprise e-mail servers abroad. BlackBerry is eager to convince corporate users that its enterprise e-mail will remain the gold standard for security, despite pressure from governments in Asia and the Middle East, which fear super-encrypted communications could be abused by militants.

Pankaj Mohindroo, president of the Indian Cellular Association, whose members include Nokia and Motorola, said Indian telecom laws are ambiguous, but can be interpreted to mean that all service providers must place servers in India.

He added that users should have faith the Indian government won’t abuse its privileges.

“Interception here is done after clearance by high levels,” he said. “Consumers should never worry some junior police officer is snooping their data. It’s rarely done, and it’s done with very good purpose.”

Looming behind the fight is a sense that India wants the same level of access granted other countries like China.

Google India spokeswoman Paroma Roy Chowdhury said Google does provide user content to law enforcement agencies, but only in exceptional circumstances. All requests are reviewed by an internal committee at Google, she said.

“There have been requests from law enforcement agencies,” she said. “These are reviewed on a strictly case-by-case basis. Only in exceptional circumstances — when there is a threat of large-scale human loss, like a bomb threat — is the content made available.”

According to Google’s website, India made 1,061 requests for user data in the second half of 2009, the most after Brazil, the U.S. and Britain. It did not disclose numbers from China because “Chinese officials consider censorship demands as state secrets.”

Google did not disclose how many requests were granted.

Skype spokeswoman Eunice Lim said by e-mail from Singapore that the company “cooperates with law enforcement agencies as much as is legally possible.”

Skype uses local servers in China and has said on its blog that chat messages into and out of China may be monitored and stored by local authorities. In places like China — where it works with a local partner, Tom Online Inc., and distributes modified Skype software — it complies with local, rather than Luxembourg, law in making data available to security agencies.

“This means there is a possibility that your communications and personal data could be stored, monitored, or blocked and made available to authorized local parties, for instance law enforcement, subject to the local legal standards,” Skype says on its website.

In 2008, a Canadian researcher discovered that the Chinese version of Skype communications software was snooping on text chats that contained certain keywords, including “democracy.”

However, Skype voice calls between computers are encrypted, much like BlackBerry e-mails, and it’s not clear what access law enforcement would gain even if Skype placed a server in India.

Associated Press writer Raphael Satter contributed to this report from London.

It’s not the Kremlin

By Tsering

Flickr Creative Commons | Josh Berglund

By A.S. | The Economist | August 25, 2010 

A.S. appears courtesy of Global Voices Online, an international community of bloggers

THIS summer Russians faced several state attempts to “filter” (selectively block) websites. And as in many other things, Russia has gone its own way with a slightly more complicated technique: regional filtering.

There are two ways to control the internet. You can influence the companies and bloggers who use the web, or you can muck with the architecture of the web itself to block or monitor traffic. China does both. Russia, so far, has leaned on websites and telecoms operators using its criminal code, and encouraged groups of like-minded citizens to nudge the online conversation in directions the Kremlin finds pleasing. Until now, few websites have been blocked altogether in Russia.

But this year three such cases were identified. In each, the site was blocked only within a certain region. On July 16th, the city court of Komsomolsk-on-Amur obliged Rosnet, a local internet provider, to ban YouTube and the Internet Archive, among other sites. The court was worried about far-right extremist material that can be found on the sites; it is the country’s first YouTube ban. The decision has not been enforced. For similar reasons in late July, a regional court in Ingushetia forced a local provider to block LiveJournal, Russia’s most popular blogging site. And in August in the Tula region, the state-controlled local telecoms operator temporarily blocked the website of Tulksiye Priyanki, an independent regional news portal.

In each case, the region used internet-protocol or “IP” blocking, a straightforward way of preventing anyone within a certain network — in this case those of the regional providers — from viewing content at specific address. This could be described as an inefficient method, since it can be sidestepped with a proxy server, which mimics a location outside of the network.

But regional filtering is in many ways more efficient than national filtering. First of all, it attracts less media attention and is easier to hide. Even if the filtering is exposed it’s easy to say the site was inaccessible due to technical reasons. Second, regional blocking affects the target group only.

In Ingushetia and Khabarovsk the prosecutor’s office requested the filter. In Khabarovsk, the provider exposed the court’s decision and appealed it. It is likely that the higher court will overrule the lower court’s decision. In Ingushetia, the block on LiveJournal lasted for 17 days; it was removed as soon as several influential online media outlets wrote about it. In Tula it was allegedly the governor of the region, irritated by the website’s criticism, who ordered the block; Tulksiye Prinanki had already mirrored its site at blogger.com.

This news is both discouraging and encouraging. It proves that there’s room for internet censorship wherever a political power is aligned with a network. At a national level, Russia prefers internet monitoring to internet filtering; at a local level, Russia’s regions may begin to better understand how to manipulate their own networks. But all three attempts were technically crude and quickly detected, and none survived much contact with sunlight. That’s something to be thankful for.

Malawi: Missing out on online technology for transparency

By Tsering

Flickr Creative Commons | Michiel Van Balen

By Victor Kaonga | Global Voices Online | August 16, 2010

If there is one online tool that has attracted many Malawians, then it is Facebook. It appears to be the “in thing” for many who are increasingly accessing the Internet. Then there are tweets. In the 2009 presidential and parliamentary elections, Twitter was heavily used for the first time to share developments in Malawi. The same applies to blogs — at least a hundred and fifty Malawians have personal online diaries. Such new media tools help “net” citizens connect with others throughout the world, enabling online civic engagement. While Malawi seems to be doing well in terms of online social networks, it has yet to make progress in using these tools for transparency and accountability.

The fight against corruption

When Malawi became a multiparty democracy in 1994, words like transparency and accountability became buzzwords in both public and civil society. As a result, the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) was born out of a 1995 constitutional provision that emphasized the need to introduce measures to “guarantee accountability, transparency, personal integrity and financial probity and which by virtue of their effectiveness and transparency will strengthen confidence in public institutions.”

Malawi has made strides in the fight against corruption using several approaches. In Transparency International’s 2009 Corruption Perceptions Index, which measures the perceived level of public sector corruption, Malawi ranked 89 out of 180 countries and territories. This was step up from previous indices.

Some countries have seen technologies for transparency help them in the fight against corruption, strengthening the credibility of governments and helping with their provision of public services. Having picked a lesson or two and joining the information highway, the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) in Malawi recently upgraded its website, a development that the bureau secretary Tokha Manyungwa described as “a big step in enlisting online support in the fight corruption.”

Asked why the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) has taken so long in having a functional website, he said that among other issues, “the main reason was capacity problems in the ACB’s ICT section mainly due to staff turn over in the section.” One can appreciate the challenges with the bureau since this is a government-funded institution where bureaucracy is involved.

The website upgrade means that for the first time, Malawians are able to report any corrupt practices by using the web. However, it is clear that the bureau is far from being online-friendly. Compared to other anti-corruption websites in the sub-Saharan Africa (e.g., the Kenya Anti-Corruption Commission and South Africa’s Special Investigating Unit), the site needs further tools if it is to enable people to easily report on and follow corrupt practices. The site can only be used by those who are able to understand and read English and this may discriminate against those who cannot use the language.

Challenges to technology for transparency

The danger with many other transparency initiatives linked to governments is that their sites contain too much raw information, much of which does not make sense to a common citizen. Some of it is irrelevant, inaccessible, irregular and inaccurate. From what I know about people in Malawi, few people can manage to read through large amounts online information. This would therefore not only affect participation of the people in the fight against corruption but also kill the transparency initiative.

According to the Malawi Communications Regulatory Authority (MACRA), Internet penetration is growing by the day through hot-spot services by ISPs and mobile phone operators who have since introduced affordable internet services. Still, the Internet is a new development in Malawi.

Apart from procedural issues regarding technological initiatives, there is also a problem with what I would call “Internet will.” There are still many public servants who have yet to appreciate the role the Internet and new media play for development, let alone transparency. For instance, the Malawian government began its Government Wide Area Network (GWAN) project in 2003, but the project is not yet fully functioning. The GWAN’s main objective is to provide government officers with a computer network that is secure and available at all times in order for the officers to access relevant information in a cost effective manner that will save government hard-earned money. This is supposed to be at the center of the government’s administrative system.

At a broader level, technology for transparency projects will have to deal with Malawi’s current level of e-readiness, which is understandably low. According to a study published by the United Nations (PDF), Malawi’s national leaders need to “be sure about the state of E-readiness for their own country, what needs to be changed, what barriers exist, and often fail to see the benefits of such changes.” Malawi rates low when it comes to the electronic climate on transparency and electronic awareness of leaders.

Civil society and transparency initiatives

Civil society has a key role in developing and using online technologies to promote transparency, accountability and civic engagement. Unfortunately, this is still work in progress. Sometimes some of the civil society initiatives are seen with suspicion by the government.

The Malawi Economic Justice Network, which is implementing the DFID-funded Governance and Transparency Fund, says it is yet to introduce online technologies to assist in achieving transparency. Launched in November 2008, the project aims at “Strengthening Citizen Demand for Good Governance Through Evidence Based Approaches.” It is not clear what aspects will be online and indeed to what extent.

A media expert and keen follower of the digitalization developments in Malawi, Baldwin Chiyamwaka, said that Malawi is still far away from utilizing online technologies to promote transparency and accountability. He pointed out that “most public institutions have no capacity to develop effective ICT infrastructure,” adding that “there is still a strong inclination and preference for traditional means information management.”

Chiyamwaka, who heads the Media Council of Malawi, observed that Malawi’s legal framework is an obstacle its own right to transparency initiatives. “The current legal framework does not allow sharing of information and let alone making it public. Public policy prohibits publicizing public information,” he noted. Chiyamwaka further explained that a common reality in Malawi is that “most public officers are skeptical about online technologies. They feel it is not safe and secure means of sharing information.” Clearly the battles for transparency in Malawi are big.

Hope for online transparency projects

It has to be noted though that there are multiple challenges in Malawi for technology for transparency projects. Poor Internet infrastructure, technophobia, high connection and connectivity costs, the lack of ICT policy in some countries, and inadequate knowledge and ICT personnel all constitute obstacles to the use of technology for transparency.

Malawi has lack of economic and technical resources in addition to a lack of funding and well trained personnel to creatively keep the transparency battle afloat. A visit to several websites run by civil society organizations involved in transparency, civic engagement and election issues reveals frequent lapses in updating the content of the sites, which is linked to inadequate funds and the shortage of personnel.

There is need to promote usage of online technologies in the country, especially among top public servants and professionals in the civil society. One may find it disappointing to see how little or inadequate information about Malawi is available online. Malawians have a free online environment where issues of control and censorship do not really arise as it is in some countries. On this, Global Voices co-founder Ethan Zuckerman strongly advised Malawians to speak out using online tools on issues that affect them and are about Malawi. He promised to further amplify such voices using Global Voices Online. “Our project seeks to aggregate, curate, and amplifies the global conversation online, shining light on places and people other media often ignore. We would love to get more stories from and about Malawi whether in English, Chichewa or any local language, and we will share such with the rest of the world. Your stories need to be heard,” said Zuckerman in an interview.

Though Malawi is yet to plug into some local and regional online networks, there is hope that with more “Internet will,” it will reap benefits of technologies on transparency. For instance, it can tap into the Africa I-Parliaments Action Plan, an Africa-wide initiative implemented by the UN/DESA to empower African Parliaments to better fulfill their democratic functions by supporting their efforts to become open, participatory, knowledge-based and learning organizations.

Conclusion

Though in many sub-Saharan African countries, it is the NGOs that are pushing for the use of technology in their advocacy for transparency, there is need for other stakeholders — e.g., government, ICT professionals, academicians, etc. — to take the leading role in using the online technologies.

Such challenges impinge on a country’s ability to plug into online technologies that would promote transparency, accountability and civic engagement. It is encouraging, though, that the era of multiparty democracy has ignited people’s desire to start demanding transparency and accountability from those they elected.

The reality is that if an individual or a country is not plugged into the information highway, they only have themselves to blame, as they will belong to the museum of history when it comes to modern communication, aid transparency and accountability.

On Cat Videos and Human Rights

By Tsering

Flickr Creative Commons | Shayan

By Christina Gagnier | Huffington Post | August 15, 2010 

With the giggles of children and adults alike in the background, you know what’s coming. Instantly, you hear a recognizable ballad and there appears a captive feline dancing, or for the more technically-inclined in video editing, singing along.

This is the “cat video” we have probably all seen some version of, whether emailed from a bored co-worker or our grandmother. While these videos are ridiculous by their very nature, protection of the vehicle by which these “cat videos” are disseminated is the same protection through which we can preserve something much greater: human rights online.

Hang with me for just a moment.

There is a gaping void in international human rights law concerning the Internet. A lack of treaty law as well as customary international law concerning human rights in the online world leaves those who are denied basic freedoms very little to turn to. While principles protecting free expression are codified in both the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the concept of Internet freedom is unknown in many countries.

In A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace, John Perry Barlow wrote, “We will create a civilization of the Mind in Cyberspace. May it be more humane and fair than the world your governments have made before.” In 2003, the first World Summit on Information Society (WSIS) convened with 175 countries. While it failed to come to an agreement on a framework for global Internet governance, what it did accomplish was to set out a general statement, a Declaration of Principles, that stated: “We reaffirm, as an essential foundation of the Information Society, and as outline in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, that everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression.”

The United States, throughout its history, has positioned itself as a beacon of democracy, and, particularly, that of free speech and expression. Yet, neither Congress nor the Federal Communications Commission has taken any action to preserve these rights online within our own borders, most notably with the issue we have come to know as network neutrality. Congress has failed to enact legislation that would regulate the behavior of corporations, like Google and Yahoo, abroad when they have taken actions contrary to the civil and political rights of citizens, most notably in China. As the United States has been a leader in “all things democracy,” it is essential for the United States to be a leader in the preservation of human rights online. Human rights online start here.

For those of us who got online in what was relatively early for the Internet in 1994, our experiences were the primitive AOL and chat rooms. Many could not have envisioned an Internet that would enable international awareness of revolution in places like Iran or a place where the virality of content spreads messages across the world within a handful of hours. The Internet we enjoy today was unimaginable to many of us even ten years ago, and to many, the Internet freedom we currently enjoy is unimaginable to our neighbors a few blocks away not to mention millions across the world.

As one of those privileged to live in the United States, one cannot imagine what promise the Internet must hold to someone living under a repressive regime: by opening the eyes of children to an unimaginable wealth of information, by allowing people to learn of rights enjoyed by others abroad or by serving as a cross-section of ideas that may lead to positive economic and social change.

A New York Times article today lauds competition as the answer to our “lack of Internet neutrality” woes. This competition does nothing to ensure that the people who currently lack access to the Internet, all of those on the other side of the digital divide who do not have the luxury of even reading a blog, or the ability of gaining access to the day’s news, something that has become exceedingly difficult due to the shuttering of community newspapers, will be ensured access. These Internet issues do not exist in a vacuum.

In April 2008, while sitting at the Federal Communications Commission hearing on network neutrality at Stanford University, the seats may not have been filled that time with fillers sent by Comcast, but it was apparent that the FCC lacked the wherewithal to take a stand, whatever that may be, on the critical issues underlying content discrimination practices.

Today’s solution proffered, and even accepted by many, is that corporate regulation will do. While we may feel comfort in the shiny veneers of corporate social responsibility measures, self-regulation in many instances has proven itself to be a failed experiment. This piece has no space for the laundry list of failed self-regulatory attempts. With the money that stands to be made from a pay-for-play tiered Internet access scheme, it is doubtful these companies can be relied upon to pave the way for freedom.

Cats have nine lives, but their videos may not. Beyond the silliness of much Internet content, there lies the path for speech and expression, the cornerstones of freedom. You may not want to throw your political confidence in our elected officials and regulatory bodies, but our freedom, as well as basic human rights for those abroad, will not be found in the pocketbooks of Google and Verizon.

Internet is Latest Battleground in Thailand’s Heated Political Landscape

By Tsering

Flickr Creative Commons | SpecialKRB

By Ron Corben | Voice of America | August 11, 2010

The Internet is the latest battleground in Thailand’s stormy political climate as the government attempts to shut down Web sites critical of it and the monarchy. The government is using tough laws to silence online criticism, but net users are finding ways to be heard.

During months of political protests earlier this year, the Thai government shut down thousands of Web sites it said fanned the protests or criticized the royal family.

May protests

The protests, which left 90 people dead and more than 1,400 injured, ended on May 19 when the army dispersed the crowds.

But the battle over the Internet continues.

Internet crackdown

Using the Computer Crimes Act and an emergency decree, the government shuts sites it thinks support the red-shirt protest movement. Media rights groups say more than 50,000 Web sites have been closed.

Chiranuch Premchaiporn is a director with Prachatai.com, an on-line news site the government shut down in April. A big concern for the government apparently was the site’s discussion boards.

She says Prachatai shut the discussion board in July. Chiranuch faces charges under the Computer Crimes Act and if convicted could go to jail.

“Even I believe in the freedom of expression or free speech but I understand some limitation and we also set up a kind of system to moderate some content that can be considered violate the rights of the people or violate the law,” Chiranuch said.

Government position

Government spokesman Panitan Wattanaygorn defends the Internet censorship policy.

“The situation under the emergency decree is very different,” said Panitan. “On one hand we still keep the freedom of the media. But on the other hand we do look into certain messages that create tension, confrontation and push people to confront among one another and that activity is monitored.”

A decade ago, it was easier for the government to control the media. TV and radio have long been state-controlled.

And newspapers faced attacks during Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra’s administration earlier in this decade.

Tough to control

Chris Baker, an author and political analyst on Thailand, says new technologies are harder to control.

“In the past the government was able to control all broadcast media very closely and generally could influence the press,” Baker said. “But that situation has totally changed with cable and satellite TV spinning out of control, community radio and the whole Internet as well.”

Prachatai.com is an example of that. Pinpaka Ngamson, an editor for the site, says the government could only shut it temporarily.

“Now it’s not difficult for us to work anymore, we know how to cope with this kind of order from the government,” said Pinpaka. “We just change our server and use another URL [Uniform Resource Locator] and go on with our work.”

Media plea

Thai media commentators have called on the government to rethink on-line censorship. They say it reinforces international opinion that Thailand’s media is increasingly less free.

Supinya Klanarong, a media activist, says the Computer Crimes Act is applied too broadly beyond insults against the royal family. Supinya says more media restrictions have emerged since the anti-government protests ended in May.

“It means a general opposition Web site related to the red-shirt movement or the critics of the government are also being blocked as concern for national security, too,” Supinya said. “So it’s not only about the issue related to les majeste but is also about political Web site in general, especially the dissident point of and the opposition.”

Some of the concerns appear to have been heard.

Improvements

Government leaders say they hope to improve draft legislation on the Internet laws.

Panitan, the government spokesman, says the there is a need to balance security and Internet freedom.

“On the one hand we regulate these activities in such a way that it’s not going to harm our national interests,” Panitan added. “Specific activities may not be allowed to be in those Web sites. But on the other hand we want to keep other communications open.”

But media groups such as the Southeast Asian Press Alliance say the government has been intimidating Web users who engage in “sensitive political discussion”. The group warns that shutting down Web sites may backfire and lead to the radicalization of those who post political comments on-line.

Tibet Steps Up Web Controls

By Tsering

Flickr Creative Commons | SFTHQ

By He Ping & Yang Jiadai | Radio Free Asia | August 2, 2010

HONG KONG—Chinese authorities in Tibet have ordered Internet cafes across the region to finish installing state-of-the-art surveillance systems by the end of the month, industry sources and local media said.

“All the Internet cafes must now install it,” said Chen Jianying, head of the customer service department of the industry group Internet Cafes Online.

“This is a nationwide policy which is part of the implementation of the real-name registration system,” Chen said.

According to a report carried on the official China Tibet News website last week titled “Long-range Surveillance of the Internet,” all computers installed in enterprises that offer services to the public must install the system.

The proprietor of an Internet cafe in the Tibetan capital, Lhasa, which is still under tight security following widespread Tibetan unrest beginning in March 2008, confirmed the scheme is already in full swing.

He said he had already been to the police station for training in how to run the system.

“The system should be up and running now,” the business owner said. “I heard the technical people saying that the last time I attended a meeting.”

“It’s pretty convenient because they can configure it directly from higher up if the guidelines change.”

He said the new system will mean tighter online controls.

“If there is something that is being controlled, there’s no way anyone will get to see it. It’s definitely a tighter form of control,” he said.

The China Tibet News website also reported that the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR) government has already inaugurated its long-range surveillance system.

Calls to the cultural department of the TAR government went unanswered during office hours Friday.

Youth ‘guidance’

Local media also reported that the department has dispatched engineers throughout Tibet to install the new system in individual Internet cafes, and to train business owners and technical staff in its operation.

Funding is already in place for the project, and all Internet cafes in the region are now effectively implementing a real-name registration system.

Under the nationwide scheme, which took effect Aug. 1, second-generation identity cards belonging to the person using the Internet must be swiped to allow online access. Viewed content can then be traced back to that identity, using the the surveillance system.

One of the touted benefits of the scheme is that it aims to prevent minors from accessing inappropriate content online.

But Zhang Tianliang, an electronic engineer and professor at George Mason University, said he believes there is another motive behind the move.

“There has to be a question mark over why the government is installing such a surveillance system in Tibet right now,” Zhang said.

“The Chinese Communist Party has always used cleaning up pornography as an excuse.”

Retired Nanjing University professor and civil rights activist Sun Wenguang agreed.

“You can’t control young people on the Internet,” Sun said. “Of course their parents can exercise appropriate guidance.”

“The starting point of the whole real-name registration policy is that they are afraid that [viewers] will see content from outside China, content that they are trying to block,” he added.

“Real-name registration will limit the amount of external information that young people are able to see, and I think that is undesirable.”

Original reporting in Mandarin by He Ping and Yang Jiadai and in Cantonese by Hai Nan. Translated from the Chinese and written in English by Luisetta Mudie.

Court orders YouTube and four other sites blocked over “extremist” content

By Tsering

Flickr Creative Commons | Howard Lifshitz

Reporters Sans Frontieres | July 30, 2010

Reporters Without Borders condemns the draconian and disproportionate ruling issued by judge Anna Eisenberg in the Russian far-east city of Komsomolsk-on-Amur on 16 July ordering local Internet Service Provider RA-RTS Rosnet to block access to video-sharing website YouTube and four other websites from 3 August onwards.

YouTube is to be blocked because of a nationalist video called “Russia for the Russians,” which is on a list of extremist content banned by the justice ministry. The other four sites – three online libraries (Lib.rus.ec, Thelib.ru and Zhurnal.ru) and Web.archives.org, which keeps copies of old or suppressed web pages – are to be blocked for having copies of Adolf Hitler’s “Mein Kampf.”

“This unilateral decision, blocking entire websites instead of targeting the offending web pages, violates freedom of information and could affect all of Russia’s Internet users,” Reporters Without Borders said. “Russia’s laws on extremism are much criticised because they are used arbitrarily and because they can have such dire consequences as the blocking of independent websites.”

The press freedom organisation added: “There are other mechanisms, envisaged in YouTube’s user conditions, for obtaining the withdrawal of videos that pose a problem. Why did the prosecutor take this case directly to court? Why didn’t he just contact YouTube’s moderators or those in charge of the online libraries to request withdrawal of the offending content?”

The head of the Russian ISP, Alexandre Ermakov, said he would appeal against the ruling and would not execute it because, in his view, he did not have the right to restrict access to information in the absence of any violation of the user conditions of the service offered. He added that he proposed several ways for filtering out access to the offending content, without blocking the entire domain name, but the court ignored him.

Describing the ruling as “contrary to the constitution,” Google said the content of the “Russia for the Russians” video could have been reported to the YouTube moderator as a violation of the user conditions.

Reporters Without Borders added Russia to its “Countries under surveillance” list in the March 2010 update of its “Enemies of the Internet” report (http://en.rsf.org/surveillance-russia,36671.html). The Internet became Russia’s freest medium for sharing information after the Kremlin brought the broadcast media under control at the start of the Putin era.

But the Internet’s independence is being threatened by arrests and prosecutions of bloggers and by the blocking of independent websites on the grounds of “extremist” content. The authorities are also themselves now using the Internet extensively for propaganda purposes.

YouTube has a lot of content, including the Russian president’s TV station.

Uyghur Webmasters Sentenced

By Tsering

2010/07/Gusjer1-e1280519957731.jpg

By Mihray Abdilim | Radio Free Asia | July 28, 2010    

HONG KONG—Three webmasters, all members of the Uyghur ethnic minority, have been sentenced to jail for publishing content deemed politically sensitive by the Chinese government, according to a brother of one of the men.

The defendants are Dilshat Perhat, webmaster and owner of Diyarim; Nureli, webmaster of Salkin; and Nijat Azat, webmaster of Shabnam. They were sentenced last week in Urumqi, capital of the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR) in northwestern China.

Dilmurat Perhat said his brother Dilshat Perhat received five years in prison, while Nureli and Nijat Azat received three years and 10 years, respectively, for “endangering state security.”

No official comment or confirmation was immediately available.

The verdicts were handed down in a series of closed trials at the Urumqi Intermediate People’s Court, Dilmurat Perhat said. All three websites publish online in the Uyghur language, spoken by the predominantly Muslim Uyghur ethnic minority.

Dilmurat Perhat, another webmaster for Diyarim who currently lives in England, had recently refused to speak with the media about his brother for fear of creating a more difficult situation for him in custody.

In April, after Beijing appointed Zhang Chunxian the new secretary of the Xinjiang regional committee, the family was visited by Chinese authorities who warned them to “make him shut up or his brother would be lost” in jail.

But after learning of his brother’s sentence and after their father’s recent death in the wake of Dilshat Perhat’s arrest in August last year, he agreed to a telephone interview.

“I have already lost my father and my brother, so now I will speak with the media,” Dilmurat Perhat said.

“To the media I would like to speak for freedom and justice for all Uyghur webmasters. I want the world media and other human rights organizations to call on the Chinese government to free all Uyghur webmasters and journalists.”

A friend of the family, who asked not to be named, said Dilshat Perhat’s mother was unable to attend her son’s trial because she was distraught over her husband’s recent death.

She refused to speak with the media because she remains concerned over her son’s treatment in jail.

Webmasters targeted

The verdicts follow the sentencing last week of another prominent, moderate Uyghur journalist and webmaster for talking to foreign media about July 2009 ethnic riots in Xinjiang which left nearly 200 people dead, according to official estimates.

Gheyret Niyaz was sentenced on July 23 by the Urumqi Intermediate People’s Court to 15 years in prison on charges of “endangering state security” and was given 15 days to appeal.

Niyaz, 51 and a former deputy director of the official Xinjiang Legal Daily, was employed at the official Xinjiang Economic Daily as a journalist at the time of his detention on Oct. 4, 2009.

His family received a warrant for his arrest four days later, relatives have said. Niyaz also served as webmaster and administrator of the Uyghur Online website, run by outspoken Uyghur economics professor Ilham Tohti.

In its 2009 annual report, the U.S. Congressional-Executive Commission on China (CECC) noted that Uyghur Online and its staff had been uniquely targeted after the 2009 violence.

“In spring 2009, authorities shut down the website Uyghur Online, a multi-language news and discussion forum that addressed issues of ethnicity in China, and interrogated Beijing-based scholar Ilham Tohti, who runs the site,” the report said.

“Authorities later detained Ilham Tohti in July after XUAR government chairperson Nur Bekri alleged that Ilham Tohti’s website contributed to incitement of rioting in Urumqi on July 5. Authorities released Ilham Tohti from detention on Aug. 2. The whereabouts of some other Uyghur Online staff members are reportedly unknown.”

Following the region’s July 5, 2009 unrest, Nur Bekri took a firm stance against Uyghur webmasters’ publishing of information related to the incident.

“These websites publish so much bad news about what happened at the Shaoguan Toy Factory between Uyghur and Chinese workers,” he said, referring to a brawl in southern China that left two Uyghurs dead and touched off Uyghur protests in Urumqi.

“They say Uyghur workers died and carry similar kinds of news and this led to the July 5 event in Urumqi.”

Not long after Nur Bekri’s statement, Chinese police began arresting several Uyghur webmasters in Urumqi and other cities in the XUAR.

Simmering tensions

Millions of Uyghurs—a distinct, Turkic minority who are predominantly Muslim—populate Central Asia and the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR) of northwestern China.

Ethnic tensions between Uyghurs and majority Han Chinese settlers have simmered for years, and erupted in July 2009 in rioting that left some 200 people dead, according to the Chinese government’s tally.

Uyghurs say they have long suffered ethnic discrimination, oppressive religious controls, and continued poverty and joblessness despite China’s ambitious plans to develop its vast northwestern frontier.

Chinese authorities blame Uyghur separatists for a series of deadly attacks in recent years and accuse one group in particular of maintaining links to the al-Qaeda terrorist network.