Extremism - Do we Cenosor or Not?

Ever since the internet first came into existence there have been attempts to censor it. A lot of people believe that the internet should be a place where all information is allowed to flow freely. Clearly the governments of most countries do not share this belief. These days the internet is censored to some extent pretty much everywhere. The reasons for this censorship may vary between countries. One reason however is to block sites that belong to terrorist groups and other extremists.

Is this a violation of the freedom of expression or should the censorship continue to occur on extremist sites?

Firstly, I would like to clarify exactly what is meant by extremist groups. Extremism is any ideology or political act that is considered to violate society’s moral standards. In democratic societies, these individuals or groups advocate their view in a dogmatic, violent way which aims to replace democracy with an inflexible authoritarian regime.

With the increase in technology, extremist groups have been able to use the internet as a very powerful tool. It provides the means to reach an international audience, to recruit members and to link extremist groups. It also allows members from around the globe to collaborate making their force even stronger. Besides the internet, the media in general is attracted by extreme terrorist acts, not only because it is their duty to report on any major event but also because the dramatic and spectacular aspect of terrorism fascinates the general public. Today’s terrorists exploit this and act in a way that will attract maximum attention around the world.

Terrorism should not affect freedom of expression and information in the media as this is one of the essential foundations of democratic society. This freedom carries with it the right of the public to be informed on matters of public concern, including terrorist acts and threats, as well as the response by the state and international organisations to them. However people want to feel safe. How far can these groups go before they need to be investigated and shut down? For instance, the Christmas Day bomber, who attempted to blow up a jetliner over Detroit, was recruited via the Internet and trained in just six weeks. Similarly, Philadelphia resident, Colleen LaRose assumed the name Jihad Jane online and used YouTube and other Internet sites to post communications about staging attacks in the United States, Europe and South Asia, in just a few days.

The big question is, “How do we respect individual freedom and access, yet find those who abuse the Internet and stop them before they act, resulting in a life-shattering event?”

If these groups are not censored and are allowed to exist, it does allow governments to access vital information about possible attacks or protests. However, they need to be creative in the way they enforce laws for the small number of people who take advantage of the internet to cause harm. For the rest of us, we need to make sure that the security on our computers is set to censor these sites, especially for the easily impressionable minds of our children.

If only it could be as Rheingold believed, that cyberspace would bring great democracy, equity and eliminate difference. However, even though the methods of communication and interaction have changed, that doesn’t mean that the people who use them have.

Twitter - The New Crisis Platform

It is bragged by news stations everywhere that they are ‘the go to location’ for breaking news as it happens. But they now seem to have some unexpected competition since Twitter arrived on the scene. Originally designed to be a brainstorming medium for board members, Twitter has now become a major social networking site. It allows celebrities to converse with their fans, friends are able to discuss their daily lives and now it has also become a tool in times of crisis.

Twitter provides real time updates, allowing for instantaneous communication. The instantaneous nature of twitter enables detailed reports to be sent many times faster than any news media. For example, during the Black Saturday fires in Victoria the State’s fire communication system broke down leaving society with no credible source of information. Residents, friends of victims and emergency services took to tweeting to find out the danger zones, discover information about family members and friends and help emergency services find out where they were needed most. Similarly, during the Queensland floods and the Los Angeles earthquake twitter was also used in this fashion.

These events have highlighted the idea that society can do it themselves. We supposedly need governments to keep countries in order, ensure safety and provide regulations. However, in times of crisis we are left to fend for ourselves when traditional procedures fail. Consequently, we have found ways to do it more successfully than the media or the government officials. Authorities have been left quite gobsmacked when trying to make sense of how twitter accidentally became a crisis platform and how they should control it. Compared to traditional means of communication, twitter is chaos. It allows huge amounts of messages to flow freely without any form of order. However society found a way to create order out of chaos and gain the information they required. The government is beginning to feel uneasy about the issue. What happens when we all realise that we don’t need them anymore? An article by Alan Smith reported that the U.S. Army released a warning that twitter could be used for terrorism and should be shut down. However they were unable to provide evidence to say that this has been the case.

In addition to crisis management, Twitter has assisted in the organisation of massive groups of people to come together and protest for their cause.

Donna Haraway was right to suggest that new technologies provide fresh sources of power. She saw the potential of these technologies to bring about social change and I believe that it has and will continue to do so. Not only are we living up to the predictions that she made, but her concept of a cyborg can also be seen to exist. A cyborg is defined as a hybrid of machine and organism, a creature of social reality as well as a creature of fiction. Although this definition sounds like a line straight out of a science fiction movie, this theory has merit. It is suggesting that in the technological age, people will be so connected with their technology that they can manipulate it to meet personal or political needs.

It is time for members of society to step up and realise that we have the potential to take care of ourselves, we are obviously perfectly capable of doing so and social media technologies are enabling these ideas to become a reality.