Internet freedom of speech is good for everyone
- Source: The Global Times
- [20:56 May 04 2009]
- Comments
Editor’s note:
Regulations on computer information protection by the Hangzhou municipal government took effect May 1, requiring netizens to register their identity numbers before blogging or posting comments online. The new real name system online has sparked heated discussions among netizens throughout China.
Hangzhou’s problematic new rules
There are some serious problems with the new rules regulating Internet freedom of speech. First of all, many of these regulations are vaguely defined. For instance, the new rules stipulate that it is forbidden to spread rumors, disrupt social order, stir the public to maliciously comment on others, or disclose people’s privacy on the Internet. Is a piece of partly untrue information a rumor? Who has the power to decide what words on the Internet disturb social order and undermine social stability? What counts as “stirring the public to maliciously comment on others?” Are scandals of corrupt officials their privacy? How do we treat the privacy of officials and that of ordinary citizens in a different way? And so on. All this is not clearly detailed, generating a large gray area that prevents netizens and Internet services providers from knowing what to do.
Second, These rules mandate an Internet real name system. Enforcing this system will encounter technical problems. For example, to identify the real identities of netizens, websites have to set up complex procedures and a large database of citizens’ identities. This will increase considerably the difficulty and costs of running websites. How to deal with those who use other people’s names to do postings is another big problem. And it is almost an impossible mission to find out whether information on the Internet, extremely large in quantity, is untrue or libelous.
Lost rights of netizens worrisome
For network administration organizations, it doesn’t matter whether the real name system is adopted or not. They can easily distinguish a netizen’s identity even if he or she is using a fake name to start an online discussion in a messy Internet bar.
However, netizens care a lot about the real name system, because they value anonymous comments and their related rights of expression. They are afraid that the Internet promise of anonymity, which they felt gave them freedom of speech, will be completely taken away.
The virtual world to some degree reflects the real world. Chinese netizens have shown great vigor in fighting against official corruption through the supervision of public opinion. The exposure of lots of inside stories – officials in Wenzhou bought resettlement houses at extremely low prices, a convict from Yunnan Province was beaten to death by his cellmate, officials in Hainan Province traveled abroad with public money and so forth – have led to a new anti-corruption mindset, and brought netizens closer to their rights entitled in the Constitution.
Netizens are not virtual individuals, but own practical rights. The online world, as a part of our everyday life, deserves cautious treatment in legislation and respect in law enforcement.
Purely arguing whether the real name system should be adopted addresses no fundamental problems, but those worries and thoughts toward lost rights of netizens should motivate progress in the supervision of the online world.