Sunday, October 2, 2011

Internet Freedom Blog

Hillary Clinton’s remarks, in Businessweek, regarding the internet were interesting.  Her idea of “Freedom to Connect” is noble and I found it staggering that 1/3 of the world’s population are online.  The power of the internet and social media is immense and as the usage grows so does the needs for rules and regulations.  The progress of democracy and overthrowing an oppressive government were evident through Egypt, and social media played a huge role in this outcome.  The outcome of the rebellion may not have happened, if social media had not played a role.  In the Businessweek article, Clinton argues for the need of helping the citizens of countries who deny access to certain internet sites and social media sites.  One of these countries is China, and while I agree with her stance on promoting democracy I found Clinton’s strong stance on China curious...it’s interesting the United States is attempting to control Chinese policies when they own so much of our national deficit.  China scolded us regarding the reduction of our bond rating and I wonder if they will have an opinion of the United States’ outspokenness of this, as well.  Does anyone else find this intriguing or see America as setting themselves up for trouble? 
The article on Syracuse.com noted that Hillary Clinton and the Obama administrations are spending $25 million (this year) on initiatives designed to protect bloggers and help them get around firewalls in countries that inhibit social media.  The Internet Freedom and Social Media article, has Clinton saying, we won’t have a clear picture of the internet’s role in the recent developments in Egypt and elsewhere until the dust settles, and the data is collected and analyzed,” yet we are throwing $25 million at this initiative?  I could think of ways that money could be better spent…especially until the data is concrete.  I think these comments (if circulated through the mainstream media) would anger Americans.  The idea of internet freedom is a new concept and one likely to be debated.  If a country can control their borders and what happens within them, why is the internet any different?  I understand the argument that the internet allows people access to things outside their country and promotes democracy (which I am for!), but it is also fair to argue the point that a country should be allowed to control what goes on within in it…including internet and access to the global market.  While I am not a proponent of this, I can understand the argument behind it.   

The NPR article notes that some of the technologies used to block internet access are developed in the United States and sold to those countries, wishing to block the access to social media sites and various other internet sites.  Sanctions may be put on U.S. Companies to keep them from selling these technologies.  Other technologies, such as items used for nuclear weapons, are banned as well.  I think regardless of whether or not China or other eastern countries sell these technologies to other countries, America should have sanctions on these items…otherwise we will appear as hypocrites.  This policy arena will have a large impact on the future of the internet and the rights associated with internet access.     

I agree with the CNAS Internet Freedom Report…and defining cyberspace and what can and cannot happen is an important aspect of developing foreign policy, related to the internet.  I think it needs to be expanded beyond the United States and the United Nations should attempt to influence countries to adopt the policies, as well.  It is a global problem needing input from all countries to work. 

The internet is important as our public space, in the United States because of our right to freedom of speech.  It is important to the underlying assumptions of the United States Constitution to preserve Internet Freedom.  Social Media changes our perception of Internet Freedom…anyone has access to large masses of people and can influence the populists at any time. 

Links to Articles:
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-02-16/clinton-to-support-facebook-freedom-fight-censorship.html
http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2011/02/whats_going_on_35.html

2 comments:

  1. Although I understand your point I feel that the government has been exposed in terms of private information and is looking for any excuse to get a control of the information surfing the internet. The internet should not be controlled by the U.S. government. What is the point of the internet if the information is regulated and controlled

    ReplyDelete
  2. I have to admit that our country has a lot to say about controlling policies in other countries around the world. Like our way is the only way that works, so everyone must follow our example. I see your point on this one.

    ReplyDelete