Archives

The Internet and Free Expression

Following in the wake of 9/11, federal officials warned the public of terrorists using the Internet for planning and recruitment. The government as well as vigilant Americans mounted a major effort to police the web and billions of taxpayer dollars were spent for interception technology – some found later to be illegal.

For years these warnings by government and groups have permeated the airways and some governments have used this fear to impose censorship and other restrictions on the Internet.

Now, in a recently released report from the International Centre for the Study of Radicalization and Political Violence (ICSR) in London, we are learning that much of that fear was misplaced along with the billions of dollars spent on programs of little or no effect.

The report found that there were only four or five instances in all of Europe where terrorist activities were fostered and brought about solely by information exchange on the Internet. And while ISP’s can and should do more in response to user complaints about radical postings and sites appearing on the Internet, the idea that a government effort to control web content through massive filtering or blockage is misguided.

Nothing in this report will come as much surprise to people of average intelligence who are familiar with the Internet. Most people know that the Internet is like a giant, international bizarre filled with people of various backgrounds and with numerous shops where owners hawk their goods or services. Like any market, there may be hucksters, con artists and other nefarious characters lurking about. And there will most likely be a diverse chorus of political discourse echoing throughout the market. But to close the entire market in an effort to end some of that discourse or to prevent access to bad people just doesn’t make sense.

Unfortunately, some government officials have advocated just that under the pretext of protecting the homeland.

Well a homeland is not a bunch of cities and streets and buildings. A homeland is people - plain and simple. And the best way to protect a homeland is to rely on the people who make up that homeland.

If Service Providers fail to respond to the complaints of Internet users, then government can and should play a role in investigating the content of a particular site. Everyone agrees that there is some content that should never appear on the Internet and we’ve done a pretty good job eliminating things like child pornography from the web.

The Internet has lowered the cost of disseminating information and has fostered more free expression throughout the world. While this remains, for the most part, a very good and desirable condition; we must also acknowledge that some information and expression may be deviant to the norms of a society. We must also be vigilant of the ability some now have to use the Internet as a weapon or a tool for carrying out terrorist plans.

To prevent expression as a way to prevent the possibility that something bad may be posted or planned on the Internet is akin to taping closed the mouths of citizens for fear they may speak something objectionable or hatch some plot.

Maintaining free and unfettered access to information sharing on the Internet will never be as dangerous as censoring information. Once restraints are accepted upon speech, free speech is dead.

Clearly, everyone must accept responsibility for what they say or post on the Internet. Free speech never meant that one was immune from the consequences of what they say or write. But to permit government to block a website or silence a person because they suspect that site or that person may say or write something objectionable cannot be tolerated in a free society.

Archives