Should the Internet be censored?
YES Even though the very sound of the word censorship, especially these days, puts worried kinks in my spine. I don't like it, it smacks of totalitarianism and Big Brother's laboured breathing - but I think some form of control is necessary before the Net entangles more than it enlightens. Already, it has spread itself so far, so swiftly that it is no longer the preserve of techo-buffs. When a Hong Kong hair salon goes on-line, as happened last week, it's surely a sign that the Internet has crossed the barriers of geekiness. And if we're all about to go surfing, I'd like to believe that the waters are pretty safe.
At the moment, however, they seem to contain a shark or two. Or perhaps the image should be of sewage seeping through the airwaves, because pornography, especially that relating to paedophilia, is becoming so pervasive that it will soon be what the Internet (nudge, nudge, wink, wink) is best known for. Last December, CompuServe, a worldwide online service with 10,000 Hong Kong subscribers, took it upon itself to shut down access to sex-related newsgroups, after police in Germany complained about their content. There were a number of global protests about this break in transmission although, curiously enough, none came from the children who were being advertised as sexually available. Or, indeed, from the animals which were also involved.
Then there's the miasma of hate which is being filtered through the system. Want to play Achtung Nazi, in which the object is to gas as many Jewish people as possible? Or how about learning to make a cheap little bomb from instructions supplied by a groovy, online Islamic group in San Diego? You could accidentally-on-purpose leave it on the Paris subway which is what worries the French authorities. Or maybe you'd like to post it to Jodie Foster who was subjected to a series of death threats posted on the Internet last year. Poor Jodie - ever the target, it seems, of those wackos out there.
That's the problem, of course. You and I are far too stable to be swayed by such bizarre material, but what about the peculiar people who reside on this planet and who need little encouragement to make life deeply unpleasant for the rest of us? It's the pervasiveness of the Internet which is its asset and its drawback. It's all so very easy, and much though I dislike finding myself on the same side of the fence as Singapore and China, who now require registration of Internet users, there has to be some regulation.
These days people discuss liberty in such a sweeping, all-embracing fashion - hey, everything's got to be permissible - that some basic freedoms end up being eroded. If it's a choice between two evils, then censorship is certainly the lesser. The shark season is almost upon us again: no one lets the sharks take over the waters of Hong Kong, so why should they do so in cyberspace? NO Let's call him Robbie. Robbie, 7, was a keen computer kid. He talked to his buddies on the Internet and with one of them in particular he developed a cyber friendship. They were virtual pals. They talked about toys and other things little boys talk about. One day, Robbie's friend suggested they meet up and see a movie. Robbie turned up at the movie house only to discover that his new buddie was a fully grown man who had far more on his mind than just toys. The friendship wasn't quite so virtual for Robbie then - it was pretty real.
This happened in the US and guess what the reaction was? Yes - a lynching mob that would have strung Apple Mac's from the nearest tree had it done any good. 'The Internet needs censoring,' they wailed.
Let's move over to the UK. A paedophile ring was using the Internet to swap information about their sordid little illness. Scotland Yard tracked the messages, collected the evidence and eventually cuffed a couple of child abusers. Experts from Scotland Yard believe the Internet should be policed, not censored. Why? Because the Internet sometimes catches crooks.
Obviously this is not a black and white issue but here's my view.
First, the Internet is already practising self-censorship. The Internet is a society of its own, a fully functioning sub-culture and like any culture it has developed its own police force.
Did you know that Internet users who come across racist or sexist entries on the Net react by sending the source loads and loads of useless text, thus jamming their computer and shutting them up? Did you know that service providers are starting to block access to certain files such as alt.sex.paedophilia which was cancelled recently. Did you know that they bombard perverts with thousands of e-mail letters which crash the computer? Did you know that Internet users report blatantly extreme views to the authorities? The fact is the Internet already has a police force - its users.
Second, censorship needs a censor. I don't trust the Government with a black pen and a scalpel so why should I trust them with a delete button? Governments are not impartial and cannot be trusted. Self-censorship is the only way.
Third, the Internet cannot be censored by an outside authority. There is always a way around the censor. You can use a different service provider, you can code messages, you can access the Internet in a country that has no law and order. Censorship would have to apply globally and that cannot be done. There is always a way.
The Internet mirrors society, it doesn't mould it. The fact that there are paedophiles and porn freaks and God knows what else on the Net reveals these problems exist. But censorship won't cure the problems, it'll just hide them. It will also give power to the censor and perhaps stop these perverts being caught. It's wrong.
