Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]
Notice (8): Undefined variable: urlPrefix [APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8]latest-news-updates/sense-and-sensibility-freedom-of-expression-and-censoring-facebook-google-others-12608.html"/> LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Sense and sensibility: Freedom of expression and censoring Facebook, Google & others | Im4change.org
Resource centre on India's rural distress
 
 

Sense and sensibility: Freedom of expression and censoring Facebook, Google & others

-The Economic Times
 
The government's sanction to prosecute some social networking sites, including Facebook and Google, in response to a Delhi court's hearing of a complaint against these sites for allegedly carrying objectionable content, will reignite the debate on censorship, freedom of expression and what constitutes profanity or offence. 

At first glance, the government's reaction would seem to be missing the wood for the trees. Most such sites or internet companies aver they have their own mechanisms to detect and remove abuse. The real problem is defining what can be deemed objectionable in different contexts and, of course, the technical aspects of how to go about applying that to as amorphous a phenomenon as the internet. 

At one level, it is a personal choice whether to use the internet for knowledge, information or various perversions. On some aspects, clearly, there are explicit laws on the illegality of some online activity. And then it is also a fact that individuals, groups and even governments can, and have, taken legal recourse against objectionable content. 

But, generally, there are not any universal standards on what constitutes the latter. What may be upheld as freedom of expression somewhere might cause ruptures, even violence, in other parts of the world - the furore, sometime ago, over the publication of cartoons of Prophet Muhammad in some western newspapers is a case in point. 

What we need, therefore, is a commonsensical understanding of rights and sensitivities, given specific cultural and moral contexts, without treading the domain of intolerance and censorship. 

When it comes to such issues, or those pertaining to national security, extant laws are probably good enough. Only authoritarian countries consistently seek to curb the internet on many grounds. But, equally, the conspiratorial spectre of an invasive, censorious Indian state would be misplaced. 

What is needed is a wider debate on the limits or otherwise of individual and collective freedoms, leading to voluntary restraint based on the debate, not knee-jerk guidelines, codes or laws. The free internet does far more to improve life than to damage it.