Post by Kizuna on Nov 17, 2011 23:46:20 GMT -5
Now, as an aspiring journalist, I know ethically, I'm supposed to be objective, act merely as an observer to report the truth. But these new bills that are going through Congress are really getting my blood boiling. (warning, I'm also going for a possible minor in law, so this can get long and even a little nerdy).
censorshipinamerica.com/2011/11/08/internet-censorship-study-shows-how-sopapipa-will-harm-investment-in-key-innovations/
wfc2.wiredforchange.com/o/9042/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=8173
newsworldwide.wordpress.com/2011/11/08/the-stop-online-piracy-act-a-blacklist-by-any-other-name-is-still-a-blacklist/
For crying out loud, this goes against not just the First Amendment, the basics of what the country was founded on, but also against things like the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. I get it, artists have to get paid too. But this is nothing more than censorship. If some video on Youtube of a baby giggling got taken off just because some pop song was playing in the background and the video's poster got sued, that would be downright ludicrous.
And then there's the problem of just how overly broad this is. One big takeaway point I have from my media law class is that the broader a law is, the more likely the regular people are unable to understand it in full, and thus, they will break it without even knowing they did. Do you really want to get sued for a video you posted and not know what it was about until much later, after getting arrested and served with a court summons? Don't think so.
And this could spread to social media, search engines, and other such sites. Rightly so, Google, Yahoo, Facebook and other big Internet companies are opposing this big time, because they know that if a link that is deemed "inappropriate" by this bill's statute in posted on their sites, they could run the risk of getting shut down (or at least lose revenue) without notice. It's not like Mark Zuckerberg and his team can monitor every Wall post of each and every single one of the 700 million (and still growing number) members that use Facebook.
For those outside the US, you could ask, how does this affect me? Well, a great number of the sites you visit are very likely to be based in the US, thus blocking you from seeing what you want to see. There's that problem.
Not to mention, the people lobbying for this bill aren't even tech saavy. The Texas senator who proposed this admitted he didn't know much about computers. Do you honestly want someone who probably hasn't even ventured outside a search engine site to govern how a medium used for connecting people and gathering information should be regulated? Don't think so.
And finally, speaking as a journalism student, this is troubling to me personally, because right now, online news is the big boomer right now. If this censorship gets through, information can be blocked, content surpressed and the truth can't be reported. I might be overreacting, but I'd rather overreact now and hope this thing gets stopped, than let this pass through. Even if these bills are only used to target 'rogue' foreign sites as it states, it can and will establish a precedent for future bills. If we don't stop these bills now, how can we ever hope to stop them in the future?
So what can you do?
If you’re a citizen of the United States, call your local representatives. Calling and letter writing will always work better than email. If you don’t know their number , use this site:
www.contactingthecongress.org/
I will close this off with the entirety of the First Amendment.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
(And hell, even if this passes, it would only serve to blow up in their faces. I've already seen people plan boycotts, riots and the like if it gets passed. The backlash would make the Occupy movements (another thing I've been following extensively) look like child's play.)
censorshipinamerica.com/2011/11/08/internet-censorship-study-shows-how-sopapipa-will-harm-investment-in-key-innovations/
wfc2.wiredforchange.com/o/9042/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=8173
newsworldwide.wordpress.com/2011/11/08/the-stop-online-piracy-act-a-blacklist-by-any-other-name-is-still-a-blacklist/
For crying out loud, this goes against not just the First Amendment, the basics of what the country was founded on, but also against things like the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. I get it, artists have to get paid too. But this is nothing more than censorship. If some video on Youtube of a baby giggling got taken off just because some pop song was playing in the background and the video's poster got sued, that would be downright ludicrous.
And then there's the problem of just how overly broad this is. One big takeaway point I have from my media law class is that the broader a law is, the more likely the regular people are unable to understand it in full, and thus, they will break it without even knowing they did. Do you really want to get sued for a video you posted and not know what it was about until much later, after getting arrested and served with a court summons? Don't think so.
And this could spread to social media, search engines, and other such sites. Rightly so, Google, Yahoo, Facebook and other big Internet companies are opposing this big time, because they know that if a link that is deemed "inappropriate" by this bill's statute in posted on their sites, they could run the risk of getting shut down (or at least lose revenue) without notice. It's not like Mark Zuckerberg and his team can monitor every Wall post of each and every single one of the 700 million (and still growing number) members that use Facebook.
For those outside the US, you could ask, how does this affect me? Well, a great number of the sites you visit are very likely to be based in the US, thus blocking you from seeing what you want to see. There's that problem.
Not to mention, the people lobbying for this bill aren't even tech saavy. The Texas senator who proposed this admitted he didn't know much about computers. Do you honestly want someone who probably hasn't even ventured outside a search engine site to govern how a medium used for connecting people and gathering information should be regulated? Don't think so.
And finally, speaking as a journalism student, this is troubling to me personally, because right now, online news is the big boomer right now. If this censorship gets through, information can be blocked, content surpressed and the truth can't be reported. I might be overreacting, but I'd rather overreact now and hope this thing gets stopped, than let this pass through. Even if these bills are only used to target 'rogue' foreign sites as it states, it can and will establish a precedent for future bills. If we don't stop these bills now, how can we ever hope to stop them in the future?
So what can you do?
If you’re a citizen of the United States, call your local representatives. Calling and letter writing will always work better than email. If you don’t know their number , use this site:
www.contactingthecongress.org/
I will close this off with the entirety of the First Amendment.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
(And hell, even if this passes, it would only serve to blow up in their faces. I've already seen people plan boycotts, riots and the like if it gets passed. The backlash would make the Occupy movements (another thing I've been following extensively) look like child's play.)
