I got to reading an article last week in my June 23rd issue of Business Week about China’s war against online content. The long and short of the article covers the highly visible topic of censorship to China’s bloggers and consumers. But what drew my interest is the business behind filtering China’s populace from speaking openly on the Web.
The article speaks of firms within China who pay monitors to scour forums, blogs and Web sites for negative publicity on its clients. They then, in turn, attempt to mitigate a fire storm of opinion by either squashing the issue before it spreads, or engaging the content owner to help solve the issue in question. The Web has long been the portal to free-speech for the western world, so how do you feel about your government censoring what you post or allowing businesses to monitor what you post about them or their customers?
The debate rages worldwide on censoring content available to users. China has been the focus of late, namely due to the spotlight shun upon it for the Olympics. But the problem exists globally. Many muslim countries ban sites they deem as ‘morally harmful’ (Source). The topic of net-neutrality is, for example, routinely being discussed by our presidential candidates and are cornerstones to many platforms in US politics. Freedom of censorship ensures your opinion is protected from slander or prosecution, and that you have access to an outlet to share original content. Censorship has broader definitions, though, including ones’ choice to use the Web as their sounding board, where by saying things he or she would not say in public.
I have long supported the general moral stance that I will only blog (or tweet, etc.) content online that I would just as easily share face-to-face. Blogging, for instance, is used by countless contributors as a venue for sharing views or musings they would otherwise not say in person. I have no grief with this practice, but do those doing so fully understand the risk?
We’ve all heard of the Dooce effect? So apply named for the popular blogger who was fired from her job for blogging about her co-workers. Censorship is most commonly applied to the blogger of today by their employer or institution. Here at our office, we are prohibited from accessing sites such as YouTube, Craigslist or even gaming sites. But do you bloggers who use social networking as your outlet to share your most honest feelings accept the risk that you could easily be ‘outed’ in real life? I once had a co-worker who maintained a secret blog to chastise his marriage and relationship with his wife. Last I heard, he is still married with child.
Censoring your content is by all means the right of the owner. Means exist within most social media tools and sites to restrict who can view your content. But this begs the question, what good is sharing content if you censor your own viewers? As China and other countries and entities continue to block access to user-submitted content, the same number will fight for their right to access the same.
Content generators, just remember your right to a free and open Web is what you make of it. Choose wisely. But know that I will never post something here I would not say to you if I took you out to dinner. Not because I am afraid of the risks, nor because I am an honest individual (lord knows!). It is because I stand behind the principle that despite the openness the Web has given me, I choose not to exploit this venue for the sake of disparagement.
Tags:
Censorship,
Internet 
Facebook. Myspace. Digg. Angie’s List. If you are a small business owner and have never heard of these four Web sites before, I am afraid I have some bad news. You are missing out on potential, free exposure.
