Top 10 List of Worldwide Internet Censors

PreacherTom writes "Reports of internet censorship are nothing new and are quite expected from countries whose leadership depends on controlling the popular worldview. Reporters Without Borders, a Paris group that does advocacy work for press freedom, puts a number to the trend with a list of the countries that it says go the furthest to censor the Internet. Photos document the worldwide protests and continuing struggles. Not surprisingly, China is described as the pioneer of internet censors, dedicating more resources than any other country to restrict online freedoms." This week we also discussed the Reporters Without Borders' 13 Enemies of the Internet list.

Comments

China has the most????

[www.sorehands.com]

What they don't say is the amount per user. China has the greatest number of internet users, which would take more people to handle the internet censoring. If you only allow 3,000 people to access the internet it is very easy to limit them. When you have 200,000,000 people it take more -- especially when there are many people trying to hack through their blocks.

They forgot Denmark

[SlashGeO]

They forgot Denmark on that list. The danish courts have already started building the great firewall of Denmark. It's sad to see a country priding itself on their freedom of speech, allow private organisations to determine what the danish internet users should see or not see. I'm thinking of the IFPI vs Tele2 case in which the court decided that Tele2 should block access to the AllOfMp3 site. Mark my words... This is the beginning of the end of uncensored internet in Denmark. This is truly sad times.

list composition

[cucucu]

What is our list made of?
6+4+3=13
6 Muslim countries (Iran, Tunisia, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkmenistan, Syria), 4 communist countries (China, North Korea, Cuba, Vietnam), 3 dicatorships (Myanmar, Belarus, Uzbekistan).
While I am not sure about Uzbekistan, I feel pretty safe about the classification. Countries classified as muslim/communist probably can be tagged as dictatorships too (or as undemocratic to say the least).

So it can be safely said that internet censors are those with ideologies that are/were opposed by the US. We should not be surprised as internet is an american invention and is mostly dominated by english language / western content.

Re:list composition

[gfxguy]

But Qatars not on the list, and has always been a step above the other muslim countries in the region as far as freedoms are concerned (even if that might not be saying much).

You might consider it inflamatory that he pointed it out (someone did), but that doesn't make it any less true, and it's certainly (IMO) an interesting point. As a previous poster pointed out, there's a lot of overlap with these countries and those that would like to wrest control of the internet away from the U.S.

One thing that does bother me is that pre-war Iraq probably wouldn't have been on this list, and yet we still have economic and political relations with China, Saudi Arabia, and a lot of other countries that we ought not be dealing with. This goes beyond and political divisiveness; both parties cow-tow to the nations that are precieved to bring us economic gain as if that's more important than human rights.

Suspicion

[Mark_MF-WN]

I had this terrible sinking suspicion that the US would make the list. I haven't been this glad to be wrong since the time that my doctor assured me that it wasn't malignant.

Still, it's a great reminder that democracy and free speech are not things that you can take for granted. Given another decade or two of passivity on the part of American voters*, and the USA could wind up taking a place on lists like that. On the other hand, if Americans were to start taking ideas like liberty seriously, they could start using phrases like "Land of the Free" again, without everyone bursting into derisive laughter and then assaulting them with nerf weapons.

* (Am I really the only liberal that was disgusted that Americans actually voted for the Democrats as their progressive party?! Lame. Seriously lame. That party gave America the DMCA, which to this day stifles security research and technological advancement. They destroyed an aspirin factory using cruise missiles to distract people from the fact that th president was LYING UNDER OATH TO THE SUPREME COURT. That should be considered treason for a president. Why can't Americans start voting for a pair of rational parties; Green vs Libertarian would make for a great election, don't you think?)

Internet Freedom Test

[rlp]

Want to know if you have freedom of speech on the Internet. Try this simple test. Post a message stating:

<Name of my national leader> is a drooling idiot

If shortly thereafter, we never hear from you again, your nation does not enjoy freedom on the Internet. Judging from posts to Slashdot, the US enjoys truly extraordinary freedom.

Re:Another X prize

[Ilmarin77]

If you intend to actually listen to this radio you have much bigger problem - making sure that nobody around you will squeal on you to the authorities.
Most of the citizens of NK actually believe in what their government is doing.

Re:i said this before

[arevos]

Individual is not enought. It has to be self-sustainable self-reproducing enthic minority.

Why? Also, what about countries that were founded from a mix of ethnicities, such as the US? And what about countries that would collapse if not for the food aid they get, such as North Korea?

"Should we interfere and liberate Tibet? " No. YOU, personally, as American, exhausted your interference quota up to 1000 years ahead.

What makes you think I am an American?

"What population does the country have to have? A million? " It is not defined by population size. It is defined by willingness of people to die for the independence. For example, Chechens deserve their independence, while Tibetians probably do not.

I see. An interesting take from someone who has personally risked their life to guarantee the independence of their country. You have personally risked your own life, haven't you? It seems a little easy for someone to say that they'd die for their independence, if they haven't lived in a totalitarian regime.

Out of interest, you say that a country is not defined by population size, but you've also said that a country's population has to be greater than one. Would a sexually active man and woman, willing to die for their independence, and part of a ethnic minority (whatever that is) be considered a country in your eyes?

"If an armed gang took control of a small US town, and announced that it was now a sovereign state, would you advocate that the US government leave the town alone?" No. Armed gang is not self-sustainable and it is not self-reproducible.

The armed gang would just be the totalitarian government; the population would be the captured town, and it seems reasonable to assume that a town of people could be self-sustainable and self-reproducible.

"In what way? " In a very simple way: if it will become real pain in the neck, Chinese people will overthrow it. The Chinese revolts happened in the past, do not worry. They know what they are doing. Talk to your Chinese co-workers. Americans unfortunately do not have the quality.

The US has been considerably more successful in their revolts than the Chinese. The last American revolt gave them a free democratic government, a constitution that was rather ahead of its time in terms of rights, an economy and military that eventually succeeded all others in the world, and a nation that has so far lasted over two centuries.

The last Chinese revolt on the other hand (if you can call the Chinese Civil War that), resulted in a communist dictatorship that resulted in corruption and hyperinflation that for a good 40 years languished in poverty. Compare China's economic growth to Japan's in the same period, and you'll see the huge gulf between the two economies. Only within the past 15 years, with China opening up its markets to private business, has its economy begun to grow at a significant rate.

So I'm not sure how you rate the quality of Chinese revolts as being greater than American ones. Now, if you were talking quantity...

Current government is real pain in the neck but nobody is going to overthrow it. There is not a single lazybone senator soul proposing an impeachment of this hunta of degenerates.

The current US administration, bad as it is, has a long way to fall before it gets as bad as China.

why should the Chinese government control it?" Because they are already controlling it.

Uh... That's a reason?

"Gee, shouldn't we stop that bear gnawing Paul's face off like that?"
"Nah, it's already doing it."

"Hey officer! Shouldn't you stop that man gunning down those children?"
"Why? He's already doing it.