Slashdot Mirror


Obama Talks Internet Freedom, China Censors

eldavojohn writes "In a town-hall-style Q&A with (hand-picked) Chinese students in Shanghai, President Obama made several statements knocking China's firewall and censorship. Quoting: 'I am a big believer in technology and I'm a big believer in openness when it comes to the flow of information. I think that the more freely information flows, the stronger the society becomes, because then citizens of countries around the world can hold their own governments accountable. They can begin to think for themselves. That generates new ideas. It encourages creativity. And so I've always been a strong supporter of open Internet use. I'm a big supporter of non-censorship. This is part of the tradition of the United States that I discussed before, and I recognize that different countries have different traditions. I can tell you that in the United States, the fact that we have free Internet — or unrestricted Internet access — is a source of strength, and I think should be encouraged.' The Washington Post notes that the event was broadcast only on the local level, and in fact Chinese authorities removed from view what little coverage it had gotten, after about an hour. But at least American news media are gobbling it up."

7 of 312 comments (clear)

  1. Anti-censorship, huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So that's why he's opposing and releasing all of the information about the ACTA treaty as well as allowing the pictures of the "POWs" that were enhanced interrogated to be shown. It's great to know that he got rid of all those national security and state secrets defenses in the courts, too.

    1. Re:Anti-censorship, huh? by twostix · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And putting legislation online at least five days before it's voted on.

      And allowing congressmen enough time to read legislation rather than ramming it down their throats at 2am.

      And ending backroom politics.

      And get rid of the lobbyists - though perhaps I misheard him on that one and he actually said "I promise to hire as many lobbyists and absolute freaks and weirdos into my administration as I possibly can".

      And and and.

      He's done absolutely nothing that he said he would do, and in fact has been even *worse* than Bushco regarding midnight bills, etc. So why is the media not lighting a bonfire under his feet? When I watch your media (MSNBC, CNN, etc) it would appear that they're absolutely infatuated with him. He's a political figure not a monarch or religious icon fer the gods sake.

      (And not much of an "orator" when he's just got to wing it either I notice)

      And before the lefty mods come down on me like a tonne of bricks, I'm no right winger and actually believed he would be different and better. Stupid me ay?

  2. Re:we'll see by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Your comment still being on slashdot: that is your freedom of speech.

    Your comment being modded troll: that is everyone else's.

  3. Re:A tradition of the United States by agrif · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm not one to post quotes willy-nilly, but this one is particularly relevant to the free internet:

    The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all. (H. L. Mencken)

  4. Re:we'll see by Starlon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You just totally lost me. I don't watch Fox News, but comparing them to child molesters is a very far stretch. Yes, I said very. It's because you went from intelligent conversation to utter ignorance and, yes, lies in one post. Again, I have no use for Fox News, but I respect their right to cover news events. The Obama administration's attempt to exclude Fox News, arguably the most viewed news source on cable TV, was politically incorrect any way you look at it. If you can't take criticism, you don't belong in politics, and you damn sure don't belong running an entire nation. Take Iran's president for example. Or China's administration. Or any country's leadership which protects political gain at the expense of the citizens' rights.

    --
    Health Freedom is almost as popular as Freedom itself.
  5. Re:we'll see by coaxial · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So, is it OK to invite every major news network to an event except FoxNews? Is it OK to give "scoops" to every network but FoxNews? Sure, not every network can attend, so I understand if the Shelbyville Gazette doesn't get invited, but Fox has the ratings to be considered on the short list of invitees. Even the other networks are getting uncomfortable with it:

    Well yes. And it's perfectly fine to be uncomfortable with it. Fox has long been known to be biased from both left and right (e.g. Jonah Goldberg). Is it awkward and troubling for a media outlet to be singled out from an administration? Sure. At the same time though, it's not exactly that FoxNews has been on the up and up. It never was. Even when it was launched it was heavily promoted on conservative talk radio. I'm sorry, but when I hear "It's fair and balanced!" from Rush Limbaugh, I'm suspicious. Now if this endorsement was coming from the Columbia School of Journalism or the Annenberg Political Fact Check, or the Pulitzer Prize winning St Petersberg Times' Political Fact Check, then yes. But an unabashedly biased source, no thanks.

  6. Re:we'll see by LKM · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So, is it OK to invite every major news network to an event except FoxNews? Is it OK to give "scoops" to every network but FoxNews?

    So, is it OK to invite every major news network to an event except MSNBC? Is it OK to give "scoops" to every network but MSNBC?

    I'd say yes. Yes, it is. And this actually happened, unlike that Fox News thing. Hopefully you were ranting about the Bush administration back when these things actually occurred in real life.