Slashdot Mirror
Google Blocks 'Innocence of Muslim' Video In Indonesia and India
hypnosec writes "Google has blocked the anti-Islamic video, which was posted on YouTube, in Indonesia as well as India. YouTube has already denied a complete removal of the clip 'Innocence of Muslims' that mocks Islam and Prophet Mohammed. The video has led to protests and violence across the Arab world. The foreign ministry spokesperson of Indonesia and India have confirmed that Google has blocked access to the video. Indonesia has also asked RIM to filter the video on its smartphones."
Apparently freedom of speech applies only when it's convenient. Sounds a lot like the model in China where only specific protests/violence are "allowed". Way to go Google for adopting the China model. Maybe they'll let you back in!
Google complies with the laws of the country it operates in. If they are required by law to remove something, they do it.
Are you suggesting that big companies in general should be exempt from the law and obey it only as they see fit?
Are they going to block this image from the Onion, entitled "No One Murdered Because Of This Image"? After all everyone tells us that Muslims are no worse than people of other religions, so surely this insult to Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Judaism will have the members of respective religions storming embassies and murdering people all over the place?
If not some people might suspect that Islam really is a more violent and savage religion than the others
> What happened to freedom of speech, Google?
Trumped by local laws. Local laws like the DMCA, copyright, etc. Theres no way for a company to fight laws.
> They are no longer the freedom loving and defending company
They cannot fight a state, they can only get out of that state.
> All went downhill after the failured product Google+.
No, all went down the crapper when single states introduced laws to censor the net. Theocracies introducing laws to censor blashpemy is no different than capitalist states having laws censoring filesharing.
Frankly I'm not hugely bothered by it.
Nowhere is freedom of speech absolute, it's limited by the ability of the society to tolerate it. Even in the US advocating violence can get you in trouble along with forms of obscenity. Quite relevantly public nudity, which I'd qualify as a form of speech, will get you arrested in a lot of places, but if society was more comfortable with the idea than that restriction would be removed.
In these countries video they're not used to this level of freedom of speech and their society needs time to adapt. I like pushing the boundaries of free speech in these countries, but sometimes things go viral and push past their ability to deal with it. Given that people are dying as a direct result of this video I can see the justification of some limited censorship (given that it's far beyond what they're allowed to do in their own society).
As to whether it's effective is another matter, censorship can easily be circumvented, but maybe it's enough of a hindrance to stop it from going viral.
I stole this Sig
So under freedom of speech, should they be allowed to publish neo-Nazi material too? Post up a video calling for the extermination of all the Jews and see how long it takes before it gets pulled.
This "Innocence of Muslims" video is exactly the same as the anti-Semetic propaganda produced by the Nazis 80-odd years ago.
Jews didn't control much of the world oil, making them filthy rich with little to do to keep their exploding population happy. (The arab "spring" was just a lot of young people with an education and no jobs getting fed up with doing nothing. Even in Libia which could afford to have an enormous essentially un-employed population)
Jews are one of smallest groups in the world, Muslims one of the biggest.
Jews don't hijack aircraft.
There is no mass immigration of jews into atheist countries from Jewish countries and then trying to turn their new homeland into a muslim state. Muslims are fleeing muslim controlled countries, then trying to convert their new country to be run the same way. See Sharia4Beglim and Sharia4Holland. England already has Sharia courts.
Need I go on? Stop comparing the conflict with Islam with nazi germany, the differences are gigantic and the parallells are at right angles to each other.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Pretty naive of the admin of this web site to believe that he will be able to safeguard his anonymity in the long run.
Why would he have to?
Anyway, picture of Mohammad are boring and nobody wants to see them.
[citation needed]
I really don't care... Really. This is just the latest excuse someone somewhere tossed out for the reason that muslims are killing people... again.
If it wasnt this video it would be some cartoon. Or maybe a book. Or a newspaper. Maybe just something someone somewhere did or said... or didnt say.
You can't deal with a religion that wants everyone else dead by saying ' i respect your right to religious differences' and pandering to them.
It's just not gonna work.
Someday the world is gonna have to deal with the muslims in a much stronger tone. A good chunk of them don't seem to be compatable with the rest of the people on the planet.
Doesn't look like that's gonna change anytime soon either. In fact it seems to keep getting worse.
The longer you wait to deal with the problem. The worse it will be to deal with too.
I actually like what they are doing here.
Refusing to take it down entirely is good. Blocking it in countries where the authorities want it blocked is also good. Refusing to do that would be a typical USA "we know better than you" move, and that is a big piece of the reason why the US is hated in so many places around the world.
If people within the country don't like what their government is doing, it is their job to solve that problem. If they need help, they can ask for it. Don't force "help" on people who may or may not want it.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
"Google complies with the laws of the country it operates in."
If people are not able to use the comment section under the video, they have to go to the street to vent their anger.
it's a tough call
1. there are laws in china that are odious and disgusting in terms of privacy invasion and censorship. such that an american company operating there, by submitting to that law, breaks it's fidelity with the principles of its home country in ways that stink. but google has, in fact, stood up to china in some ways, such as with censorship, and lost market share in china due to that and pissed off the chinese government. go google!
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/12/06/01/1450204/google-highlights-censored-search-terms-in-china
other western companies, for example, will do business with oppressive regimes in ways that support those oppressive regimes in evil and odious ways:
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/08/31/1434229/finspy-commercial-spyware-abused-by-governments
what a company like this deserves is to be shut down, kicked out, and have their business actively destroyed in righteous indignation of operating from the west while grossly violating important beliefs of the west and in support of evil regimes
2. however, there are also local laws that, while you can find more abstract objections with them, it makes prudent sense to just comply with the local laws to continue doing business there, and also be in a position to effect long term liberty improving change in that country by remaining a force there
such as, for example, with this stupid video: while speech should be free all over the world, it isn't in some places. and going crazy and not cooperating, for example, with germany for not allowing nazi imagery or indonesia for not allowing mohammad imagery, doesn't convince anyone of anything and you just piss off that country and lose market share
so it's better to just comply with local law on this issue. but on other issues, it's better to stick up your middle finger at oppressive governments. each case is different
shrewd governance, of countries or companies, is a matter of finesse
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Given that people are dying as a direct result of this video I can see the justification of some limited censorship
I disagree with the above statement. This is a way to grant power to extremist groups. If societies are 'unprepared' for free speech, as you say, they should have laws about the matter. And in fact they do - there are laws against (religious) slander, even laws protecting a specific religion such as Islam.
I don't think that Google should break the laws in such country in order to make a point - that should be done by activists from inside if they think the law was unjust. So Google should remove the video from the countries where the law requires it. However, it should not cater to extremist groups giving them the power to change things through violence.
That would only bring more violence.
There are only two types of people who will take the risk of activism against those willing to use violence: Those who are so dedicated they are willing to risk their life or freedom, and those who are too dumb to realise that is what they are doing.
Indosiar (one of the largest TV networks in Indonesia) is running a vicious anti-Hindu series "Sembilan Wali". The Balinese are upset but they aren't beheading anyone.
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
Yes, that's a valid point. But the decision that a company makes should be whether or not to withdraw from the country or whether or not to pressure the government for a change but not whether or not to break the law. That should be used only in extreme cases (aka Oskar Schindler) but not in issues such as removing a video from your server.
Why does something critical of a religion have to be blocked?
I'm an agnostic, and I've seen any number of documentaries, interviews and propaganda by various religions suggesting that I'm anything from a devil-worshipper to a deviant to an idiot for not wanting to believe whatever religion it is that they believe in and also that I'll burn in hell for all eternity. I don't call that a pleasant belief and especially not when they want to tell me that I'm going to suffer eternal pain for how I live my life.
I don't ask for them to be blocked, though, or banned. Hell, I can barely be bothered to be offended. If that's truly someone's opinion then it's an opinion (and therefore person, and whatever group they claim membership of) that DOES NOT MATTER to me. Disregard it, move on.
If it's offensive, don't watch it. Don't encourage it. Ignore it and it will be in the Recycle Bin within a week. As it is, "banning" it has made it one of THE most googled-for items across the world and exposed it to millions who wouldn't have cared and also, because of the ban, put it into people's head that maybe there's something in there that the religion DOESN'T WANT US TO KNOW. Why would you call for something to be banned just because it's inaccurate when you could just put out a correction, an official statement on the film's veracity, and invite the filmmaker to tack it on to the end of the film?
I don't know. I've not seen it. I don't really care. All I see is people wanting something banned that isn't against YouTube's content guidelines in most countries (i.e. if it's not offensive or inaccurate enough to ban in my own country, then it's probably not actaully that "offensive" at all - just taken personally by the target of the movie).
Please think of this next time you comment to an athiest, agnostic, or even someone of another religion about how their belief is "wrong". As far as I'm concerned, I've been subjected to more insults and complete dismissal of my opinion from members of religious organisations than just about any other type of organisation, ever.
One of which is that some of them believe that they should be immune to all forms of criticism, and be endowed with superior powers to curb it and censor such criticism - involving violence. I find that more insulting than anything that could find into a clip on YouTube.
This morning, Sept 17, 2012, I've been watching and listenting to reports of riots and civil unrest all over the World - from mostly international sources.
While the American news sources are focused almost exclusively on the Middle East, their are riots in China, Japan, S. Africa, Western Europe, etc ....
NONE of them are about Islam. They are all about economics.
Deep down it's the same with the MIddle Eastern riots. This piss-ant video was just a the spark or an excuse for the riots.
ANYONE who thinks these riots are really about Islam being "insulted" is horribly provincial and uninformed.
An example of something similar in the States would be the Occupy Wall Street protests. It's really not about Wall Street "greed". It's about young people pissed off about the percveived lack of economic opportunities and jobs that are available to them - exactly the same reason all those young people in the Middle East are rioting. Give'em jobs and they'll be back in their homes.
We have BILLIONS of people trying to get a slice of the ecnomic pie and the pie isn't growing fast enough for us all to have increasing standards of living. Hence, the haves are getting more and the have nots are being left in the dust.
But go ahead, blame the video and Islam because that's what the media is telling you.
And go ahead be a smug that you have a nice life because you were smart enough to get a degree in the right field in the right country and live in the right are.
If this keeps up, YOU will be affected - if not already.
I suspect this is more a humanitarian issue to lessen bloodshed amongst the ignorant, than a political issue. Blame newsclowns for coloring it any other way.Election year.
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
Agreed, this is monday morning and I just watched the video here in the u.s.
I've seen video slamming the tenets of just about any major religion and several obscure ones.
No reason Islam can't suck it up just like everyone else.
How many movies cover the Inquisition? The Crusades? Bad Buddhist Kung Fu? Make Hindi Gods into animated villains? Show faithful anywhere to be subversive and evil in the name of good?
Suck it up and quit acting like children and the world will stop treating you like children. Keep it up and get spanked.
Hey, that's not a threat, that's nearly a physical law of the universe.
No one asks you to go along with the flow of the world, but if you stand against it, you stand against the world. You stand the chance of an ant to a steamroller, a drop of water in a volcano, an undercover cop at a rap show.
This is all so unecessary for everyone. A peaceful solution for all can be found at http://www.subgenius.com/ .
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
On one hand, believing God X is the one and true; the controller of all; omnipotent in every way, and on the other hand, killing people over the lamest and poorly done parodies to defend God X almighty? Make up your mind: is God X an unassailable, infallible supreme being, or a 98-pound weakling that must be defended from bullies kicking sand in his face?
Religion: Organized Stupidity
It's worth noting that there is a significant cultural difference at play here. What one culture considers "free speech", other may consider "defamation", "copyright infringement", "inciting of hatred" and many other things.
Consider for example the legislation in place in Germany against denying the Holocaust. Under "universal" free speech umbrella, I should be able to talk about Holocaust not having happened and it being a one big lie. Political and historical realities suggest that such free speech has potential to cause catastrophic damage, and as a result it's illegal in Germany, while legal in, for example, some Nordic countries.
To add to the mess is the current transition from centralised broadcast media to user-generated one. Much of the stuff comes from amateurs with meagre budgets, such as this movie and can be screened worldwide within minutes of being finished. This was an impossibility only a decade ago. We're in a new territory in terms of what is acceptable in different cultures, and as shown with this particular example, free speech can carry significant price paid in blood by those not even related to the speech in question.
There really are no easy solutions here. Internationalism is very difficult to make work because of cultural clashes like these. We simply have to take it one step at a time and hope and work for the best outcome.
how many GIs are demanding that other Americans be sent off to risk life and limb to satisfy their lust for blood sacrifices in the name of religion while they stay safe at home?
I would say probably none. But then, I would count the number of Americans in general that believe that as ALSO none.
I WOULD count the number of Americans that falsely believe that some their fellow Americans are crazed religious nutbags that want to slaughter people who theologically disagree with them as AT LEAST one, and probably more as I know that there is a strain of anti-religious (Really, Anti-Christian) fervor that has infected some people in America that has no grounding in reality and is instead held up by anti-religiously bigoted propaganda by people with political and financial hay to make.
Congratulations on buying into the lie, BTW.
Official Heretic from the "Church of Global Warming". Proven right thanks to whistle blowers. AGW = Flat Earth Theory
I hope that when people in these countries search for censored stuff, they get presented with a page that says:
Results hidden from you because angry men with guns pointed at us have made us hide it from you. This is part of their control mechanism over you that lets them maintain their power over you.
The alternative, Results hidden because you may run around like animals murdering people isn't much better.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.