[governance] Facebook profiles blocked and content removed in Brazil

Thu May 31 03:01:54 EDT 2012

On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 5:15 PM, Jac sm Kee <jac at apcwomen.org> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> hi all,
>
> a glimpse into how FB implements its censorship policies in practice:
>
> http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/02/22/low-wage-facebook-contractor-leaks-secret-censorship-list/
>
> In those countries, the people make their laws through the
> > parliament and one can say that they are legitimately exercising
> > their sovereign right to determine what is "acceptable" versus what
> > is "not acceptable" - do we then dare say that they are wrong.
> > Every country has the sovereign right and the people therein the
> > sovereign right to determine for themselves what is "public
> > morality".
> actually, the state's duties to protect public morality is precisely
> what provides legitimate cause of governments to intervene and create
> more laws around censorship of the internet - and this needs a closer
> and more critical analysis than accepting as is. e.g. in brazil, the
> problematic azeredo bill was first pushed under economic arguments
> (preventing financial fraud) - didn't work. but when it was pushed
> under child protection arguments, it almost went through without a
> hiccup and galvanised a lot of support (which also resulted in a huge
> protests - but different story).
>
> There are two opposing schools of thought and maybe more, one holds the
view that what is true in the real world must hold true in the virtual
world. Paraphrasing that would mean that laws that are applicable in real
time should be applicable in the internet. The other believes that there
should be separate laws in real life and separate laws for the Internet.
Every event/transaction has to be analysed according to its own merits so
that the danger of painting everyone with the same brush is reduced.

> pornography is another obvious one, but then what does this constitute
> and how is it defined can be a problem - as can be seen the FB
> scenario. not the first time they have come across problems, e.g. they
> are notorious for blocking photographs of women breastfeeding. compare
> this against e.g. time magazine's recent controversial cover of a
> woman breastfeeding, which is okay under US laws - so, lowest common
> denominator internationally?

This, I would respectfully submit is not the correct test.What is
culturally acceptable in Miami, Florida, US is not the same as in Qatar,
Malaysia etc.  To dictate to them what their public morality won't buy us
any ground as far as advocacy for freedom of expression is concerned and
only serves to alienate without educating and giving them an opportunity to
learn and grow. See the tests that the US Supreme court used in the Miller
case.

> this would mean anything less than e.g.
> fully closed face and ankles and wrists would be unacceptable. that
> doesn't quite make sense either.
>
> That was never said. For the record, the discussions have been about
namely the following:-

   1. Is the right of freedom of expression an absolute right? Is it an
   unfettered right?
   2. Does the right of freedom of expression come with responsibilities?
   3. Who should be responsible when it comes to the Internet?
   4. Are there exceptions under International law?
   5. What are those exceptions?
   6. Are there instances where the exceptions have been abused?
   7. How can civil society advocate responsibly?

apc has been doing a research on examining how internet regulation and
> regulation of sexuality goes hand-in-hand, and it's thrown up some
> interesting points. from e.g. international aid for infrastructure
> that comes encumbered with policy requirements and setting national
> agendas on e.g. the issue of child pornography, to the contentious
> geopolitical negotiations around sexual speech, health, rights and
> citizenship. more info: http://erotics.apc.org
>
> i've also been reading the conversations around EC and democratization
> of IG on this list with interest. and the thing that bugs me about
> looking at democratization starting from national democratic processes
> is that the potential of the internet to facilitate democratic
> participation and deliberations is precisely because it is currently
> still somewhat slippery from complete state control, as opposed to
> e.g. broadcasting media and books and streets.

 I think that when making a broad assertion that you give specific examples
so that there can be discussion and debate.

> so i am reluctant to
> say that states should ahve oversight and negotiate it from there.
>

There is some misunderstanding. In any sovereign jurisdiction, civil
society, private sector and the state each have their place. The foundation
of multistakeholderism stems from the basic notion that the governments,
private sector and civil society have clear functions. What is enhanced
cooperation domestically within a nation and what does it look like outside
the country? What should it look like?

although i understand that global governance and oversight is
> different from national, but when states become the highest hierarchy
> of authority, then my point of entry for engagement as civ soc would
> be from that level. it's not something i am optimistic about..
>

> anyway, 2 cents,
> jac
>
>
>
>
> >
> >
> > What FB is doing will potentially impact the way that younger
> > generations
> >> will perceive liberty (including body expression and sexual
> >> liberty) and morality. And, in my country, FB is actually being
> >> more conservative than traditional media, endangering the
> >> progress we made on recent decades when it comes to body
> >> expression women's rights and sexual rights.
> >>
> >
> >
> >> Is it facebook that is being conservative? Afterall, they are
> >> merely trying to comply with the laws of the land. I think that
> >> if people have an issue, they should take it up with their
> >> respective Parliaments and have it debated. These comments are
> >> restricted to the "Freedom of Expression" but when it comes to
> >> "Privacy" and "misuse" of information and data - I have different
> >> views.
> >>
> >
> >
> >> I do not feel comfortable to place this sort of decision on FB's
> >> hands, with no chance of democratic debate, with no chance to
> >> scrutinize these policies they impinge on users.
> >>
> >> These are good discussions and Turkey and Thailand and the US
> >> make
> > fascinating studies.
> >
> >> Best, Marília
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>>
> >>>>> Some basic conclusions: a) rights, such as freedom of
> >>>>> expression,
> >>>>
> >>>> Why would one who uses FB think they can express themselves
> >>>> outside of the FB ToS/AUP?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> are being
> >>>>> restricted by the same platforms that are praised and known
> >>>>> for
> >>>> enabling
> >>>>> their exercise; b) there is a privatization of Internet
> >>>>> regulation,
> >>>> subtle,
> >>>>> based on contracts (terms of use)
> >>>>
> >>>> Would you argue that Internet companies have NO ToS?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> , but yet, dangerous; c) I see no adequate
> >>>>> forum where we should take this issue to be analized in a
> >>>> participatory and
> >>>>> balanced way in the global arena.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Nor should there be IMHO.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> -- Cheers,
> >>>>
> >>>> McTim "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates
> >>>> where it is. A route indicates how we get there."  Jon
> >>>> Postel
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
> >>>
> >>> Tweeter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Cell:
> >>> +679 998 2851
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> -- Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade FGV Direito Rio
> >>
> >> Center for Technology and Society Getulio Vargas Foundation Rio
> >> de Janeiro - Brazil
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
> - --
> Jac sm Kee
> Women's Rights Policy Coordinator
> Association for Progressive Communications
> www.apc.org | erotics.apc.org | www.takebackthetech.net
> Skype: jhybeturle | Twitter: jhybe
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.14 (Darwin)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>
> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJPxv6IAAoJEKpQzmPAS5FmHCoH/2uwhPDET81D4QPUCLs0VAxS
> IiJOShAJQmyCJUc6M6ghZl/pmpUdgBF0y0kB++DCJkU/sZrboTz4VGsffXwSBo3a
> 4bbwMHZcNQLhwRccM9780M0NHCJ4IVgF2gpJxmrfBcREiLp/w4ET4azQ1KTDeGnD
> 79vDfVg3ZAqTortPV46UgVzHyy025q2DDzMBqhBoup6MUFK3E6ItM7oOGnmjBYaJ
> esbVXxdSrhnGDfWzCfOvSF9UJ1sjE8pftvTjAP7xAfEHGQvLCiWARA5OWxjBth+h
> LfumxmmtrDuC3Tp2p1o3AYpR19PaD3DRRqOalwZ12+39SEYQlRyiAQHxDA9YG5Y=
> =HB8Y
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>

-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20120531/b50e3375/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t