Several weeks ago, a lot of internet sites in Indonesia, such as YouTube, Multiply, MySpace, and Rapidshare were blocked by the government. Those sites were blocked because they broadcasted Fitna (film that contains a humiliation about Moslem’s way of life) which get a lot of criticisms from Indonesia government. Yet, this blockading decision was protested by many people because they really need internet for their study and work. I also disagree with the site blockading because I think those sites offer much more positive programs besides that controversial film. The other reason is that the site blockading is the same as giving a boundary to freedom to speak up.
Firstly, those blocked sites offer much more information besides broadcasted that controversial film. For example, nowadays YouTube has been used by some universities to distribute their textbook in video or screen cast format. Other sites provide knowledge ands news from all around the world. Those things can be downloaded easily so many people can get many ideas and references just by using internet. Besides that, some people can also the latest video clips or cartoon films from those sites when they want to relax.
Secondly, those site blockading gives a boundary to freedom to speak up because some blogs also become not accessible. It means that human right to speak up has been suppressed. For example, many people could not publish their opinion because some blogs such as Multiply could not be accessed. Besides that, a lot of people could not broadcast their ideas in video format and share some contents through those sites.
Based on all of the reasons I have mentioned, I can conclude that sites blockading would give new complex problem in our lives. A lot of people could lose some information media to support their study and work. Besides that, the blockading could give a boundary to freedom to speak up. Those problems lead us to a point that it is not wise to block the whole site just because of one film that contains bad morale aspect.
Marsiana Anggieta – 16207068 – WR01
Firstly, those blocked sites offer much more information besides broadcasted that controversial film. For example, nowadays YouTube has been used by some universities to distribute their textbook in video or screen cast format. Other sites provide knowledge ands news from all around the world. Those things can be downloaded easily so many people can get many ideas and references just by using internet. Besides that, some people can also the latest video clips or cartoon films from those sites when they want to relax.
Secondly, those site blockading gives a boundary to freedom to speak up because some blogs also become not accessible. It means that human right to speak up has been suppressed. For example, many people could not publish their opinion because some blogs such as Multiply could not be accessed. Besides that, a lot of people could not broadcast their ideas in video format and share some contents through those sites.
Based on all of the reasons I have mentioned, I can conclude that sites blockading would give new complex problem in our lives. A lot of people could lose some information media to support their study and work. Besides that, the blockading could give a boundary to freedom to speak up. Those problems lead us to a point that it is not wise to block the whole site just because of one film that contains bad morale aspect.
Marsiana Anggieta – 16207068 – WR01
No comments:
Post a Comment