Dumbing down democracy: Trends in internet regulation, surveillance and control in Asia.

Abstract

This article argues that the trends in state regulation, survelliance and control of the internet in Asia stand to effectively reduce political expression. A variety of international media watch and human rights organisations have noted that since September 2011, a slew of anti-terrorism laws have been adopted in Asia which place greater restrictions on the internet. Laws against online pornography, gambling, hate speech and spam have been revised to cover online political content and mobilisation. Such measures limit and reduce the space cyberactivists have to push the demogaphic agenda online. These cybersecurity measures, introduced as part of the 'war against terrorism', represent an extension of already draconian regulation in South-East Asian countries.

Rethinking China’s Internet censorship: The practice of recoding and the politics of visibility

“…To be sure, censorship often has the real consequence of depriving dissidents of their voices if not their bodily freedom (by way of detentions or imprisonment; e.g. Gomez, 2004; MacKinnon, 2012). However, describing the outcome of censoring acts as a stoppage in the free flow of ideas, particularly those deemed inappropriate or too “sensitive” by the Chinese state (e.g.…”

Rethinking the fragmentation of the cyberpublic: from consensus to contestation

“…In contrast, the internet has been seen as offering citizens the opportunity to encounter and engage with a huge diversity of positions, thus extending the public sphere (Blumler and Gurevitch, 2001;Gimmler, 2001;Kellner, 2004;Papacharissi, 2002).Through email, discussion sites, web publishing and webcasting, a great variety of actors articulate and critique validity claims locally, nationally and internationally. However, those researching the possibility of the internet expanding democratic culture also point to significant factors limiting open and reflexive debate online, including inequalities in access and participation, unreflexive communication, corporate domination of online attention and state surveillance and censorship (Dahlberg, 2001(Dahlberg, , 2005bGomez, 2004;Hoar and Hope, 2002;Murdock and Golding, 2004;Wilhelm, 2000). Furthermore, a number of internet-democracy commentators question whether the myriad of diverse views that exist online are actually intersecting, and thus the extent to which online interactions actually involve any significant problematization and contestation of positions and practices.These commentators argue that much online interaction simply involves the meeting of 'like-minded' individuals, leading to a fragmented public sphere of insulated 'deliberative enclaves' where group positions and practices are reinforced rather than openly critiqued.…”

Internet Development, Censorship, and Cyber Crimes in China

“…Section (6) of the Article 5 prohibits any organization or individual from manufacturing, copying, browsing, and disseminating information that "propagates feudal superstitions; disseminates obscenity, pornography or gambling; incites violence, murder, or terror; instigates others to commit offences." As usual, such regulations on pornography could also be found among many other regulations (Gomez, 2004).…”