The War On Grass Roots Journalism: Defiling Bloggers
In the days of our colonial forefathers the idea of journalism was not as well defined as it is today. In fact, all one had to do to run a newspaper was to have the resources to either print it (as did Benjamin Franklin) or find a printer willing to do so within one's financial means. Indeed, most newspapers were more of a gossip sheet that reported incidents of local importance and interest. It was not until the likes of Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin, Sam Adams, et al., decided to use the press to publish criticism and reports on the actions of the British and the Tories that the issue of a free press--which did not just include those reporting "news" but also those writing opinions and criticisms--came to bear.
The efforts of the British to curtail any and all printed and distributed literature discussing, critiquing and/or condemning the intolerable acts and restrictions placed against the colonials that opposed British tyranny became so important that when our founders and framers sought to create a "more perfect union," they insisted on creating the First Amendment that protected the right to speak out against the government.
This right to speak out in oral and written form, even in an unfavorable manner, is also included in Article 19 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and is incumbent upon all members of the United Nations to observe, implement and protect.
It is important to note that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was developed by a process chaired by one of our most famous American women, Eleanor Roosevelt. It was she that employed American ideals of liberty and principles of freedom to convince the whole of the United Nations General Assembly to adopt and ratify this set of principles for all human interaction and assertion of basic human rights. While the Declaration is not a specifically ratified treaty under US law, it is an incorporated portion of the United Nations Charter, which was signed and ratified under the US Constitution, making it a part and parcel of the "supreme law of the land" under the "treaties clause" that is incorporated in the "supremacy clause."
The news today reports that a blogger, Karim Amer of Egypt, was sentenced to four years in prison for criticizing Hosni Mubarak (President of Egypt, much in the same manner that Saddam Hussein was President of Iraq) and the extremism in Islamic factions present in Egypt and throughout the Middle East, as well as those factions employing terrorist tactics.
Amer is not the first blogger in the Middle East to be arrested and/or convicted for blogging in such a way as to offend the sensibilities of political and/or religious leaders, but he is among the first to garner the attention of the world. While living in Bahrain, I saw the extent to which even a "liberal regime" such as that headed by HRH Sheik Isa ibn Salman Al-Khalifa (who was the Amir when I was there) would limit free expression. During my time in Bahrain there were laws against possessing, distributing or broadcasting a lot of religious and political views. In fact, many of those views prohibited were coming out of Iran and were intended to rouse the sensibilities of the poor, mostly Shi'ite residents of Bahrain to rise up against the Al-Khalifa regime.
In truth, having met and briefly discussed some of these issues with HRH Sheik Isa, life for the poor natives of Bahrain was not all that hard. Medical care was provided for free. The mosques throughout Bahrain were given a lot of money by the government and by many of the wealthy citizens of Bahrain to provide for the basic food and housing needs of the poorest citizens. This is not to say that life for the poor in Bahrain does not need improving, but in comparison to many afflicted with poverty, those in Bahrain are not abandoned to their own devices and resources alone. In fact, the poorest and most abused members of Bahraini society were the 200,000 or so non-native ex-patriot workers from Sri Lanka, India, Pakistan, the Philippines, Bangladesh and other places outside of Western culture. These people often work for less money than the Bahraini government provides for its native citizens. Even most Saudis present in Bahrain are subject to a little ridicule because many come to Bahrain to violate Saudi law and prohibition against alcohol and other things labeled "haram." Many Saudis coming to Bahrain are often found to be sowing their wildest of oats and find themselves in some form of trouble with either the law or some faction of Bahrain's residents.
But despite the "liberal" nature of Bahrain, even under the reforms afforded by Sheik Isa and his son, Sheik Hamad ibn Isa Al-Khalifa, who is now the Amir, the censorship of the media and access to certain Internet sites is still blocked and/or monitored. Many of my students expressed to me that despite the official censorship and site blockage, many Bahrainis deliberately circumvented the rules and found ways to reach out from inside the borders of Bahrain. In fact, there have been several web sites that specifically focus on criticizing the ruling family of Bahrain.
Amazingly, both Sheik Isa and Sheik Hamad, have been more tolerant of such dissidence than the Saudis, the Iranians, the Syrians, the Egyptians or the Israelis.
But none of the regimes in the Middle East have lived up to the standards set forth by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In fact, many of the states across Northern Africa, which is called the "Maghreb" by Arab Muslims, have even harsher restrictions and penalties for dissidence, especially those expressed in web-based media. There have been reports that regimes in Nigeria, Tunisia and Libya have issued arrest and murder warrants for dissidents distributing dissident "media" from places outside of their particular jurisdictions.
So the case of Karim Amer is an important issue for freedom of the press. But what bothers me is that while Amer's case is an extreme example of the oppression of web-based media and freedom of the press, very little attention is being paid to the same types of oppression, albeit without extreme prosecution, offered by western societies that proclaim their adherence to principles of freedom of the press. Indeed, cases of censorship, shutdown, confiscation and prosecution of bloggers, reporters, dissidents and others employing media to distribute reports, views and criticisms in France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the United States and elsewhere.
The Bush administration has used its considerable power, influence and authority to control the press, giving preference to those that support the views and propaganda of the administration, but threatening legal action, incarceration and sanctions against not only mainstream media outlets, but also bloggers. One such case involved forcing the closure of a blog popular in the intelligence community through manipulating the human resource policies of a contractor because the intelligence expert operating the blog dared to question the soundness of the intelligence reports used to justify invading and occupying Iraq. In short, the blogger was shut down by causing her to be fired.
In fact, several courts have heard cases against bloggers and have ruled that bloggers are not entitled to full First Amendment protections. I have written about these issues in the past, so I won't bore us all with the details. But the fact remains that the ultra-conservative dominated judicial branch has narrowed the definition of "the press" to exclude most bloggers or grass roots commentators. This is nothing less than a continuation of the slow erosion of civil liberties that has been creeping into our society as the fascism of the ultra-conservative and ultra-religious, all of whom are extremists in their views, just as the extremists from the left are in their views.
So while we can look at the case of Karim Amer as a horrible situation and experience, I make the case that almost every society is engaging in significant limits upon civil liberties and human rights, especially that of a free press. I argue that we need to refocus our efforts to assert our freedoms and human rights here at home, as much as we are calling for changes and justice in foreign lands where more overtly extreme examples are being presented to us.
As a frequent blogger, a civil rights and civil liberties advocate, and someone opposed to the Bush administration, these issues concern me greatly. But I am also a veteran of two branches of the US military that takes my oath to defend and support the Constitution quite seriously. Anyone seeking to infringe upon my liberties and human rights is in for the fight of their lives, in the courtroom or on a new battlefield... right outside my front door.
REFERENCES:
Kareem Amer (Karim Amer)
Egypt: Karim Amer Sentence Makes Bloggers New Target Of The Authorities
The 'Crime' of Blogging In Egypt
The efforts of the British to curtail any and all printed and distributed literature discussing, critiquing and/or condemning the intolerable acts and restrictions placed against the colonials that opposed British tyranny became so important that when our founders and framers sought to create a "more perfect union," they insisted on creating the First Amendment that protected the right to speak out against the government.
This right to speak out in oral and written form, even in an unfavorable manner, is also included in Article 19 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and is incumbent upon all members of the United Nations to observe, implement and protect.
It is important to note that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was developed by a process chaired by one of our most famous American women, Eleanor Roosevelt. It was she that employed American ideals of liberty and principles of freedom to convince the whole of the United Nations General Assembly to adopt and ratify this set of principles for all human interaction and assertion of basic human rights. While the Declaration is not a specifically ratified treaty under US law, it is an incorporated portion of the United Nations Charter, which was signed and ratified under the US Constitution, making it a part and parcel of the "supreme law of the land" under the "treaties clause" that is incorporated in the "supremacy clause."
The news today reports that a blogger, Karim Amer of Egypt, was sentenced to four years in prison for criticizing Hosni Mubarak (President of Egypt, much in the same manner that Saddam Hussein was President of Iraq) and the extremism in Islamic factions present in Egypt and throughout the Middle East, as well as those factions employing terrorist tactics.
Amer is not the first blogger in the Middle East to be arrested and/or convicted for blogging in such a way as to offend the sensibilities of political and/or religious leaders, but he is among the first to garner the attention of the world. While living in Bahrain, I saw the extent to which even a "liberal regime" such as that headed by HRH Sheik Isa ibn Salman Al-Khalifa (who was the Amir when I was there) would limit free expression. During my time in Bahrain there were laws against possessing, distributing or broadcasting a lot of religious and political views. In fact, many of those views prohibited were coming out of Iran and were intended to rouse the sensibilities of the poor, mostly Shi'ite residents of Bahrain to rise up against the Al-Khalifa regime.
In truth, having met and briefly discussed some of these issues with HRH Sheik Isa, life for the poor natives of Bahrain was not all that hard. Medical care was provided for free. The mosques throughout Bahrain were given a lot of money by the government and by many of the wealthy citizens of Bahrain to provide for the basic food and housing needs of the poorest citizens. This is not to say that life for the poor in Bahrain does not need improving, but in comparison to many afflicted with poverty, those in Bahrain are not abandoned to their own devices and resources alone. In fact, the poorest and most abused members of Bahraini society were the 200,000 or so non-native ex-patriot workers from Sri Lanka, India, Pakistan, the Philippines, Bangladesh and other places outside of Western culture. These people often work for less money than the Bahraini government provides for its native citizens. Even most Saudis present in Bahrain are subject to a little ridicule because many come to Bahrain to violate Saudi law and prohibition against alcohol and other things labeled "haram." Many Saudis coming to Bahrain are often found to be sowing their wildest of oats and find themselves in some form of trouble with either the law or some faction of Bahrain's residents.
But despite the "liberal" nature of Bahrain, even under the reforms afforded by Sheik Isa and his son, Sheik Hamad ibn Isa Al-Khalifa, who is now the Amir, the censorship of the media and access to certain Internet sites is still blocked and/or monitored. Many of my students expressed to me that despite the official censorship and site blockage, many Bahrainis deliberately circumvented the rules and found ways to reach out from inside the borders of Bahrain. In fact, there have been several web sites that specifically focus on criticizing the ruling family of Bahrain.
Amazingly, both Sheik Isa and Sheik Hamad, have been more tolerant of such dissidence than the Saudis, the Iranians, the Syrians, the Egyptians or the Israelis.
But none of the regimes in the Middle East have lived up to the standards set forth by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In fact, many of the states across Northern Africa, which is called the "Maghreb" by Arab Muslims, have even harsher restrictions and penalties for dissidence, especially those expressed in web-based media. There have been reports that regimes in Nigeria, Tunisia and Libya have issued arrest and murder warrants for dissidents distributing dissident "media" from places outside of their particular jurisdictions.
So the case of Karim Amer is an important issue for freedom of the press. But what bothers me is that while Amer's case is an extreme example of the oppression of web-based media and freedom of the press, very little attention is being paid to the same types of oppression, albeit without extreme prosecution, offered by western societies that proclaim their adherence to principles of freedom of the press. Indeed, cases of censorship, shutdown, confiscation and prosecution of bloggers, reporters, dissidents and others employing media to distribute reports, views and criticisms in France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the United States and elsewhere.
The Bush administration has used its considerable power, influence and authority to control the press, giving preference to those that support the views and propaganda of the administration, but threatening legal action, incarceration and sanctions against not only mainstream media outlets, but also bloggers. One such case involved forcing the closure of a blog popular in the intelligence community through manipulating the human resource policies of a contractor because the intelligence expert operating the blog dared to question the soundness of the intelligence reports used to justify invading and occupying Iraq. In short, the blogger was shut down by causing her to be fired.
In fact, several courts have heard cases against bloggers and have ruled that bloggers are not entitled to full First Amendment protections. I have written about these issues in the past, so I won't bore us all with the details. But the fact remains that the ultra-conservative dominated judicial branch has narrowed the definition of "the press" to exclude most bloggers or grass roots commentators. This is nothing less than a continuation of the slow erosion of civil liberties that has been creeping into our society as the fascism of the ultra-conservative and ultra-religious, all of whom are extremists in their views, just as the extremists from the left are in their views.
So while we can look at the case of Karim Amer as a horrible situation and experience, I make the case that almost every society is engaging in significant limits upon civil liberties and human rights, especially that of a free press. I argue that we need to refocus our efforts to assert our freedoms and human rights here at home, as much as we are calling for changes and justice in foreign lands where more overtly extreme examples are being presented to us.
As a frequent blogger, a civil rights and civil liberties advocate, and someone opposed to the Bush administration, these issues concern me greatly. But I am also a veteran of two branches of the US military that takes my oath to defend and support the Constitution quite seriously. Anyone seeking to infringe upon my liberties and human rights is in for the fight of their lives, in the courtroom or on a new battlefield... right outside my front door.
REFERENCES:
Kareem Amer (Karim Amer)
Egypt: Karim Amer Sentence Makes Bloggers New Target Of The Authorities
The 'Crime' of Blogging In Egypt
posted by Jim Downey at 12:15 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home