Access Denied
Jul. 12th, 2008 11:41 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
paserbypClaiming control of the Internet has become an essential element in any government strategy to rein in dissent - the 21st century parallel to taking over television and radio stations.
The internet has borders - just like meatspace - and the quality of its borders depends on the situation of the country that erects them.
Certainly, government-sponsored filtering isn't new: many public libraries and schools have done it for years in the United Sates, and hate speech is filtered in several European countries.
During 2006, the OpenNet Initiative collected its data the hard way - by sending researchers into each country and having them try to view various Web pages and run specific applications by connecting to various Internet providers. The researchers found filtering in 26 of the 40 nations they visited. But some countries, such Cuba and North Korea, were too risky, and others, such as Russia too big to get a handle on.
The two biggest blockers, in term of number and type of sites, are Iran and China. No surprises there. Both countries block by keywords in the URL stream. China, which also blocks range of specific IP address, has the most extensive filtering system: it implements blocks at various network levels and across the widest range of topics.
Most of the study results are available at http://opennet.net...
Different countries filter for different reasons. For example, Syria filters a lot of political sites, while the Emirates and Saudi Arabia filter a lot of what they consider objectionable social content.
Filtering directed at political opposition to the ruling government is a common type of blocking that spans many countries and is characteristic of authoritarian and repressive regimes.
At some points during 2006, you couldn't connect via Skype(http://www.skype.com) in the Emirates, Jordan and Myanmar. Syria and Vietnam also blocked other voice over IP providers. Some countries block free e-mail providers, while others - including Syria, Ethiopia, the Emirates, India and Pakistan - also block free blogging providers, such as blogspot(https://www.blogger.com).
Not all filters are active all the time, and some countries only put blocks during elections or other critical periods when they want to exert more control over the free flow of information.
In July 2005, the Canadian provider Telus(http://www.telus.com) blocked access to a Web site run by the Telecommunications Workers Union during a labor dispute. And let's not forget the US governments's Internet surveillance activities.
For references you could check authors involved in the OpenNet Initiative from their new book "Access Denied: The Parctice and Policy of Global Internet Filtering".
The internet has borders - just like meatspace - and the quality of its borders depends on the situation of the country that erects them.
Certainly, government-sponsored filtering isn't new: many public libraries and schools have done it for years in the United Sates, and hate speech is filtered in several European countries.
During 2006, the OpenNet Initiative collected its data the hard way - by sending researchers into each country and having them try to view various Web pages and run specific applications by connecting to various Internet providers. The researchers found filtering in 26 of the 40 nations they visited. But some countries, such Cuba and North Korea, were too risky, and others, such as Russia too big to get a handle on.
The two biggest blockers, in term of number and type of sites, are Iran and China. No surprises there. Both countries block by keywords in the URL stream. China, which also blocks range of specific IP address, has the most extensive filtering system: it implements blocks at various network levels and across the widest range of topics.
Most of the study results are available at http://opennet.net...
Different countries filter for different reasons. For example, Syria filters a lot of political sites, while the Emirates and Saudi Arabia filter a lot of what they consider objectionable social content.
Filtering directed at political opposition to the ruling government is a common type of blocking that spans many countries and is characteristic of authoritarian and repressive regimes.
At some points during 2006, you couldn't connect via Skype(http://www.skype.com) in the Emirates, Jordan and Myanmar. Syria and Vietnam also blocked other voice over IP providers. Some countries block free e-mail providers, while others - including Syria, Ethiopia, the Emirates, India and Pakistan - also block free blogging providers, such as blogspot(https://www.blogger.com).
Not all filters are active all the time, and some countries only put blocks during elections or other critical periods when they want to exert more control over the free flow of information.
In July 2005, the Canadian provider Telus(http://www.telus.com) blocked access to a Web site run by the Telecommunications Workers Union during a labor dispute. And let's not forget the US governments's Internet surveillance activities.
For references you could check authors involved in the OpenNet Initiative from their new book "Access Denied: The Parctice and Policy of Global Internet Filtering".
