|
Still, freedom of information flow is often indicated by the foreign press, which is an opposition to Chinese Internet regulation. As it is illustrated that “it is not surprise that the ICP Measures forbid ICPs from producing, copying, publicizing, or disseminating state-classified information or information that is targeted against the government and that threatens national security. The ICP Measures also ban any Internet content that could incite racial ethnic hatred, social disorder, crime or violence.” Concerning this question, briefly, there are two main points against it. The first one is, in fact, Chinese Internet content is not so ban as what is cited above; on the contrary there is much information about crime, violence, and others, if the issue has happened. For example, the SOHU.COM, one of the most famous ICPs in China, reported two crimes of twenty reports in the social affairs section at 19th November 2002, which is 10 per cent high. Furthermore these ICPs sometimes invite some experts, who are concerned with social problems, to discuss about these issues such as idleness, corruption, and others. This sign implies, obviously, that Chinese Internet regulation is not so tight as it is reported by the foreign press.
Secondly, it is entirely possible the medium will become a monster if it is not regulated well. There is a widely reported example recently, that is, , one of the Hongkong entertainment magazines, has been shut down because it released the privacy of some actress, which harmed them seriously. As a consequence it will be clear that it is worth reiterating the control of Internet information. Then with transborder date flows increasing this kind of control seems more necessary to protect normal people’s rights. Controls over transborder data flows, therefore, have been a feature of almost all national data protection statutes, with restrictions being justified on the basis of safeguarding the position of individuals. After 11th September there is a remarkable change that is most of nations including the United States turn to control the information flow in the Internet. It was reported by the New York Times in February 26, 2002, that is, the New York state government quietly ordered its state agencies to remove information available from government Web sites as a security precaution. The new policy is apparently one of the most far-reaching and restrictive of any government in the U.S. All these changes simply imply that uncontrolled information will kill information itself definitely. On the other hand, even more so-called freedom has been given to the medium, including Internet; it seems to have no effect in order to reduce crimes. Ironically some people learn from Internet, which reports the criminal procedure specifically, so that their skill of committing crime is improved by those unregulated Internet. Fro these reasons “in Sweden and Austria transborder data flows outwith countries which are signatories to the Council of Europe Convention require to licensed by the data protection authorities.”
|
