Reading the news today, I came across a number of articles with one thing in common–they all in different ways (some new, some old) have the potential to impact how we communicate online:
- Charging by the Byte to Curb Internet Traffic (Times): There are many places around the world that charge “by the byte” for internet access, and the U.S. typically hasn’t been one of them. In some ways this seems perfectly fair. Yet, as bandwidth hungry technologies like video, VOIP, and bittorrent distribution become increasingly common, moving away from a flat rate access charge could hinder their adoption. Thus pricing is one way that might impact how we communicate online
- Verizon offers details of Usenet deletion: alt.* groups, others gone (CNet): In reaction to the state of New York’s request to restrict access to sites offering child pornography Verizon is taking out an entire hierarchy of newsgroups. Alt groups may be more likely to host offensive speech (ALT stands for ‘Anarchists, Lunatics, and Terrorists’) but by no means do all of them host offending images. Here, refusing to host a resource (not quite the same as completely removing access) is the means for controlling communication.
- France to block porn, terror, hate websites (Sydney Morning Herald via Slashdot): France will use the help of its citizens to flag porn, terror, and hate websites to possibly be blacklisted. This is an interesting combination of social control of speech (since the public is deciding what to block) and a technical complete access restriction. As Adam Liptak wrote a few days ago, “In the United States, that debate has been settled. Under the First Amendment, newspapers and magazines can say what they like about minorities and religions — even false, provocative or hateful things — without legal consequence.”
- Training helps bloggers hone professionalism (AP via Wired): Finally, the law and what we know (or don’t know) about it have the power the power to control speech. Bloggers and other would-be online publishers attended a session to learn some of the ins and outs of libel and other media laws. One individual hoping to start an “ultra-local,” online newspaper was “so worried about the legal boundaries of writing online that he still hasn’t started the ultra-local news site.”
I have a long list of questions here, perhaps most importantly: is this moving these bloggers over the line into the realm of “journalists?” Should the casual blogger (who doesn’t earn income from the speech on their blog) have to know the intricacies of these laws?