Internet should promote civility (By Greg Cusack)

By: | Post date: February 24, 2010 | Comments: 41 Comments

Posted in categories: Backup of Internet Posts, Uncategorized

I have been avidly following the back and forth conversation between China and the United States regarding the Internet and the recent dust-up occasioned by Google in China.

I regret that my country has, once again, fallen into the old habit of “lecturing” to China. We may have something to offer, as a country, to your people to consider, but we have no right to lecture. Personally, I apologize for this.

Both as a former college instructor of American history and political science in this country, involving studying our revolution and the issues that surrounded the creation of our Constitution (including “protecting free speech”), and as a person involved in public policy in the US for almost four decades (including 12 years as an elected official), I have been both buoyed and stung by “free speech.”

In this context, I have found your paper’s (Shanghai Daily’s) reporting of China’s government’s perspective on this issue to be of great interest. I agree with much of what your government has said.

First, “free speech” in the context of our Constitution was aimed primarily at protecting freedom of speech and assembly in matters of politics, civic issues, and religious beliefs.

Nonetheless, it has always been construed in this country to also have some limits: for example, I do not have the right to falsely shout “fire” in a crowded movie theater. That is an abuse of free speech! Why, because it endangers my neighbors.

I have heard your government saying something very similar. Should a society simply “not care” about what is flooding its air waves, or the Internet ether? Should “anything” go?

In the US, all sorts of garbage (not just pornography, but so-called games of excessive violence, and political charges and counter-charges without any supporting facts) fills our media, including the Internet.

This is because “free speech” has been enlarged to include “commercial” activities. So, if I can pay for something, for example, “buying air time,” I have an almost unimpeded right to flood it with whatever I want.

There are some, ever-weakening limitations on what can be shown or said on over-the-air TV, but they are very weak. This has greatly cheapened political and civil discourse in the US. I recognize that the current debate has focused on China’s alleged censorship of the Internet regarding both pornography and political debate of sorts.

Cannot a reasonable society decide that there is a clear distinction between garbage and civil discourse?

Does not your citizenry and your government have a reasonable interest, indeed, responsibility, in seeing to it that the Internet furthers civility rather than erodes it? Enriches young minds rather than poisoning them?

I don’t pretend to know exactly where that line is, but I believe it exists and that it must be thought of. China does not need to repeat our mistakes. We need to continue to learn from each other, adopting the best practices of each.

41 Comments

Leave a Reply