Version: 2008
  • On TechRepublic: Windows 7 report card: Hits and misses

August 16, 2005 4:00 AM PDT

Perspective: Blogging to be free

See all Perspectives
Blogging to be free
I've never been much of an activist. I lack that certain species of self-regard necessary to join the army of collar-tearing St. Sebastians who populate the peace industry.

But one morning I read an article about the detention and torture of Iranian bloggers. Within half an hour I had conceived and started the Committee to Protect Bloggers, or CPB. Here was a cause that required no hairsplitting. Simply put, no one, for any reason, should be tossed into prison and tortured for what he or she says. I was not alone.

Within a month, thousands of bloggers from around the world, of different creeds, religions and political orientations, had expressed their support. And when, a month after that, on Feb. 22, we staged "Free Mojtaba and Arash Day," tens of thousands of bloggers around the world joined our attempt to focus attention on these two detained Iranian bloggers.

Iran has imprisoned more than 20 bloggers in the last six to eight months. But it is hardly the only villain.

Mojtaba Saminejad remains detained in Tehran for criticizing the yearlong crackdown on reformists in that country. Arash Sigarchi's fate was worse. Midway through that day of ours, it was announced that Arash had been sentenced to a prison term of 14 years by a closed, so-called revolutionary court for transgressions similar to Mojtaba's. It was a heartbreaker, but bloggers across the world persevered.

Iran has imprisoned more than 20 bloggers in the last six to eight months. But it is hardly the only villain. Bahrain, a relatively liberal country for a hereditary Persian Gulf monarchy, imprisoned three moderators of BahrainOnline, a bulletin board service, including the chief, a blogger named Ali Abdulemam. Ali and his two co-moderators were also subsequently released on their own recognizance after a similar effort by Bahraini bloggers and the CPB. China has a huge number of cyberdissidents behind bars. Security police in Malaysia and Syria have hauled bloggers in for interrogation.

Power makes strange requirements on those who would possess it. And governments based solely on the acquisition and maintenance of power are ironically the regimes most discomfited by the finger-wagging of the world at large. We heard repeatedly from the people in the affected countries that the benefit of the attention bloggers bring to a human rights issue is the ability to mobilize overnight. The sudden ramp-up of an issue can put repressive regimes on the defensive and cause them to lose face. And bloggers, unlike most other groups of people, can make something an issue in an instant, all across the world.

Blogging is so decentralized that the complete suppression of dissent is becoming increasingly impractical.

In addition to bringing the word to other bloggers and to the wired in general, the blogosphere has become one of the primary cues of standard media. If something gets big in the blogosphere, it later will be covered in the newspapers and TV. The electronic tricks of the human rights trade provide amplification. Software like Adam Globus-Hoenich's ActivePetition software allows our supporters to swamp an unlimited number of recipients with personalized messages.

Newspapers, even individual Web sites, are relatively easy to shut down. But what can't be shut down is a self-perpetuating system like the blogosphere. What our experience has shown is not that a single organization, the Committee to Protect Bloggers, is a threat to tyrants, but that blogging itself is. Blogging's culture of sharing, quoting and linking has created a radical redundancy for powerful ideas.

Blogging is so decentralized that the complete suppression of dissent is becoming increasingly impractical. Will that lead to a messianic age of liberty and justice for all? I think that's unlikely. But there are 14 million other bloggers out there, and they've all got their opinions.

Biography
Curt Hopkins is director of the Committee to Protect Bloggers.

More Perspectives

See more CNET content tagged:
blogger, blogging, blogosphere, regime, Iran

Add a Comment (Log in or register) (8 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
No matter how much ...
by Earl Benser August 16, 2005 6:31 AM PDT
... lipstick you use, blogs fail to develop any inherent credibility
or journalistic worth. If anything, blogs are a step below spray
paining slogans on walls. It would be nice to think that all this
'intellectual' effort behind blogs results in significant messages,
at least once in a while. But for the most part, blogs are useless
to everyone other than the people who write them. if there is a
gem in the rubbish pile, it will never be found.

Perhaps it would make more sense for all these bloggers who
write of their daily experiences at length to quite the keyboard
and actually find something useful to do.
Reply to this comment
Funny.
by David Arbogast August 16, 2005 10:19 AM PDT
Funny, most of the complaints you have about blogs can be pointed at this very New.com "blog" site. Yet you are out here every single day, spouting your opinion same as every other blogger. Perhaps there is some value to this... sharing of ideas after all, eh?
View reply
Obviously the governments of Iran, Bahrain, etc. see the worth of blogs
by August 16, 2005 2:43 PM PDT
You might think blogging is meaningless, but obviously somebody out there doesn't. Besides, making content publicly available with ease is clearly important for all but the most technically adept. If you think technocrats are the only ones that should be posting things online, perhaps you have more in common with said governments than with the bloggers in prison. Sorry you haven't found any good blogs. I haven't had any trouble.
View reply
Define oppressive regime
by aureolin August 16, 2005 5:28 PM PDT
How do you define an oppressive regime? Is a conservative by definition oppressive? What about regimes that actually try to enforce the law? What if you, personally, disagree with those laws? Does disagreeing with a law make it oppressive? What standard would you hold up laws to, to define them as "oppressive"?

Who gets to decide?
Reply to this comment
how's this any different?
by 202578300049013666264380294439 August 16, 2005 9:46 PM PDT
People have been imprisoned, tortured, and killed for thousands
of years for spreading ideas unpopular with the local
government. Yet when it happens to a couple of _bloggers_
you're up in arms, creating committees and rallying support. I
think what you're doing is fine and I'm certainly not supporting
these types of governments, but how involved were you before it
was a blogger that was oppressed?

And the think so many Americans scoff when we're told how we
take our freedoms for granted...
Reply to this comment
(8 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
advertisement

Latest tech news headlines

RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.

More feeds available in our RSS feed index.

Markets

Market news, charts, SEC filings, and more

Related quotes

Dow Jones Industrials (1.29%) 132.79 10,450.95
S&P 500 (1.36%) 14.86 1,106.24
NASDAQ (1.40%) 29.97 2,176.01
CNET TECH (1.71%) 26.91 1,604.16
  Symbol Lookup
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right