Print 53 comment(s) - last by CENGJINYIWEI.. on Jan 31 at 8:59 AM

Speech denounces countries that prevent the free flow of information to citizens

Americans and citizens of other free nations take many of our freedoms for granted. We can do and say what we want without fearing prison. We can get on the internet and get any information we want, even if other people don’t like it. In some countries, citizens can only access the information that their government wants them to see.

The most infamous country in the world for censoring what citizens can see online is China. China isn’t the lone country that censors access to information though; Tunisia and Uzbekistan both censor the internet, and Egypt has detained bloggers who disagree with the government before.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has denounced countries that use technology to prevent citizens from accessing information freely. Clinton delivered the speech on January 21 and outlined the five key freedoms of the internet age that will be used to help build U.S. policy.

Clinton's speech outlined the commitment of the U.S. to freedom of speech and worship online, the freedom to connect to the internet anywhere, and the freedom to live without fear of cyber attacks.

Clinton said, "Countries that restrict free access to information or violate the basic rights of Internet users risk walling themselves off from the progress of the next century. In the last year, we've seen a spike in threats to the free flow of information. China, Tunisia and Uzbekistan have stepped up their censorship of the Internet."

She continued saying, "[The internet] has already been a source of tremendous progress in China, and it is fabulous there are so many people in China now online." Clinton added, "The United States and China have different views on this issue. And we intend to address those differences candidly and consistently in the context of our positive, cooperative and comprehensive relationship."

The comments come after the U.S. asked China for an explanation for the cyber attacks against search giant Google and 30 other U.S. companies that were targeted in attacks that originated in China. Google has stated that it may consider leaving the Chinese market due to the attacks and the censorship of its search results required by the Chinese government.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: How ironic
By superPC on 1/22/2010 4:34:14 PM , Rating: 0
i think we all forget how expensive freedom is. and what it cost to maintain that freedom. the US got a taste of how high freedom can cost thanks to 9/11. after that flying never feels the same. and each terror attempts kept on reminding us how expensive freedom really is. and that is just a small taste. in the past freedom cost even higher. with Nixon watergate US nearly turn into an authoritarian country. with the patriot act privacy has just become one of the price for freedom.

give credit where credit is due. the price for freedom in china may be too high. right now they're one of the fastest growing economy. if they're as free as the US, that might means civil unrest, or worse, civil war. freedom is what they pay for their amazing economical growth. and if you ever talk to someone that lives in china (city not countryside), they would tell you that freedom is a price worth paying for that economical growth.

RE: How ironic
By masamasa on 1/22/2010 5:07:57 PM , Rating: 2
"and if you ever talk to someone that lives in china (city not countryside), they would tell you that freedom is a price worth paying for that economical growth."

They will tell you the opposite, among other things mentioned in this thread. Who do you think is getting the benefit of the economic growth? It isn't the people. To sum it up and rich get richer and.....well you know the old saying.

RE: How ironic
By superPC on 1/22/2010 5:32:29 PM , Rating: 2
you may be right there about who gets the most benefit out of economic growth. but the poor stand to loose more in a civil unrest or civil war as the rich would undoubtedly have long left the country before that happened (or have better protection). you might say china is choosing the lesser of two evil (civil unrest or no freedom).

RE: How ironic
By Penti on 1/24/2010 12:08:51 PM , Rating: 2
Many in the cities are actually rich party members, it's those who can send their kids to study abroad. I.e. they make more then most working class people or blue collar workers in the west.

The rest is stuck earning like $150 a month living at a factory dormitory. Or a really crappy apartment. But there's still hundreds of millions that got a high living standard. Got their own apartments or houses, good paying jobs, can afford to travel, own a car and so forth. The party would be nothing without members. Then you also always got the people who's poor and are working in the informal sector living on building sites, illegal housing, squatting in make shift houses, under bridges or whatever.

Then again, US got millions of illegal immigrants living in sub standard housing, running it's agricultural sector. There's problems in any society. US is pretty broken.

"I modded down, down, down, and the flames went higher." -- Sven Olsen

Most Popular ArticlesSmartphone Screen Protectors – What To Look For
September 21, 2016, 9:33 AM
UN Meeting to Tackle Antimicrobial Resistance
September 21, 2016, 9:52 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM
5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
Update: Problem-Free Galaxy Note7s CPSC Approved
September 22, 2016, 5:30 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki