Social media censorship -- Iċ-ċensura tal-midja soċjali

 

I’ll be writing about quite a difficult subject today.

 

What drove me in this direction was the horrible attack just undertaken in Christchurch in New Zealand, where an Australian terrorist is alleged to have entered two mosques in the city and shot at the crowd gathered there, ending up with fifty fatalities, and seems to have intended taking more lives if he hadn’t been apprehended and arrested by police.

 

The alleged terrorist was a white supremacist that before starting on his bloody and cowardly rampage, sent a manifest full of hatred against immigrants to the office of New Zealand’s Prime Minister, Jacinda Adern, and to several other media organisations.  He also started showing his killings live on the Facebook Live platform.

 

Arms he had a few, including one engraved with a reference to the Great Siege of Malta of 1565, when the Maltese populace and the Knights of St John had rebutted the invasion of the Ottoman Muslim forces.1

 

This act shocked many people around the world, and some world leaders are discussing how to respond.

 

Jacinda Adern has my admiration for the compassion shown to the victims’ families, when going to console and listen to their pain, entering as one of them and even wearing the hijab as an act of solidarity.  This attitude is the opposite to that shown by the Australian member of parliament, Pauline Hanson, who had worn the burqa in the Australian Senate as a show of disdain to the Islamic faith some years ago.

 

Adern seems to be intent on guiding her government take two significant steps as a reaction to the worst terrorist attack occurring in her country.  The first is to propose new restrictions in laws regulating the purchase of arms in the country, as the laws in this space are considered to be loose as are those in the United States of America.  In fact, all the arms used by the alleged killer were all purchased legally in the country.

 

The second step is an insistence with Facebook and other internet platforms to remove copies of the killing videos and their derivations.  In fact, in the first 24 hours after the attack, Facebook had already removed 1.5 million copies of the videos, and there was still much work needing to be done.  At least one other platform seems to have had no intention of cooperating.2

 

The Australian Prime Minister, Scott Morrison, stated his desire for other world leaders to discuss how to pressure other social media organisations so that similar videos be stopped.  He added he wished these organisations had automated systems that detect and not permit hate-filled content.

 

This intention is difficult to disagree with, unless you’re a white supremacist, hate immigrants or some other ethnic or religious group and/or sympathise by and large with such views.  I don’t consider myself included with the latter, nevertheless I do have one concern if these intentions do end up as reality, that is organisation such as Facebook, Twitter and others having better systems to filter out objectionable content.

My fear is that one government might define that sickening content similar to that witnessed by the world from New Zealand be stopped by these automated systems, and another government in another country might decide that political content it disagrees with is objectionable and should be stopped.

 

In other words, I see that the old hoary chestnut of the conflict between those believing in the absolute freedom of expression and those believing in the need for censorship in certain circumstances.

 

I admit this is not an easy question.  I accept the argument that there should be limits for freedom of expression where ghastly scenes are involved, or depictions of people inciting some kind of violence against individuals or communities, as long as these limits are defined and agreed, given the universal nature of the internet, by as many countries as possible.  This naturally will not impede some country or other to stretch this definition hither or thither.

 

I await the discussion that will arise on this subject with not a little concern.

 

---------------------------------------

 

Se nikteb illum fuq suġġett pjuttost diffiċli.

 

Li ġiegħlni naħseb fuqu kien l-attakk orribbli li għadu kif sar f’Christchurch ta’ New Zealand, fejn terrorista Awstraljan huwa allegat li daħal f’żewġ moskejiet tal-belt u spara lejn il-miġemgħat li kienu hemm, u spiċċaw mietu ħamsin ruħ, u jidher li kien intenzjonat li jaħsad iktar ħajjiet kieku ma kienx imwaqqaf u arrestat mill-pulizija.

 

L-allegat terrorista kien supremaċista abjad li qabel ma beda l-maltempata mdemmija viljakka tiegħu, bagħat manifest mimli bil-mibegħda kontra l-immigranti lill-uffiċċju tal-Prim Ministru ta’ New Zealand Jacinda Adern u lil diversi organizzazzjonijiet tal-midja.  Beda wkoll juri l-atti tal-qtil tiegħu dak il-ħin stess fuq il-pjattaforma Facebook Live.

 

Armamenti kellu diversi, inkluż wieħed li deher imnaqqax b’riferenza għall-Assedju l-Kbir ta’ Malta tal-1565, fejn il-popolazzjoni Maltin u l-Kavallieri ta’ San Ġwann kienu ħarġu rrabettew l-invażjoni tal-forzi Musulmani Ottomani.1

 

Dan l-att ħasad lil ħafna nies madwar id-dinja, u xi mexxejja tad-dinja qiegħdin jiddiskutu kif sejrin jirrispondu.

 

Jacinda Adern għandha l-ammirazzjoni tiegħi għall-kumpassjoni li wriet lill-familjari tal-vittmi, fejn marret biex issabbar u tisma’ l-uġigħ tagħhom, waqt li daħlet magħhom bħala waħda minnhom u anke libset il-ħiġab bħala turija ta’ solidarjetà.  Din l-attitudni hija l-oppost ta’ dik murija mill-membru tal-parlament Awstraljan Pauline Hanson li kienet libset il-burka fis-Senat Awstraljan b’turija ta’ disprezz lejn it-twemmin Islamiku xi snin ilu.

 

Adern jidher li beħsiebha tiggwida lill-gvern jieħu żewġ passi sinjifikanti bħala reazzjoni għal dan l-agħar attakk terroristiku li sar f’pajjiżha.  L-ewwel huwa li jiġu proposti restrizzjonijiet ġodda fil-liġijiet tax-xiri tal-armamenti fil-pajjiż, għax il-liġijiet f’dan il-qasam jitqiesu li huma laxki bħal ma huma dawk fl-Istati Uniti tal-Amerika.  Fil-fatt, l-armamenti tal-allegat qattiel kollha kienu nxtraw legalment fil-pajjiż.

 

It-tieni pass huwa l-insistenza ma’ Facebook u pjattaformi oħra tal-internet biex jitneħħew kopji tal-vidjos tal-qtil u derivazzjonijiet tagħhom.  Fil-fatt, fl-ewwel 24 siegħa wara l-attakk, Facebook kien diġà neħħa 1.5 miljun kopja tal-vidjos, u kien baqa’ ħafna xogħol xi jsir.  Mill-inqas pjattaforma waħda oħra jidher li ma kellha l-ebda intenzjoni li tikkoopera.2

 

Il-Prim Ministru Awstraljan Scott Morrison stqarr li jixtieq lil mexxejja oħra tad-dinja li jiddiskutu kif jistgħu jagħmlu pressjoni fuq l-organizzazzjonijiet tal-midja soċjali biex vidjos simili jiġu mwaqqfa.  Kompla li jixtieq li dawn l-organizzazzjonijiet ikollhom sistemi awtomatiċi li jindunaw bi u ma jippermettux kontenut mimli mibegħda.

 

Din hija intenzjoni li diffiċli li ma taqbilx magħha, sakemm m’intix supremaċista abjad, tobgħod lill-immigranti jew xi grupp etniku jew reliġjuż u/jew tissimpatizza xi ftit jew wisq ma’ dawn il-veduti.  Jien m’iniex minn dawn tal-aħħar, madankollu għandi biża’ wieħed jekk dawn l-intenzjonijiet fil-fatt jissarrfu f’realtà, jiġifieri li kumpanniji bħal Facebook, Twitter u oħrajn ikollhom sistemi aħjar biex jiffiltraw ‘il barra kontenut oġġezzjonabbli.

 

Il-biża’ tiegħi hija li gvern wieħed jista’ jiddefinixxi li kontenut makabru bħal dak li iffaċċjat id-dinja f’New Zealand jiġi mwaqqaf minn dawn is-sistemi awtomatiċi, u gvern ieħor ta’ pajjiż ieħor jiddeċiedi li kontenut politiku li ma jaqbilx miegħu huwa oġġezzjonabbli u għandu jiġi mwaqqaf.

 

Fi kliem ieħor, nara li se terġa tqum il-kunflitt bejn dawk li jemmnu fil-libertà assoluta tal-espressjoni u dawk li jemmnu fiċ-ċensura f’ċerti ċirkostanzi.

 

Nammetti li din mhijiex kwestjoni faċli.  Naċċetta l-argument li għandu jkun hemm limiti għal-libertà tal-espressjoni fejn ikun hemm xeni makabri, jew ikun hemm min iħajjar xi tip ta’ vjolenza kontra individwi jew komunitajiet, basta dawn il-limiti jiġu definiti u maqbula, fil-każ universali tal-internet, bejn kemm jista’ jkun pajjiżi.  Dan mhux se jwaqqaf naturalment lil xi pajjiż jew ieħor li jġebbed din id-definizzjoni ‘l hawn jew ‘l hemm.

 

Nistenna d-diskussjoni li għad tqum fuq dan is-suġġett b’mhux ftit ta’ tħassib.

 

 

1https://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20190315/local/malta-1565-written-on-mosque-massacre-gunmans-rifle.704621, retrieved 19/3/2019

2https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-19/new-zealand-facebook-christchurch-shooting-video-sheryl-sandberg/10915184, retrieved 19/3/2019

1https://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20190315/local/malta-1565-written-on-mosque-massacre-gunmans-rifle.704621, retrieved 19/3/2019

2https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-19/new-zealand-facebook-christchurch-shooting-video-sheryl-sandberg/10915184, retrieved 19/3/2019

Support -- Sapport

 

This word is difficult to explain without being misunderstood in particular circumstances.  For example, the current Wiktionary entry for the verb includes the following definitions: to keep, to back, to help, to sustain etc.1  With all this, one might understand that when one person supports another, he would demonstrate solidarity, defend the other for whatever might have been done and intercede for him come what may.

 

So one might legitimately ask whether a person should provide support to another considered to have done something deplorable.

 

I say there is room for this, and unashamedly so, but before you reach out for your rotten tomatoes to hurl at me, just let me explain.

 

The context for all this you’d have probably guessed by now is the guilty verdict delivered by jury of a court in Victoria with respect to Cardinal George Pell who had been accused of sexual abuse of two choir boys at St Patricks Cathedral in Melbourne.

 

For those of you just disembarking on planet Earth after a visit to nearby Mars without access to the internet, these stories, and many similar ones, are now the witness to Christ we are receivin lately from the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church in which we reaffirm our belief every Sunday.

 

Many have been shocked by the verdict, including myself whose sympathy for the Cardinal is nil.  There are those who do not accept the verdict, and others who have launched into condemnation.  I will do none of the above, except to remind that there is still the appeal be heard and adjudicated.

 

The point of this article is quite another though.  For example, the ex Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott declared on radio that Pell was still his friend, and had talked to him by phone on the day the guilty verdict became public.  He said he felt that Pell had long been his friend, and that he also felt for the victims of an institution that they were supposed to trust.2  For this display of support for Pell, Abbott was criticised by many, including his interviewer Ray Hadley.

 

Similar was the reply by the current Archbishop of Melbourne, Peter Comensoli, who declared that George Pell remains his friend and is ready to go visit him in jail.  He continued that nonetheless he would separate his personal friendship from the damage that has been done to individuals and communities by the Church.3

 

This to my mind is the main point – you can have a personal relationship with an offender, while condemning the bad act undertaken and acknowledge the damage undertaken.

 

Prisons in NSW and the world are full of offenders, both on remand and sentenced, who have family and friends that taintain contact with them by phone or letters, and many visit them in person at the jail, regularly or otherwise.  This does not necessarily mean they are happy with the criminal act that had occurred.

 

Naturally not everyone is ready to maintain a relationship with those on the wrong side of the law, and I’ve met several who have been completely abandoned by whoever might have been close.  I need to make clear that I don’t second guess those who take such a step, as I have no idea what circumstances they might have lived through – everybody has his or her own story to tell.

 

Nevertheless, maintained personal relationships, even with those in the deepest reaches of a gaol, far away from and reviled by everyone else, are essential for a sense of humanity to be maintained in a world that in the blink of an eye has turned to walls, slamming doors and the rigid routines dictated by security.

 

For those who are Christian, it is good to remember the invite by Jesus: “I was in prison and you visited me”.4

 

We also need to embrace those who have been abused, broken, betrayed, having justice denied for such a long time, not even believed after all.  For those that are still alive, those who avoided the vicious circle of drugs and suicide, we need to show compassion, a listening ear, provide them with structured help, and sympathy for their long and difficult quest for justice.

 

For them also, support.  For them also, Jesus invites us in the same verse from Matthew: “I was sick and you took care of me”.5

 

-------------------------------------

 

Din hija kelma mislufa mill-Ingliż support, u hija daqsxejn diffiċli li tispjega xi tfisser mingħajr ma tinftiehem ħażin.  Per eżempju, id-dizzjunarju ta’ Aquilina jittraduċi support bħala rifed, felaħ, appoġġja, sostna, mantna, għen, kien favur u oħrajn.  B’dan kollu, wieħed jista’ jifhem li bniedem li jkun qed juri sapport lil ieħor, ikun solidali miegħu, jiddefendih għal kull m’għamel u jaqbeż għalih akkost ta’ kollox.

 

U allura, wieħed jista’ leġittimament jistaqsi jekk bniedem għandux juri sapport lil ieħor meqjus li għamel xi ħaġa deplorevoli.

 

Jien ngħid li hemm post għal dan, u b’wiċċek minn quddiem, imma qabel ma tmorru tfittxu t-tadam mnawwar biex tħaġġruni bih, ħalluni nispjega xi ftit.

 

Il-kuntest ta’ dan kollu probabbli ndunajtu li hija d-deċiżjoni ta’ ħati li għadha kif ingħatat minn ġuri ta’ qorti f’Victoria lill-Kardinal Kattoliku George Pell li kien akkużat b’abbuż sesswali ta’ żewġ subien, membri tal-kor, fil-Kattidral St Patricks f’Melbourne.

 

Għal min għadu kif irritorna fid-dinja wara mawra fuq il-pjaneta Mars mingħajr aċċess għall-internet, dawn l-istejjer, u ħafna oħrajn bħalhom, huma x-xhieda ta’ Kristu li qiegħdin nirċievu dan l-aħħar mill-Knisja Qaddisa Kattolika u Appostolika li nistqarru t-twemmin tagħna fiha kull nhar ta’ Ħadd.

 

Ħafna ġew ixxukkjati mill-verdett, inkluż jien li simpatija mal-Kardinal m’għandi xejn.  Hemm min il-verdett ma jaċċettahx u oħrajn li infexxew jikkundannawh.  Jien ma se nagħmel xejn minn dan, ħlief li nfakkar li għad baqa’ l-appell x’jinstema u jinqata’.

 

Is-suġġett huwa ieħor madankollu.  Per eżempju, l-eks Prim Ministru Awstraljan Tony Abbott stqarr fuq ir-radju li Pell kien u għadu ħabib tiegħu, u kien kellmu bit-telefon dakinhar li l-verdett ta’ ħati sar pubbliku.  Qal li kien iħoss għal Pell li kien ilu ħabib tiegħu għal ħafna żmien, u kien iħoss ukoll għall-vittmi ta’ istituzzjoni li suppost setgħu jafdaw.1  Għal din il-wirja ta’ sapport għal Pell, Abbott kien ikkritikat minn ħafna, inkluż mill-intervistatur tiegħu, Ray Hadley.

 

Simili kienet it-tweġiba tal-Arċisqof ta’ Melbourne, Peter Comensoli, li stqarr li George Pell jibqa’ ħabib tiegħu u lest li jmur jinvistah il-ħabs.  Kompla madankollu li jifred din il-ħbiberija personali mill-atti ta’ ħsara li twettqu kontra individwi u komunitajiet mill-Knisja.2

 

Dan jidhirli jien li hu l-punt prinċipali – li jista’ jkollok relazzjoni personali ma’ offensur, filwaqt li tikkundanna l-att ħażin u tagħraf il-ħsara li jkun twettaq.

 

Il-ħabsijiet ta’ NSW u tad-dinja mimlija b’offensuri, kemm akkużati u kemm sentenzjati, li għandhom familjari u ħbieb tagħhom li jżommu kuntatt magħhom bit-telefon jew bl-ittri, u ħafna minnhom iżuruhom, regolarment jew le, fiżikament fil-ħabs. Dan ma jfissirx neċessarjament li huma kuntenti bl-att kriminali li jkun twettaq.  

 

 

Naturalment mhux kulħadd ikun lest iżomm relazzjoni ma’ min ikun xellef difrejh mal-ġustizzja, u jien naf diversi li ġew abbandunati kompletament minn kull min kien qrib tiegħu.  Irrid nagħmilha ċara li jien ma nlumx ‘il min jagħmel dan il-pass, għax ma nafx minn xiex ikun għadda – kulħadd għandu l-istorja tiegħu.

 

Madankollu, relazzjonijiet personali miżmuma, anke meta wieħed jinsab f’qiegħ ta’ ħabs, ‘il bogħod u mistmerr minn kulħadd, huwa essenzjali biex jinżamm xi sens ta’ umanità f’dinja li f’ħakka t’għajn saret biss ħitan, bibien tal-ħadid jissabbtu u rutini riġidi tas-sigurtà.

 

Għal min huwa Nisrani, tajjeb li niftakru l-istedina ta’ Ġesù: “kont fil-ħabs u ġejtu żżuruni”.3

 

U irridu wkoll ngħożżu ‘l dawk li ġew abbużati, nies miksura, ittraduti, ħafna drabi mċaħħda mill-ġustizzja, lanqas biss emmnuti wara kollox.  Għal dawk li għadhom ħajjin, dawk li rnexxielhom jevitaw waqgħa fiċ-ċirku vizzjuż tad-droga jew is-suwiċidju, irridu nuru mogħdrija, widna li tisma’,appoġġ għal strutturi ta’ għajnuna għalihom u simpatija għat-triq twila u diffiċli biex ikollhom ġustizzja.

 

Għalihom ukoll, sapport.  Għalihom ukoll, l-istedina ta’ Ġesu fl-istess vers tal-vanġelu ta’ Mattew: “kont marid u ġejtu tarawni”.4

 

 

 

1https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/support, retrieved 14/3/2019

2https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/tony-abbott-doesn-t-recall-if-george-pell-asked-for-a-character-reference-20190304-p511k7.html, retrieved 5/3/2019

3https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/archbishop-of-melbourne-says-george-pell-remains-a-friend-apologises-to-abuse-victims-20190227-p510hu.html, retrieved 6/3/2019

4Mt 25:36

5Ibid.

1https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/tony-abbott-doesn-t-recall-if-george-pell-asked-for-a-character-reference-20190304-p511k7.html, retrieved 5/3/2019

2https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/archbishop-of-melbourne-says-george-pell-remains-a-friend-apologises-to-abuse-victims-20190227-p510hu.html, retrieved 6/3/2019

3Mt 25:36

4Ibid.