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