The internet: to each their own?
Yesterday, the Pakistani government lifted a ban on YouTube dating back to September 2012, when it featured a movie hostile to Islam called “Innocence of Muslims”. So what has prompted the authorities in Islamabad to lift the ban? Simple: YouTube has acceded to the demands of the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) and will now provide a special version of the site for Pakistan subject to the demands of the government there.
Let’s stop for a moment to consider what’s going on here: Pakistan is a country, like some others, where blasphemy is punishable by death. What’s more, the decision on what constitutes blasphemy or not is taken by religious leaders, whose dictates are implemented as policy by the government, which in turn seems to be supported by a large proportion of the population. This is a country whose administration is determined to impose this narrow religious vision by banning websites it considers contradict this vision. There are no human rights, no freedom of religion or expression in Pakistan.
When we began to use internet, when it became a fast-growing reality, many of us saw something genuinely universal, a powerful tool that could make the world a better place. But the reality has been stubbornly different: the sociopolitical environment we live in is not prepared for that yet. The world today doesn’t admit universal concepts: what in some countries is seen as an essential freedom is punished by whipping and the death penalty in others. But what are we really talking about here? Countries that have evolved over time and developed a clear consensus about essential freedoms, while others are still living in the late medieval era? Or is it the inalienable right of people to decide about the laws that govern them and the customs they follow, even if to the rest of us these are utterly inacceptable? What are the limits of political correctness that lead us to assume that these realities cannot be changed and that we have to accept them?
The question is clear: is YouTube’s decision to develop a special version for Pakistan a good thing or a bad thing for Pakistanis? Is it better for Pakistan to have access to some content rather than none? Or would the absence of YouTube create awareness among Pakistanis that they live in a “different” country? Should we see these kinds of countries as anomalies that need to be “corrected”, or should we respect those differences and offer them the opportunity to adapt. Google pulled out of China in January 2010 because it refused to accept the Communist Party’s restrictions on accessing certain types of content, but is returning to Pakistan in January 2016 after accepting the government’s restrictions…
Which approach makes the most sense? Which is the most logical? Is Google already preparing a return to the Chinese market? Should we give up on norms we consider universal, such as human rights, religious freedom, the right to free speech? And if so, on what grounds? Commercial interests, or the desire to promote change that could advance these countries or persuade them to think about what is going on there? Has the idea of a universal internet been exposed as a utopian dream?
