Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Censorship Government

A Horrifying Interactive Map of Global Internet Censorship 158

Posted by timothy
from the coming-soon-to-a-security-theater-near-you dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Imagine a world where the book burners had won. A world where information is filtered and must be approved by governments before it can be accessed by their citizens. A world where people are held down and kept in line by oppressive regimes that restrict the free flow of information and bombard citizens with government-approved messages. Now stop imagining, because this horrifying world already exists..."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

A Horrifying Interactive Map of Global Internet Censorship

Comments Filter:
  • [censored] (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 26, 2014 @10:07AM (#47756913)

    [censored]

  • by iONiUM (530420) on Tuesday August 26, 2014 @10:16AM (#47756963) Homepage Journal

    The summary links to an article which has a link in it to the map which doesn't load.

    What a waste of space. Why is this on Slashdot? Find a reliable source, and then post it.

    • Re:Doesn't work (Score:5, Informative)

      by mlkj (3794193) on Tuesday August 26, 2014 @10:21AM (#47757013)
      Works for me. Maybe the servers are just choking under the load. Here's a screenshot : http://a.pomf.se/xcxzwr.png [a.pomf.se]
      • by iONiUM (530420)

        Thanks! I live in Canada, but it's greyed out? Our internet is not censored, or if it is, they do such a good job that I don't even know it's censored.

        • by Mashiki (184564)

          The only thing we have in Canada is CleanFeed [wikipedia.org] it's it's optional for any ISP, they can use it, or not use it. Large ISP's like Bell and Rogers use it, or have used it in the past. Not sure if they still do. Smaller ISP's like distributel, teksavvy, execulink, etc., don't use it.

      • Works for me. Maybe the servers are just choking under the load.

        Here's a screenshot : http://a.pomf.se/xcxzwr.png [a.pomf.se]

        I've been on /. for 15 years. That's the first time I've clicked an image link here that actually went to the image that I was expecting. Thank you.

    • by Rik Sweeney (471717) on Tuesday August 26, 2014 @10:26AM (#47757069) Homepage

      The summary links to an article which has a link in it to the map which doesn't load.

      It's probably been censored by your ISP :)

    • by jeffmeden (135043)

      The summary links to an article which has a link in it to the map which doesn't load.

      What a waste of space. Why is this on Slashdot? Find a reliable source, and then post it.

      Are you sure you're not censored???!!?!??!?!?!!1111zomg

      But yes, the actual map is slashdotted

    • by RevWaldo (1186281)
      It's not called getting "slashdotted" for nothin', ya know.

      You want to contact the site and offer to mirror it on your own servers, be our guest.

      .
    • The page the map is on first caused my browser to alert me that it has an invalid security cert, and then was blocked by the security settings in my DNS filter (which is set pretty wide open for the most part, i mainly use it for blocking content I don't want to see). Thats a cool place to store a internet censorship map.
  • North Korea should be very NOT FREE.

    • by Anonymous Coward
      Well, you can't measure internet censorship if nobody has internet ..
    • Its hard to represent negative numbers in this sort of graph.
  • The map's already been Slashdotted. Yet another type of censorship.
  • Looks like they censored themselves.

  • These "mod points" slashdot gives just censors everyone, comments should be freeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!eleven
  • [Citation Needed] (Score:5, Informative)

    by Mycroft-X (11435) on Tuesday August 26, 2014 @10:24AM (#47757051)

    United States is shown as:
    VIOLATIONS OF USER RIGHTS 12/40
    FREEDOM ON THE NET 17/100
    OBSTACLES TO ACCESS 4/25
    LIMITS ON CONTENT 1/35

    But they don't say what these things are and which ones are violated. Without the context and citations the results are meaningless -- I could create the same thing in Paint.

    • Re:[Citation Needed] (Score:5, Informative)

      by Anubis IV (1279820) on Tuesday August 26, 2014 @11:19AM (#47757523)

      If you get to the specific page for the US, it lists the following as conditions that were met:

      - Political, Social and/or Religious Content Blocked?
      - Localized or Nationwide ICT Shutdown?
      - Pro-government Commentators Manipulate Online Discussions?
      - New Law/Directive Increasing Censorship or Punishment Passed?
      - New Law/Directive Increasing Surveillance or Restricting Anonymity Passed?
      - Blogger/ICT User Arrested for Political or Social Writings?
      - Blogger/ICT User Physically Attacked or Killed (including in custody)?
      - Technical Attacks Against Government Critics and Human Rights Organisations?

      Nowhere are any of those cited (at least not publicly that I could see), but at least a few of them do appear to be true, based on news we've all likely heard.

      • No, it actually says the USA does none of those things. Those are Xes next to those, not the check marks it has for violations.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Germany is free?
      A country where there are legislations against Holocaust denial?
      You gotta be fuckin kiddin me.

  • Link has no map? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by tekrat (242117) on Tuesday August 26, 2014 @10:26AM (#47757073) Homepage Journal

    It links to an article that wants you to click a lot more before you ever get to any map. What the hell ever happened to accessing information on the web, as opposed to clicking just on a bunch of ads?

    Imagine a world where global advertising has eliminated all information, never mind censorship. That world has already happened.

  • Lame.. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Virtucon (127420) on Tuesday August 26, 2014 @10:30AM (#47757103)

    Lame, lame and lame. It's been going on for years and just because your country doesn't ascribe to censorship they're most likely tracking your activities surreptitiously. While it was a lofty goal to have an Internet free from Censors, you're not going to get that to happen in every place all the time. There was once a trial in Canada over a very serious crime there was some testimony that was extremely sensitive involving the crime. The judge in the case issued a gag order including that of all Canadian press organizations not to publish details about it. That didn't of course apply to US journalists covering the trial who published the information in the US. This led to Canadian border agents seizing US newspapers because of the publication of the information. The point here is that some view censorship as beneficial in certain cases while others view it with disdain. For example, this week I saw a video of a beheading. Now after watching it I probably wish that somebody had filtered that for me.

    • For example, this week I saw a video of a beheading. Now after watching it I probably wish that somebody had filtered that for me.

      I haven't seen a video of a beheading because someone filtered it for me. "Someone" being myself. I'm not going to purposefully watch a beheading video. So unless someone tricks me into watching one, I'm not going to see it.

      • by Virtucon (127420)

        Well I did it out of curiosity and being curious means some garish views in my minds eye. Curiosity did kill the cat.

        • by e r (2847683)
          You knew it was a beheading video... and you CHOSE to watch it. Now you're trying to say that someone else should take responsibility for the things you view. How about just letting someone else take responsibility for your entire life and be done with it? Get off the internet and go bury your head in the sand, child, real life is much too rough for you.
          • by Virtucon (127420)

            Read the title of this posting... "Horrifying" I'd submit censorship is a bit less horrifying than that particular video. I love patronizing retards who seem to think that life should be at you full volume, constantly. Every piece of information, every detail has to be in their hands or the world is somehow cheating them. Knowing about something and having graphic knowledge of it are two different things. Yes I chose to watch it and now after watching it I think that there should have been some respon

            • by Anonymous Coward

              Yes I chose to watch it and now after watching it I think that there should have been some responsibility taken to remove it.

              You learned the wrong lesson from watching the beheading. What you should have taken away is a critical opinion of those who would support execution and practice it. If you found the execution offensive, you should have been motivated to some political action, such as writing to your local representive informing him/her of the event and what policy you want them to support in the future, and sending some of your money to groups that would help to stop similar events from happening again.

              Next thing you know Youtube will allow rape videos to be submitted or torture videos. Is that what we want as a society?

              Yes (if we replace

            • by redeIm (3779401)

              If you don't want to watch it, then don't. You don't get to use censorship to stop everyone else from seeing something you're offended by; that's 100% anti-freedom.

              I don't like your comment. Therefore, no one else should be able to see it. But I'm sure you'll talk about how this is 100% different because of some arbitrary nonsense you spew forth. I can do the same, so don't waste your time.

              Does it make us less human and desensitize us to future events? Yes.

              Not only can you not prove that (I assure you, watching a video does not turn someone into a different species.), but i

              • by Virtucon (127420)

                "Toute nation a le gouvernement qu'elle mérite." - Joseph de Maistre

                "Every nation gets the government it deserves."

                Censorship may be abhorrent but it's not Horror. People who think they're free are basically not, so don't assume that to be true. If you want liberty then you'll have to fight to change the statis quo because no nation on earth is free. That means censorship is going to be a day to day occurrence, you're just more acutely aware of it now because of the Internet. Blue or Red pills awai

                • by redeIm (3779401)

                  "Every nation gets the government it deserves."

                  I disagree that it's deserved. People may be apathetic and foolish, but I don't think it's moral to screw them over simply because of that. I would say, instead, that every nation gets the government it's willing to tolerate.

                  If you want liberty then you'll have to fight to change the statis quo because no nation on earth is free.

                  Obviously.

                  • by Virtucon (127420)

                    So you're saying people have a right to freedom and no censorship. Humm, get the UN to agree with it and you might have a case. Oh wait, there's that security council thingy.. It'll never happen.

                    • by redeIm (3779401)

                      So you're saying people have a right to freedom and no censorship.

                      I said that a few posts ago, so it's rather strange to hear you mentioning it now.

                      Humm, get the UN to agree with it and you might have a case.

                      I don't need the UN to agree with facts; facts are facts regardless of whether they agree. In the US, we have the first amendment. The government may ignore, and we should stop them from doing so, but we have it. Countries with government censorship do indeed need to put a stop to it, one way or another.

            • Yes I chose to watch it and now after watching it I think that there should have been some responsibility taken to remove it.

              Or, you could take some responsibility for the bad choice you made. Nobody put a gun to your head and forced you to watch it. Your complaint is the equivalent of a child who wants to ban all use of fire after having burnt himself despite being warned of its dangers.

              I also like the way you passed the buck to that mythical "somebody" who you say should have done something about the video. Why don't you do something about it yourself? Besides raging on the internet?

              It's shocking how little you value your free

      • I tried to watch it, but... well let me put it this way: I was actually relieved to be Rick-rolled.
    • by Yaztromo (655250)

      For example, this week I saw a video of a beheading. Now after watching it I probably wish that somebody had filtered that for me.

      If it makes you feel any better, unless you watched a completely different video than I did (something other the what has been in the news recently), you didn't see a beheading. Did you see the blood spurt/drain out as the carotid/jugular were severed? Did you see the disarticulation of the spine? Those weren't in any version of the video I saw. It moves from a guy making a sawing motion with a knife in front of a guy throat, to a picture of the disembodied head sitting atop the body.

      That's not to say t

      • by Virtucon (127420)

        yeah same here, so the sight of a dismembered head isn't disgusting to you? to me gushing blood, dismembered heads is bad enough. My mind can easily extrapolate the other details.

  • Book burning... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by lcam (848192) on Tuesday August 26, 2014 @10:32AM (#47757123)

    ... is the cornerstone of decadence.

    It actually started with the burning of the great library of Alexandria and the murder of Hypathia at the start of an era we call the Dark Ages when Christianity was born. Centuries of a murderous, and genocidal campaign was untaken to erase specific information from human knowledge and history.

    I find it odd to read an article shared on /. starting with "Imagine a world where the book burners had won."

    • by westlake (615356) on Tuesday August 26, 2014 @12:27PM (#47758305)

      It actually started with the burning of the great library of Alexandria and the murder of Hypathia at the start of an era we call the Dark Ages when Christianity was born.

      Although there is a mythology of the burning of the Library at Alexandria, the library may have suffered several fires or acts of destruction over many years. Possible occasions for the partial or complete destruction of the Library of Alexandria include a fire set by Julius Caesar in 48 BC, an attack by Aurelian in the A.D. 270s, the decree of Coptic Pope Theophilus in A.D. 391, and the decree of the second caliph Omar ibn Al-khattab in A.D. 640.

      It's contents were largely lost during the taking of the city by the Emperor Aurelian (A.D. 270-275), who was suppressing a revolt by Queen Zenobia of Palmyra. During the course of the fighting, the areas of the city in which the main library was located were damaged. Some sources claim that the smaller library located at the Serapeum survived, though Ammianus Marcellinus wrote of the library in the Serapeum temple as a thing of the past, destroyed when Caesar sacked Alexandria.

      Library of Alexandria [wikipedia.org]

      According to the only contemporary source, Hypatia was murdered [370 AD] by a Christian mob after being accused of exacerbating a conflict between two prominent figures in Alexandria: the governor Orestes and the Bishop of Alexandria. Kathleen Wider proposes that the murder of Hypatia marked the end of Classical antiquity, and Stephen Greenblatt observes that her murder "effectively marked the downfall of Alexandrian intellectual life". On the other hand, Maria Dzielska and Christian Wildberg note that Hellenistic philosophy continued to flourish in the 5th and 6th centuries, and perhaps until the age of Justinian.

      Hypatia [wikipedia.org]

  • Why no info on Canada? What are they hiding from us!
    • by davecb (6526)
      The whole country is a secret: the government of the day suffered a hostile takeover by space aliens masquerading a toupees. Just have a look at any picture of the PM (;-))
      • The whole country is a secret: the government of the day suffered a hostile takeover by space aliens masquerading a toupees. Just have a look at any picture of the PM (;-))

        Just don't look at Rob Ford. He's not even trying to disguise himself.

        THE HORROR! THE HORROR!

    • by gstoddart (321705)

      Why no info on Canada? What are they hiding from us!

      Just wait, you'll see soon enough. ;-)

      All I can say for now is ... Moosenado!

  • So the document on government censorship of the internet appears to be censored :o I smell a government conspiracy!
  • by tool462 (677306)

    I tried viewing this site from my work, and the map was replaced by my corporate 'Ad Blocked' image.

  • "most important thing you’ll see today" ... "this horrifying world already exists" ... other news bits on bgw: "awesome iPhone apps..." ... "Man suffers burns when OnePlus One explodes in his back pocket"
  • by luis_a_espinal (1810296) on Tuesday August 26, 2014 @10:56AM (#47757337) Homepage

    A world where people are held down and kept in line by oppressive regimes that restrict the free flow of information and bombard citizens with government-approved messages. Now stop imagining, because this horrifying world already exists..."

    There are more things horrifying in this world than Internet censorship. It is an important topic, but it is one that deserve appropriate discussion, not geek uber-hoopla. So please spare us from the unnecessary histrionics.

    If you need to rely on histrionics to make your point, then your point is irrelevant, or you are an idiot who cannot communicate properly, or a cheap entertainer, or an attention whore. Or a combination of them all.

  • by argStyopa (232550) on Tuesday August 26, 2014 @11:10AM (#47757445) Journal

    "Imagine a world in which the book burners had won"

    Please. "Horrifying"?

    The OP pimps itself breathlessly as "This interactive map of global Internet censorship is the most important thing youâ(TM)ll see today" - yes, it's about as important (and surprising) as the sun coming up in the East.

    The facts are that
    a) the ubiquitous availability of information is a relatively new thing. Public libraries didn't even really exist until the latter 19th/E20th centuries. The internet is less than a generation old.
    b) governments and power structures have controlled such information throughout the span of human history.

    The panicked tone of the article implies that this is worse than ever, which is patently histrionic bullshit. Even in these heavily censored countries, these people have access to information that they NEVER would have had before.

    I'm not even 100% convinced that the ideal of universal access to information is an unalloyed good. Certainly, from the POV of a midwestern, middle class educated individual I *assume* that the net result of having more information is beneficial - but I can certainly see that there are negative aspects to "everything open", such as people who clearly don't understand basic science drawing conclusions from unfiltered scientific data. Or statistics? How many people are easily manipulated by presentations of statistics that they don't even understand? Again, my gut tells me that the "net" is a benefit, but I can't say I'm certain.

    Again, as a small-l liberal, I believe that information and communication is probably good in the long run; even the small trickles of illumination sneaking into those heavily censored places suggests to me that their ability to keep their people in ignorance will eventually expire. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but eventually.

    A glass 95% empty is still a crapton better than no glass at all.

    • by pavon (30274)

      such as people who clearly don't understand basic science drawing conclusions from unfiltered scientific data.

      Those people come to their predetermined conclusions with or without the the raw data, but removing restrictions on distribution of data does help real researchers.

      Or statistics? How many people are easily manipulated by presentations of statistics that they don't even understand?

      Again those presenters would be manipulating opinion with or without openly available data.The fact that the statistics are openly available is the only chance people have to prove them wrong.

      So neither of the examples of negative aspects are actually negative. At best the open information gives other groups the opportunity to debunk the lies and

    • by Vellmont (569020) on Tuesday August 26, 2014 @12:15PM (#47758127) Homepage

      a) the ubiquitous availability of information is a relatively new thing. Public libraries didn't even really exist until the latter 19th/E20th centuries. The internet is less than a generation old.
      b) governments and power structures have controlled such information throughout the span of human history.

      I'm not even 100% convinced that the ideal of universal access to information is an unalloyed good.

      Nothing is pure good. Fortunately that's not the standard for good. Unfettered access to the Internet merely has to be better than government censorship of the internet. That's the real choice, not internet vs no internet. Unfettered access to information is one the founding principles of Democracy. Western nations have embraced this idea for around 200 years. Developing nations that aren't particularly democratic or are newly democratic are having to come to grips with this fact.

      A country where the Government gets to censor what we see and hear can't function as a democracy. Democracy relies on the citizens being able to freely communicate. That can't happen under censorship. In the US the founding fathers reconized this because they were subject to a government that tried to control them. That's why the created the first amendment, and why other countries equally recongized this basic fact of a functioning democracy.

      • no they don't. There isn't the same equivalent of the US first amendant anywhere on the planet. Why? Knowledge is power. And to be correct. The founding fathers were all wealthy individuals. They didn't want anyone other than land owners to vote. Do you know how many people that would eliminate today?
      • A country where the Government gets to censor what we see and hear can't function as a democracy. Democracy relies on the citizens being able to freely communicate. That can't happen under censorship.

        Removal of anonymity (ubiquitous surveillance) is just as much of a problem to a democratic form of government as censorship.

    • I'm not even 100% convinced that the ideal of universal access to information is an unalloyed good

      That's actually an interesting question, I've always assumed that it is. That being said, I've always assumed the information is correct or can be verified correct, or can be eventually demonstrated as incorrect and then repaired.

      Remember the pseudo-joke about how "unwritten laws are the worst to change, because they're not written down in any one place?" Rumors and hearsay are hard to correct, because maybe they're right, maybe they're only partially right, maybe they were right once but not now, mayb

  • The State of Israel is ignored on this map despite its low 96th spot on the World Freedom Press Index of 2014 which would suggest a high degree of censorship! http://rsf.org/index2014/en-in... [rsf.org]
  • I thinkit was abd firefox plugin
  • Governments don't do that much for internet censorship. The more dramatic censors are the corporate players who are doing everything they can to prevent information from getting out that can harm them.
  • History is written by the victors.

  • The statistics for the UK from the website:

    Violations of User Rights 16/40
    Freedom on the Net 24/100
    Obstacles to Access 2/25
    Limits on Content 6/35

    And yet on the map graphics it's shown as a bright white 'Free', not 'Partly Free'.

    Not quite, mate. [gizmodo.co.uk]

    • its not free if its a crime to view a beheading or if anyone can request a removal because they don't like their past sins exposed.
  • I can't help but point out two observations I've made reading today's Slashdot headlines: (1) There is a post accusing the Kochs of being astroturf for spending money to oppose Net Neutrality (2) This map shows the US as one of the few "free" uses of Internet around the world. Maybe giving due attention to those who express reservations about heavier regulation on the Net is better than slandering them. That's just a thought I'd like to post here on the free and open Internet.
  • It doesn't load for me. I guess that means the USA is on the map.
  • So /. is taking about Continuum now?

    City Protective Services (CPS) law enforcement officer Kiera Cameron (Rachel Nichols) lives a quiet, normal life with her husband and son in 2077-era Vancouver. Under the corporatocratic and oligarchic dystopia of the North American Union and its "Corporate Congress", life goes on in apparent freedom under a technologically-advanced high-surveillance police state.

    When a group of self-proclaimed freedom fighters known as "Liber8" escape execution by fleeing to the year 2012, Kiera is involuntarily transported with them into the past. Joining with Detective Carlos Fonnegra (Victor Webster) and the Vancouver Police Department, and enlisting the help of teen computer genius Alec Sadler (Erik Knudsen), Kiera works to track down and thwart Edouard Kagame (Tony Amendola) and his followers in the present day while concealing her identity as a time-traveler from the future.

    we all know how certain places censor everything. This is why the MPAA and RIAA need to put on a leash at the least because that story above is our future if we don't. And we need no map of the dark censor laden areas of the world to do it.

Stinginess with privileges is kindness in disguise. -- Guide to VAX/VMS Security, Sep. 1984

Working...