ASSIGNMENT 2 - DEADLINE 6 August 2009 16h00

First read my introduction, second read the relevant literature, third answer the two questions given below in your blog.

Your blog this week has to be completed and posted by Thursday 6 August at 16h00.
For this assignment you do the following:

Find the Coetzee and Barendt readings made available to you, and aquaint yourself with the concepts 'freedom of speech' and 'censorship'.
Note that 'freedom of speech' is defined as a basic human right, and is one that is also entrenched in the South African Constitution and Bill of Rights.

You will notice that 'freedom of speech' is not an unlimited right, i.e. people should be free to speak their mind, and as an extension, people should be free to publish their knowledge, insight and opinions in the media without fear of prosecution; however, if free expression means injury to anther person or group, as e.g. in hatespeech - then it has some limitation: you cannot in the process of speaking your mind defame or criminally offend (by crimen iniuria) another person or institution.

Censorship is a form of silencing people - state censorship can disallow some forms of political debate (then the state may be accused of violating democratic rights of its citizens); state censorship can also forbid the publication in the media of certain kinds of information -- e.g. they may forbid publication of state secrets in time of war, or - as was the case in the 1980s in South Africa - they can forbid the publication of any reference to (or picture of) persons that they regard as enemies. Did you know (e.g.) that it was illegal back then to publish any picture of Nelson Mandela, and similarly it was illegal to cite anything that Oliver Tambo may have said or written? (So, treasure the freedom we have gained since then!!)

Now, consider how state censorship can forbid public debate in the media on election results following a national poll that was not, in general democratic terms, "free and fair". Recent news reports on elections in Iran claimed that such censorship made it very difficult for those opposed to the new government to debate the process and to voice their protest. If there are only state controlled media - i.e. the state owns and oversees all radio, television and newspaper reporting - open discussion, fair exchange of ideas, is disallowed. EXCEPT ... that with new media ... there are now ways around this kind of censorship that were formerly not possible.

The questions you have to answer in your blog:
1. What are the limits of state censorship that have been made clear by recent events of state oppression in Iran.

2. Refer to the two websites (a blog and a report from an e-version of BBC) cited below, and go to the You Tube clip of which the link is given. Make sure that you read the full stories AND the comments that they drew.
(a) Explain how the use of 'new media' in these two cases enabled protest/criticism that would formerly not have been heard.
(b) Also, if a person or institution feels that use of new technologies has defamed them - what recourse do they have? How can they expect the injury to their good name to be repaired?
http://travel.latimes.com/daily-deal-blog/index.php/smashed-guitar-youtu-4850/
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8173731.stm