'Fitna'and digital exclusion

Jennie S. Bev ,  San Francisco   |  Sat, 04/12/2008 11:17 AM  |  Opinion

In October last year, Indonesian Internet users enjoyed momentary happiness when Communications and Information Minister Muhammad Nuh personally promised "free speech among bloggers", and then when both the government and private sectors agreed to provide Internet connections for at least 20 percent of the population by 2012.

Investor Group Against Digital Divide (IGADD), which was the non-profit think-tank behind this grand plan, said users of broadband technology would increase by 20 times, which would greatly bridge the "digital divide" between rich and poor.

Finally, Indonesia, as the last truly unwired Asian country, has decided to go digital with the protection of free speech. And for a country that was acknowledged for its peaceful transition into democracy, with the prestigious Democracy Award from the International Association of Political Consultants (IAPC), in 2007, it seemed as if things had finally fallen into the right places. Yet the truth bit hard. Indonesians have not won the battle to win democracy, or even narrowed the digital divide. It may as well be on a dwindling downward spiral into the darkness, if things remain as they are.

Fitna, a 15-minute film by Geert Wilders posted on YouTube (a video-sharing Web site) has been causing a lot of stir worldwide. The Indonesian government, which was represented by Minister Mohammad Nuh, ordered a temporary blockage of YouTube, MySpace, Google Video and other video-sharing sites until the video was removed.

Such a reaction was understandable given Indonesia's sensitivity toward anything related to SARA, which is an Indonesian acronym for ethnicity-religion-race-intergroup. Historically -- from the Dutch colonization, in which social stratification was a part of divide-and-conquer politics, to Soeharto's version of democracy, in which responsible free speech was far from a reality -- such issues have always been fragile and have been used in various ways to control a society in draconian mode.

For more than three centuries, Indonesians have been living in the so-called "infancy" stage of acceptance of differences, including varied spectrums of opinion pertaining to religions. And apparently the government has not ceased to cradle such a mentality by "naively" asking Web 2.0 user-generated grand Internet players like Google and YouTube, whose soft power far exceeds Indonesia as a whole, to remove any offensive materials from the Internet, whenever they feel like it. Would this be effective? Or is it just a "testing the new car" syndrome?

An Internet censorship policy, which is now conveniently regulated in a bill (which will become law within a month) on information and electronic transactions, must be exercised with caution. Used excessively, it would only undermine efforts in bridging the digital divide between highly-wired and less-wired countries and between wired and unwired populations. At the same time it would also create a so-called "unnatural digital divide" or even a "digital exclusion".

China is another good example of an "unnatural" digital divide, in which the government has implemented its own country-wide content filter since 1991. In 2000, State Council Order No. 292, created the first content restrictions for ICPs (internet content providers?), which regulated China-based Web sites not to be able to link to overseas news Web sites or carry news from foreign media without approval.

The government of China, supported by 30,000 members of its Internet police task force and strong financial capacity, has been showing its supremacy to control information quite impressively, especially considering the Internet today consists of mostly user-generated content. The price, of course, is sky high. While China's economy is flourishing, its political and civic maturity is questionable.

While it may hurt to listen to opposing views pertaining to things we care about so dearly -- including our own religion -- the Internet has actually been providing the world with an unprecedented capacity which did not exist previously: the wisdom of the masses.

Unless Indonesia would prefer to be digitally excluded in a highly wired world, it would be wiser to play the Internet game gracefully and smartly in maintaining the virtual equilibrium. After all, the critical masses are readily available, we just need to tap into them.

Don't retaliate to bigotry with bigotry and don't retaliate to hatred with hatred, not just because this is ungraceful but, more importantly, it is impossible in this interconnected, mobile world of today.

The writer is a columnist and a doctorate candidate in e-commerce based in Northern California.

Comments (4)  |   Post comment
A  |   A  |   A  |   Mail to a friend  |  Printer Friendly Version |  Digg it!  |  Add to Del.icio.us!  |  Add to Reddit!  |  Stumble it!   |  Share on facebook  

The Watcher (not verified) — Fri, 04/18/2008 - 2:01pm

I think the best part of this all is that the Dutch filmmaker gets the attention and free publicity that he probably was planning on.

Agreeing with the previous post on that not everything that comes from the west is an ideal model to strive after. However that does not mean that the reaction that we should adopt is one of complete opposition to being open-minded.

The problem with this so-called film is that it's not even credible or applicable to the normal Muslim population. I say this because after I've watched it, my opinion of my Muslim friends did not change.

They are still my good friends. The "Muslim" leaders in the video are of a whole different religious mindset from Muslims worldwide, to put it in the kindest words possible. Tackling this issue this way is not a wise solution at all.

Rioting and protesting is giving the world the permission to collect a few as examples to represent the world's image of Islam. In this case, a rioting few demanding the death of this obviously insensitive Dutch man is only aggravating and hurting their own credibility.

Blocking the internet access to youtube for the sake of this one man is giving him too much credit. Is the religion so fragile that one misinformed and aggressively defamatory vandal can do so much harm to its' integrity?

Pick the battles, pick the rights. I'm not saying it's alright for such films to exist as propaganda, I'm saying don't give him more materials. Also, if Islam does not wish to be portrayed as a religion that supports and employs violent cause, it's leaders should be more vocal and open about the stance that extremist leaders have taken. I say fight bad press with benevolent examples. A Muslim nation giving him this much attention is pretty much equivalent to an adult spoiling a misbehaving child.

Please, it shouldn't be this hard to know what to do in such a situation. It should be clear as day that rioting and aggressive protesting won't alleviate his propaganda attempts to show that Muslims are aggressive and unruly group of people.

I'm not anti-Muslim, for the record. I'm very much interested in the day when everyone can turn a deaf ear to the negativity instead of feeding it so that it can grow enough, overtaking and blinding us of what's most important... just so that we can fight over the smaller details and rigid definitions of always reacting to an attempt at controversy.

Dewi Savitri Reni (not verified) — Tue, 04/15/2008 - 6:14am

I am an Indonesian and am very proud of Indonesia's culture.
Yet, I agree totally with Ms. Bev's article.

I am in the position that the Indonesian government had denied its people rights to receive information by blocking the movie Fitna. As a country with the largest Muslim population, I do not think that the Indonesian people (including the non-Muslim people) will have a problem in digesting the movie. Thus, the movie should be studied by the Muslim intellectuals in Indonesia so that they can help Islam in responding to so many wrongful accusations nowadays.

In relation with the new Indonesian law regarding Information and Electronic Transaction, I think that the Act has establishes some positive points that are beneficial to the legal framework of the internet usage in Indonesia. Yet, the provision criminalizing any transmission related to pornography as well as violence should be reviewed in the Constitutional Court. The underlying reason that the law is so broad and vague that it make room for future abuses. There is no comprehensive definition on what the law thinks the standard is for violent or pornography materials. It also should have an immunity clause for interactive internet service providers, such as internet cafes etc so that they could not be subjected to the long arm of the law in the case where they have comply with conducting several mechanism.

Responding to the R. A. Stallmann's comment, I do agree that we have to maintain our own culture and do not let ourself easily infiltrated with the western culture. Yet, I think your comment is irrelevant with this context. In the context of Fitna etc, we should have access to it in order to be a smarter nation. We should not go back to an era where we are continuously being dictated by our government on what is right and what is wrong. I personally do not want my children (if i have one someday) to go back to my era where every single children in my kindergarden and primary schools' class draw the same thing. Mountain, with a sun and paddy fields.

I believe that the freedom of information that I enjoy nowadays is so valuable to my personal intellectual development that are still developing and hopefully will still do. I also think that before the enactment of the law, Indonesian people are becoming more critical on responding to internal issues inside their country. We can see that also in the internet, with Indonesian bloggers freely expressing their views. I am afraid that the enactmant of this law would subjected the bloggers and Indonesian journalist to the fear in posting their opinion. And I think, it will be like that if the law is not revised to be more clear.

Furthermore, the vagueness of this law can also make room for abuses by the Indonesian police. Even though I believe that our Police Department has actually become more reformed throughout the years. Yet, a lot of Indonesians are still skeptical in interacting with the police. There is a fear that the enactment of these laws will make room of abuses by "some of the police officials" in order to get money out of it. This is definately something that should be think about.

The Reader (not verified) — Mon, 04/14/2008 - 9:33pm

Mr. Stallman,

The western based free speech and equality is something worth while and what the whole world should believe in. It is practices like ones committed in Indonesia, pakista, afghanistan, saudi arabia and countries alike that are sickening. Indonesia HAS its own culture, but fact of the matter is, currently Indonesia is living somebody else's culture.
I don't think the writer IS proud of her country and culture, it's just the people in Indonesia who are trying to distort the REAL indonesian culture and turn it into an extension of Saudi Arabia that she, and many Indonesians alike, are ashamed of.
Not everything that comes from the west is good, but you should not be so naive as to think that bigotry and a country going backwards into the medieval era as something good. There are many countries like that already, let's not let Indonesia become one of them (backwards country) and support those who wants to turn the country around and be a modern democracy without losing its REAL culture, not imported middle eastern culture.

R. A. Stallmann (not verified) — Mon, 04/14/2008 - 2:34am

The writer is described as a doctoral candidate in Northern California. Interestingly, so am I. But my point of view could not be more different from hers. She describes Indonesian culture going back hundreds of years (300 years, in her view--unexplained), as in an "infancy" [sic] stage of development. Really, is that so? Is Western secular culture, then, the model of the fully-developed "adult" society? Why do Indonesians persist in repeating this kind of colonialist propaganda? Indonesian culture IS fully developed. It is Wesern culture that is infantile--a free "marketplace of ideas" that treats all ideas as equal, regardless of whether the idea was tried and tested over centuries, or originated yesterday! How does that make sense? For God's sake, be proud of your people and your culture. Do not acquiesce to Westernization just for the sake of being "wired" and connected with the world. If the world at large is evil, why are you in such a hurry to plug into it? Maybe grandma back in the kampung does know a thing or two that are worthwhile. Yes, Indonesian culture is not perfect--for example, mistreatment of women is widespread and not new--but please don't throw away all that you have just to plug into the Western-dominated world of electronic filth.

What's On

Corporate News


  • Bridgestone Tire Safety Campaign
    Mr. Agus Sarsisto, Mr. Shigeru Niho (President Director), Mr. Shinya Hisada (Marketing Director), Mr. John M. Arsyad Hold a place in the Tire Safety Campaign, Rest Area 57 KM ...
more