Regulation of the Internet

This is a touchy issue. I have a nagging feeling that because the Philippines is currently working to pass an Anti Cybercrime Act, more supposed incidents of "cybercrime" will begin to emerge over the next few weeks and months. People tend to react to issues like this through a semblance of "participation through association". If one John Doe says that Jane Doe has been saying "bad things" about him on Twitter or Facebook, and if he says that Jane Doe's doing so in "bad taste" or in a "libelous manner" (based on his personal opinion), the thus begins the cycle of "thinking you've got an understanding of an issue when in fact you only think so because you managed to thrust yourself into a situation that minutely resembles defamation". You get what I mean. Everything is relative on the internet. You go on Wikipedia, and you look up, say, the biography of Martin Luther King, and you see dates, places, names of people- those are facts. But when you consider the flow of the article, the cadence at which certain statements have been positioned- that can be subject to a million and one types of interpretation. You go on Facebook, and you see posts about people, places, topics of interest, issues. Every post on there is subject to interpretation. How the posts are written out, what the posts contain, etc., can be made to be points of contention, or even, blatant offense. Given the speed at which the information circulates through the internet, it wouldn't be surprising to eventually see an all in all minor piece of feedback grow into a grotesque monument to destructive social thought. It's frightening. It's downright absurb how many can affected by this pathway of thought. This is why we need regulations for the internet, BUT such caveats need to be made in such a way that no one is disenfranchised, abused, or rendered powerless. Let's leave it to brilliant legal minds to figure out the ins and outs of this process. At the same time, let's not forget the consumer, often woebegone in the face of what stands to be the onset of implausible censorship, or, freedom of speech which is set to be his/her own undoing. Maybe those in power could begin with more obvious forms of internet media, such as child pornography and ultra violent for-the-heck-of-it websites. That would help set a precedent for "competent" censorship. If they target more complex arenas such as Twitter and Facebook first, then, they may be in for a tough battle which muddles details and works towards the gist of the fight being lost in the shuffle. See, Apple's script for product launches. It's never too late for change. How to make such change feasible, and significant, is another story. MC