Freedom Curtailed?

Today, most news publications and broadcast companies have

their own websites that provide news and information round the clock. With the

evolution of web 2.0 concept that allows rich content with interactivity and

user engagement in various forms, most news websites have embedded the web 2.0

tools and applications.

These tools and applications allow users to post comments

or views, dig content, tag pictures, link content with emails or blogs, and also

perform other activities. However, in a broader context, these web 2.0 tools and

applications, linked with the news content or information, offen create an

impact on peoples thinking?

Agrees Rediff.coms editorial director, Saisuresh

Sivaswamy. "These tools give the reader/user a sense of ownership, a sense of

participationby digging it, taking part in message boards, linking it to blogs,

etc. It enables the reader/user to publish his/her own comments, which in turn

generate further comments or opinions from more readers." According to him, all

these enable the proliferation of a greater debate or discussion; not the

prevalence of one single opinion, but many opinions.

Delhi based MediaGuru.ins editor-in-chief for web operations, Ved Vrat Giri,

observes that interactivity or the use of web 2.0 tools in media primarily might

not be directed to impact peoples thinking (readers/viewers, or people in

power), but as its use and utilities are evolving, an enormous impact is

happening.

"Interactivity is basically meant for empowering people with the facility of

having their say in the local, national, and world affairs, as far as the news

and social media networks are concerned. Actually, the voice of people in

general through web 2.0 is positively impacting the thinking of people in power,

and their policies of governance," Giri explains.

No one would object to the positive impacts, but what happens if the impact

is adverse?

In India, which has over a billion people with diverse religions and faith,

speaking different languages, and having different cultures; so the possibility

of individuals, or a group from a community or religion getting offended by

users comments or posts is very high.

So does the situation demand for control or censorship of the Internet, along

with those web 2.0 tools and applications? "No, I dont think the Internet needs

censorship any more than the other forms of media need. I presume when you talk

of self-controlled censorship, you are implying to some kind of a

self-regulation," Sivaswamy comments.

Sharing his twenty-five years of industry experience, Sivaswamy says that

every publicationonline or offlinefollows strict journalistic standards. In

contrast, Giri says that the need of the hour is to regulate the content coming

via the web 2.0 facility. "And as far as the news media is concerned, this is

possible by editing or deleting the comments, letters, blogs, etc. And even

there can be a ban on people who are habitual of submitting malicious content,"

he says.

"We are doing the same thing in our citizen journalism portalsmynews.in and

merikhabar.com, where the content is generally uploaded by our registered users

whom we call citizen journalists. Only duly registered users, who abide by the

strict terms and conditions of use, must be allowed to submit content," Giri

recommends.

F5ive Technologies co-founder; and Business Blogging CEO, Kiruba Shankar

reckons that in India one needs to follow self-regulation.

Being a professional blogger, Shankar says, "India should have strict

guidelines for the Internet and websites so that general people, users, bloggers

or writers who are unaware of self-regulation can get a rough idea and

understanding via the guidelines." In his opinion, even the government should

have a code of conduct, and the people who breach the code should be punished.

Pankaj Maru/CMN



maildqindia@cybermedia.co.in