The Hong Kong government is encouraging family to have three babies, at the same time, it is so keen on censoring away information concerning sex. Of course sex is not all about giving birth, but how can we have babies without sex? Guess the government will advocate test tube babies pretty soon.
The latest sex censorship is a case against posting a hyperlink to pronographical photos in the adult section of a BBS forum. The court found the defendant guilty under COIAO (Control of Obscene and Indecent Articles Ordinance) and sentenced to $5000 fine.
Charles Mok is very worried about the the case:
I think it is uncalled for for law enforecement to bring the case to court. Apparently someone made a complaint to TELA. But they are probably definitely many more serious (worse) pictures being posted on forums, and why did the Police only prosecute this case? The fact that the law enforcement in Hong Kong seldom likes to use education first, but always want to test the limit of the court by bringing nitty gritty cases to test, this practice worries me a lot and I think it is unfair to the users because they are not warned ahead of the dangers (you can't just say, “you are posting dirty pictures so you deserve it”), and to the providers it is troublesome too. I clearly remember years ago as the Chairman of the ISP Association, TELA told me that they can't do anything about those hyperlinks even if the content behind them are child porn. When did that change!?
If hyperlinks are articles that can constitute as “articles” in COIAO, will it be a precedent case that others can prosecute people posting hyperlink for many other “crimes” in civil or criminal courts for all kinds of things, even subversion or libel? It is not right I think to judge hyperlink this way, because the link points to some place not controlled by this user making use of the hyperlink, and the content behind the hyperlink can change.
This will also have dire implications to search engines or even other web hosting companies or ISPs. Does the Hong Kong government want them to carry out self-censorship from now on, on even hyperlinks? Search engine companies may be the first to get into troubles. This has serious negative consequences for Hong Kong's IT infrastructure (which includes our legal infrastructure) and the reputation of having freedom of information. Should Google and Yahoo! get out of Hong Kong?
wanszezit is very angry and says he must have broken the law as well:
Plastichk finds the situation so ridiculous:
在「成人貼圖區」發佈成人照片，由發佈到觀看的，雙方都是成年人，…為何同一張相片，貼在美國的討論區則合法，放 server 在香港則否？但同樣觀看的人身卻在香港），對香港警方來說，這樣的行為又如何影響香港治安了？警力過盛嗎？…
In order to protest against this ridiculous and highly political case, I have put a nude photo (link from flickr) and a hyperlink to a sex blog at inmediahk.net to invite criminal charge from Hong Kong government. I have also invited other netizens to make it a collective legal action.
Fred Lam has echoed my call and posted all the links that he search from google under “sexy hot chick”.
This is not a single case, because a few days ago, the Chinese University Student Press is also under attack by the mainstream media because they have opened some sex columns at the student magazine.
According to an insider story (via inmediahk.net [zh]) from the Student Press, the mainstream media got some complaint letters from conservative religious groups, and within 12 hours, the story hit the headline of major mainstream Chinese newspapers. And the university administration made a statement that they would investigate the issue and consider to punish the students who are in charge of the magazine.
The obscene article is a questionaire about sex, including sex fantasy. Among the 14 sets of questions, two are about fantasy and attitude towards incest and bestiality.
The case has raised concern from local homosexual and sex rights groups. As it is not the first time conservative religion groups make use of the censorship tool to silent sex talk.
As the Television and Entertainment Licensing Authority will investigate the case and decide whether the student magazine has also violated the COIAO, a signature campaign has been launched at inmediahk.net to plead for not guilty.
Meanwhile, the university disciplinary committee has issued a statement saying that the student press “has passed the acceptable moral line” and will ban the publication of the sex pages and consider punishing the editor in charge as the publication has “affected the image of the university”. Plato questions whether the school administration body has the power to intervene into the student press’ editorial policy:
Amnesty International (Hong Kong) has also issued a statement to the University Administration. The organization expressed concern that the judgement of the discipinary committee will affect the freedom of speech and press in Hong Kong.
However, diumanpark criticises that the editors are not critical but follow the market logic.
Jim feels that the university students are just reflection of the society,
I have also signed the statement against the charge of COIAO, not that I enjoy reading the sex column in student magazine, but against the unreasonable censorship practice in Hong Kong that would eventually ruin the society.
May be I have missed out on this but while there are so many publicity on protecting the Queen Pier (which I fully support), there is so little awareness on the issue on ICT in Hong Kong makes me wonder whether anyone is doing something about this for Hong Kong..
An activist group called open knowledge action has been formed and has been protecting against the government digital copy rights legislation (now in the consultation / drafting stage). there are also some university professors and i.t professional representatives concern about the issue. however, hong kong is relatively backward in this. in the legislative council, the members know very little about ICT issue.
I think one way of making people cloyed with a topic is to let them be immersed in it. Keeping sex knowledge like pornography on a strict basis would only increase people’s curiosity and therefore create the sense of suspense. Sex education should be open, letting the public know the importance and functions of sex, while promoting safe sex simultaneously.
Oh, here another obscene Article, that makes CU the laughing stock of the academic world:
“which part of campus is the most desirable for having sex.”
the Chinese University Student Union condemned the paper for “hurting the reputation of the institute.”
The Chinese University said an investigation committee has been established to investigate.
“We take a serious view of the incident and will handle the matter rigorously and fairly,” it said.
What is the reputation of the CU – that all students and staff are virgins and holier than the pope and Jiang Zemin together?
Oh! I hope only 2 child are enough. After that must be use Condoms for the protection of the 3rd birth.