The Daily Beast published an article called "Should YouTube Block “Innocence of Muslims?” in Sep 17,2012. We know this film has made a lot of noise and caused many cultural conflicts. The reporter Andrew Blue makes us to think of ethical issues. Giving appraisal of the situation it's necessary to point out that YouTube is the life line for knowing what is happening. However, information can be viral. Sometimes it's hard to predict the course of events in the future, because we have no language to distinguish the good viruses from the bad, the cheery from the hateful and grotesque. Popular speech is not protected by the notion of “freedom of speech”; it would be pointless. What freedom of speech is designed for is to defend unpopular speech, no matter how cruel or vile or bigoted. There is some evidence of the deterioration of situation because The Innocence of Muslims is needlessly provocative. Because of numerous protests the authorities decided that YouTube should ban the videos from being viewed in Libya, Egypt, and other countries where such content is considered illegal.
The article concludes that the filter of information is the best solution in order to avoid the unintended consequences of viral media
In my opinion, news should be open and accessible to all and sundry. However, any media should not be a bigoted piece of poison calculated to inflame the whole world
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/09/16/should-youtube-block-innocence-of-muslims.html
The impression is that you WRITE rather than RENDER. Pls, make use of the lead-ins.
ОтветитьУдалитьSlips:
ON September ...
make noise is no good here
... makes us THINK .. (the mistake persists)
I think the question is why did they do it? For every decision there is the reason. Before posting this video they could guess about the possible consequences and in spite of it they did it. Now we have what we have.... Irina what is your opinion on this question?
ОтветитьУдалитьI suppose there was no need to publish this video.)It's too vulgar!
ОтветитьУдалить