Has Pakistan’s YouTube ban served any purpose?
No, say analysts, activists, political party workers and artists.
YouTube was banned in Pakistan on September 17, 2012 to pacify incensed emotions that were unleashed across the country following the release of the anti-Islam film “Innocence of Muslims”.
Two months later, the service still remains blocked in the country for an indefinite period.
A video of the report can be viewed here.
A “knee-jerk” failure
Following the ban, YouTube’s ranking on Alexa.com, as among the most visited websites in Pakistan has fallen from the third to the eighth slot. On the other hand, the rankings of several proxy websites that allow users to bypass the ban like proxfree.com, unblock-proxee.net and many others have soared following the ban. This proves that YouTube is still getting traffic through alternative routes.
Several other popular video sites such as Vimeo and Daily Motion that also host blasphemous content have not been banned. Given the failure of the government’s move to block access to such content, experts argue that the “knee-jerk” reaction was ill-thought out.
“Content on the Internet is not distributary, but voluntary. Therefore, if one book is bad, you cannot close down the entire library,” says Sana Saleem, executive director and spokesperson for Bolo Bhi-a non-profit organization that works actively in areas like Internet freedom and digital security.
Jahanzaib Haque, Web Editor at The Express Tribune agrees. “Either we block the entire Internet, form our own version of the Internet like Iran is trying to do, or come to terms with the fact that we live in a global society,” says Haque.
However, the ban has complicated things for artists, entrepreneurs and political parties who have started to rely increasingly on sites like YouTube to engage with their followers.
While almost everyone has turned to alternate avenues like Vimeo, Daily Motion, Bing and Blip.tv, none of them are as user-friendly or have as large a user-base as YouTube.
Up-coming pop singer Ali Gul Pir states that such things are a part of the deal when one choses to work in Pakistan.
“Instead of fighting continuously, it is best if you find other ways,” says Pir.
Awab Alvi, a member of the PTI states that while the ban has affected everyone, not much has been said or done to revoke it due to the sensitive nature of the issue.
The need for cyber laws
“Anything with blasphemy becomes a no-go zone, but it’s time to stop using nationalism and religion as a blanket for everything,” Saleem argues.
She emphasized the need for a concrete set of cyber laws. It is the current legislative vacuum that is repeatedly used by the government to block access as they deem fit, Saleem argues.
“You [citizens] have a right to express yourself and to access information, both of which have been infringed upon through this YouTube ban. Having a concrete set of cyber laws could have prevented this from happening,” says Haque.
Earlier in the year, a URL filtering and blocking system was also proposed by the Ministry of IT. If approved, the system would act like an online ‘Big Brother’, blocking out content at the URL level, somewhat similar to the firewall used by China.
With elections just around the corner, some like Alvi also expressed fear of content being censored by the current government.
To ensure a free and fair space for public discourse, a participatory approach is needed in drafting cyber laws, added Saleem. Also meticulous attention needed to be paid when defining terms like “blasphemy,” “morality” and “national security”.
While Interior Minister Rehman Malik hinted last month that the ban might be lifted, no clear timeline on the action is available yet.
Past bans
The PTA banned YouTube in 2008 for the first time on grounds of containing blasphemous content. The decision was then linked to blasphemous cartoons and the release of a documentary film entitled Fitna, by Dutch lawmaker Geert Wilders.
The service was banned once again in 2010 along with several other websites, in the wake of an offensive competition about Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) on Facebook.
A video of the report can be viewed here.
Two months later, the service still remains blocked in the country for an indefinite period.
A video of the report can be viewed here.
A “knee-jerk” failure
Following the ban, YouTube’s ranking on Alexa.com, as among the most visited websites in Pakistan has fallen from the third to the eighth slot. On the other hand, the rankings of several proxy websites that allow users to bypass the ban like proxfree.com, unblock-proxee.net and many others have soared following the ban. This proves that YouTube is still getting traffic through alternative routes.
Several other popular video sites such as Vimeo and Daily Motion that also host blasphemous content have not been banned. Given the failure of the government’s move to block access to such content, experts argue that the “knee-jerk” reaction was ill-thought out.
“Content on the Internet is not distributary, but voluntary. Therefore, if one book is bad, you cannot close down the entire library,” says Sana Saleem, executive director and spokesperson for Bolo Bhi-a non-profit organization that works actively in areas like Internet freedom and digital security.
Jahanzaib Haque, Web Editor at The Express Tribune agrees. “Either we block the entire Internet, form our own version of the Internet like Iran is trying to do, or come to terms with the fact that we live in a global society,” says Haque.
However, the ban has complicated things for artists, entrepreneurs and political parties who have started to rely increasingly on sites like YouTube to engage with their followers.
While almost everyone has turned to alternate avenues like Vimeo, Daily Motion, Bing and Blip.tv, none of them are as user-friendly or have as large a user-base as YouTube.
Up-coming pop singer Ali Gul Pir states that such things are a part of the deal when one choses to work in Pakistan.
“Instead of fighting continuously, it is best if you find other ways,” says Pir.
Awab Alvi, a member of the PTI states that while the ban has affected everyone, not much has been said or done to revoke it due to the sensitive nature of the issue.
The need for cyber laws
“Anything with blasphemy becomes a no-go zone, but it’s time to stop using nationalism and religion as a blanket for everything,” Saleem argues.
She emphasized the need for a concrete set of cyber laws. It is the current legislative vacuum that is repeatedly used by the government to block access as they deem fit, Saleem argues.
“You [citizens] have a right to express yourself and to access information, both of which have been infringed upon through this YouTube ban. Having a concrete set of cyber laws could have prevented this from happening,” says Haque.
Earlier in the year, a URL filtering and blocking system was also proposed by the Ministry of IT. If approved, the system would act like an online ‘Big Brother’, blocking out content at the URL level, somewhat similar to the firewall used by China.
With elections just around the corner, some like Alvi also expressed fear of content being censored by the current government.
To ensure a free and fair space for public discourse, a participatory approach is needed in drafting cyber laws, added Saleem. Also meticulous attention needed to be paid when defining terms like “blasphemy,” “morality” and “national security”.
While Interior Minister Rehman Malik hinted last month that the ban might be lifted, no clear timeline on the action is available yet.
Past bans
The PTA banned YouTube in 2008 for the first time on grounds of containing blasphemous content. The decision was then linked to blasphemous cartoons and the release of a documentary film entitled Fitna, by Dutch lawmaker Geert Wilders.
The service was banned once again in 2010 along with several other websites, in the wake of an offensive competition about Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) on Facebook.
A video of the report can be viewed here.