Don’t even think about a ban on Google
No state has the right to act like a net nanny.
The writer hosts a show called “Capital Circuit” for News One and tweets @FarrukhKPitafi
In the federal finance minister’s speech, the proposed auction of 3G spectrum found a special mention. And this is not the first mention of its sort. In the recent past, we have seen former finance minister Dr Hafeez Sheikh promising the auction of 3G spectrum more than once in his budget speeches. And why should any government not talk about it? Our fiscal deficit and debt have reached frightening levels and the state needs money if it wants to bring the economy back from the brink. While the previous government had demons of its own — corruption scandals, poor relations with the judiciary and poor public image being some of them — this new government can accomplish the sale of the spectrum relatively easily because of its fresh start and better image. In a country starved of economic activity, this will be a welcome development.
Unfortunately, however, the indicators are not right. YouTube, the most renowned video portal used the world over, has been blocked in Pakistan for a while now. It is widely believed that with this ban in place, an auction will not attract the right kind of investor attention and may bring back less money than otherwise expected. Of course, everyone was expecting that the new government would show moral courage and restore it. It did not. And the purported statement of the new Information Technology state minister, Anusha Rehman, has given birth to new doubts and fears. While we know that the junior minister believes in restoring YouTube after putting in place the adequate filters to remove access to any content deemed blasphemous, the statement also mentioned that if Google, which operates YouTube, did not cooperate, the government might have to ban the rest of Google services in Pakistan as the last resort. There is a chance, of course, that she might have been misquoted but if my sources are correct, a statement to this effect was indeed made.
Now, with a YouTube ban, the auction of 3G spectrum would have been difficult, yet not impossible. But a blanket ban on Google would simply mean disaster. It is common knowledge that a majority of 3G cell phones use Google’s operating system known as Android. And that is not all. Services like Google Maps and Google Play are fairly well known and thoroughly used. With a blanket ban on Google services, you can safely say goodbye to the distant dreams of a 3G auction. It is precisely this attitude and the state’s obsession with regulating the consumer choices and freedoms that have clearly distanced us from various investors like Etisalat.
Add to it the fact that the Supreme Court has already taken a suo motu notice of the blasphemous content on the internet at the request of a UK-based Pakistani and sought a report from the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) within a week. This could allow the PTA to take matters out of the government’s hands. Why else would a UK-based barrister want to deny us access to wider internet when this ban doesn’t provide him any relief? Interestingly, the matter of locus standi was not raised here. We all know that the PTA has done precious little for the last few years except for trying to curtail our freedoms and restrict our choices. Or then this could be the sensitivities of our deep state regarding some other content available on the video sharing website. The inter-ministerial committee that was originally constituted to look into the matter, after all, had representation of our intelligence agencies, too. But if these concerns are related to the war on terror, then raising the right issues might make a better case.
Practically speaking, the ban is unwarranted and only damages the prospects of an economic revival. Also, since people have the ability to waylay the ban through the use of virtual private networks, this only gives an opportunity to an invisible traffic that can compromise even the benign motives behind state regulation.
Morally, too, no state has the right to act like a net nanny. It is common sense that a person who finds any content blasphemous will not access it. So, why stymie the prospects of an economic revival? All stakeholders need to keep all of this in mind.
Published in The Express Tribune, June 15th, 2013.
Unfortunately, however, the indicators are not right. YouTube, the most renowned video portal used the world over, has been blocked in Pakistan for a while now. It is widely believed that with this ban in place, an auction will not attract the right kind of investor attention and may bring back less money than otherwise expected. Of course, everyone was expecting that the new government would show moral courage and restore it. It did not. And the purported statement of the new Information Technology state minister, Anusha Rehman, has given birth to new doubts and fears. While we know that the junior minister believes in restoring YouTube after putting in place the adequate filters to remove access to any content deemed blasphemous, the statement also mentioned that if Google, which operates YouTube, did not cooperate, the government might have to ban the rest of Google services in Pakistan as the last resort. There is a chance, of course, that she might have been misquoted but if my sources are correct, a statement to this effect was indeed made.
Now, with a YouTube ban, the auction of 3G spectrum would have been difficult, yet not impossible. But a blanket ban on Google would simply mean disaster. It is common knowledge that a majority of 3G cell phones use Google’s operating system known as Android. And that is not all. Services like Google Maps and Google Play are fairly well known and thoroughly used. With a blanket ban on Google services, you can safely say goodbye to the distant dreams of a 3G auction. It is precisely this attitude and the state’s obsession with regulating the consumer choices and freedoms that have clearly distanced us from various investors like Etisalat.
Add to it the fact that the Supreme Court has already taken a suo motu notice of the blasphemous content on the internet at the request of a UK-based Pakistani and sought a report from the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) within a week. This could allow the PTA to take matters out of the government’s hands. Why else would a UK-based barrister want to deny us access to wider internet when this ban doesn’t provide him any relief? Interestingly, the matter of locus standi was not raised here. We all know that the PTA has done precious little for the last few years except for trying to curtail our freedoms and restrict our choices. Or then this could be the sensitivities of our deep state regarding some other content available on the video sharing website. The inter-ministerial committee that was originally constituted to look into the matter, after all, had representation of our intelligence agencies, too. But if these concerns are related to the war on terror, then raising the right issues might make a better case.
Practically speaking, the ban is unwarranted and only damages the prospects of an economic revival. Also, since people have the ability to waylay the ban through the use of virtual private networks, this only gives an opportunity to an invisible traffic that can compromise even the benign motives behind state regulation.
Morally, too, no state has the right to act like a net nanny. It is common sense that a person who finds any content blasphemous will not access it. So, why stymie the prospects of an economic revival? All stakeholders need to keep all of this in mind.
Published in The Express Tribune, June 15th, 2013.