 |
|
Home
> News
> Freedom and Responsibility
|
|
|
| |
|
Freedom and Responsibility
|
Does the safety of individuals conflict with personal liberty and freedom of information? This is a core question that internet safety awareness raisers frequently have to address.
The problem is not new but the internet has brought added challenges through the speed and ease with which you can access information. Above all, the way points of view are presented online without review or authority makes it difficult not to accord them equal value when they could be erroneous or even malicious.
When John Stuart Mill advocated complete freedom to any form of information or opinion he related wholly to the concept of individual responsibility. You can have access to anything as long as you are willing to accept the consequences. However, he did add the following exception: "It is, perhaps, hardly necessary to say that this doctrine is meant to apply only to human beings in the maturity of their faculties. We are not speaking of children, or of young persons below the age which the law may fix as that of manhood or womanhood. Those who are still in a state to require being taken care of by others, must be protected against their own actions as well as against external injury." (“On Liberty”)
Where does that leave us with the recent research published by the British Medical Journal on how search engines list sites about suicide? This was reported by the BBC under the headline: Fears over pro-suicide web pages. A quick summary of the findings showed that what could be termed "pro"-suicide sites were nearly as prolific as "anti". In the following graph adapted from the findings, we can see how the researchers classified the content of the suicide sites, ranging from the suicide as fashion through to discouraging it...
Someone contemplating suicide could be deemed as not being in control of their faculties, by definition. Indeed any suicidal tendency is considered to be part of a mental illness.
By the same token, people searching for help with eating disorders could well find sites that glorify size 0 as well as sites that would give sound advice. Within the Insafe network, for example, the Spanish awareness node, Protegeles, runs specific helplines to answer questions on anorexia and bulimia (www.masqueunaimagen.com). Other research has found that the internet can be a great source of support to people suffering or recovering from illnesses or conditions (c.f. BBC article: "Websites bolster chronically ill").
Again, we can benefit from the example of the Insafe node Save the Children Finland who organised online chats after tragic school shooting incident and at Christmas, a particularly stressful time of year for some young people. Indeed, in September 2007, the Mannerheim League for Child Welfare, also a part of the Finnish Insafe node, organised a group chat campaign through the Habbo virtual community. The group chats were open three hours on six evenings around the topic of cyber-bullying. These discussions were guided by Child and Youth Phone volunteers.
How can the individual choose which web site to click on when faced with thousands of sites that purport to help with their problems? The answer must come, ultimately, in the form of greater media education where s/he can judge what is worth considering and what isn't.
By the same token, it is interesting to note that public attention turned towards what could be considered to be unsuitable, such as the “Miss Bimbo Game” aimed at girls as young as 9, has resulted in changes by the web site providers. (“As a result of this rather surprising media attention we have decided to remove the option of purchasing diet pills from the game.” www.missbimbo.com) Raising awareness will pay dividends and it is part of the Insafe mission to promote digital literacy and the positive aspects of the internet as well as report on threats to an individual’s safety.
| Author: |
Chris Jenkins, INSAFE |
| Published: |
Tuesday, 22 Apr 2008 |
| Last changed: |
Friday, 30 May 2008 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Links:
|
