No News

This isn’t a news site. I haven’t the energy or interest for constant updates, where blogwatching becomes the raison d’être of the blog. But one month on from the start of the ban, here’s a link to a recent article in the Korea Herald about the internet blocking. (Briefly, the Government sought to stop the dissemination of the video of Kim Sun-il's beheading. They blocked access to any internet sites showing it, or linking to it. Despite that, the video circulates freely via P2P, and is available on many unblocked sites, such as wikipedia.)

There is no progress, and a surprising lack of information:

the ministry says it has no idea how many sites are blocked and Internet viewers say millions of users are affected by the ban, due to a blanket procedure that shut off entire domains.
Despite these broad stroke efforts, the execution video still remains accessible to Internet surfers in Korea.

It seems likely – though why has no-one been able to find out? – that the ban is informal. The Ethics Committee of the MIC met at an emergency meeting last month and decided to ban the video. All they then had to do was put pressure on the ISPs to block the offending sites. I’ve heard tell of ranting telephone calls to ISPs. They apparently go in awe of the powers of the MIC, so will do what they’re asked, without the need for a formal order from the Minister. In these circumstances, it’s easy for the MIC to claim it’s not censorship but voluntary self-regulation. The effect is just the same.

On the MIC's FAQ page, there are unanswered questions by angry and baffled internet users. Particularly worthy of notice is one by C Smith, an EFL teacher, who lists a number of sites he cannot access, and says

I look to these sites for inspiration and ideas to improve my classes. This ban is affecting me professionally and personally as my family in Canada maintains a blog on the blogspot network, which I can no longer view.

Why aren’t the customers putting pressure on the ISPs? Because those people really aware that they’re affected are few and powerless. And because in any case, public opinion might not be on their side. Consider this article, in The Korea Times. A high school teacher argues for a filtering system to create

a healthy internet culture which will make our society more democratic and transparent by reducing the digital divide and filtering out junk information, so that Korea will truly become the most developed information-centered nation all over the world.

Anyone notice anything self-contradictory in that?