Free Speech Debate

Thirteen languages. Ten principles. One conversation.

Log in | Register | Mailing list

Loading...
1We – all human beings – must be free and able to express ourselves, and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas, regardless of frontiers.»
2We defend the internet and all other forms of communication against illegitimate encroachments by both public and private powers.»
3We require and create open, diverse media so we can make well-informed decisions and participate fully in political life.»
4We speak openly and with civility about all kinds of human difference.»
5We allow no taboos in the discussion and dissemination of knowledge.»
6We neither make threats of violence nor accept violent intimidation.»
7We respect the believer but not necessarily the content of the belief.»
8We are all entitled to a private life but should accept such scrutiny as is in the public interest.»
9We should be able to counter slurs on our reputations without stifling legitimate debate.»
10We must be free to challenge all limits to freedom of expression and information justified on such grounds as national security, public order, morality and the protection of intellectual property.»

What’s missing?

Is there a vital area we have not addressed? A principle 11? An illuminating case study? Read other people's suggestions and add your own here. Or start the debate in your own language.

Home | Audio/Video | David Kirkpatrick talks Facebook

David Kirkpatrick talks Facebook

The author of The Facebook Effect talks to FSD about privacy, anonymity whether the social network plans to go into China.

For David Kirkpatrick, author of The Facebook Effect, the social network uniquely gives individuals the power of broadcast, something which has historically been controlled by a small elite (1min). Kirkpatrick, who spent months with Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg to conduct research for the book, says that while the company is the “manifestation of the vision and will of one individual … on balance it’s been for the better” (2mins 12secs). On Zuckerberg’s flaws, Kirkpatrick says that he has a “certitude, shall we say, about the inevitability of sharing and transparency … If he’s wrong, then the whole thing falls apart” (3mins 36secs). According to Kirkpatrick, it is unlikely that a competitor to Facebook will emerge but instead “something fundamentally new” (6mins 7secs).

Kirkpatrick argues that while Facebook may have implemented its privacy controls “clumsily”, privacy is not irrelevant to the company (15mins 14secs). However, for Kirkpatrick, concerns about privacy are usually voiced by those in social elites. “There really is very little evidence that the average user of Facebook is terribly concerned about privacy,” he says (16mins 5secs). Developing his argument further, he adds that Facebook is returning its users to an earlier condition of humankind, before urbanisation (18mins 48secs). ”And what Facebook does is in effect recreate that over-the-backyard-fence of the village intimacy,” he says. So does Kirkpatrick think Facebook will go into China? He says the company certainly wants to and may even be wiling to hand over user information to the Chinese government in order to gain a foothold in the country (23mins). “But they have a big PR problem if they do that,” he says.

 

Print
Published on: June 29, 2012 | No Comments

Leave a comment in any language


Free Speech Debate is a research project of the Dahrendorf Programme for the Study of Freedom at St Antony's College in the University of Oxford. www.freespeechdebate.ox.ac.uk