As is predictable with a dictatorship, the censorship starts off with a few and then the net widens. As my signature shows, a few months ago an Iranian poster noted that only "loony" sites had been banned in Iran, now the list includes such loony sites as Amazon, Youtube, and Wikipedia. All of this comes on the heels of an October ban on broadband access in Iran... http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=2704399&page=1 For those of you who can see them, here is the link to the Iran entry in Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran Here is a compilation clip of some pretty good goals scored by the Iranian national team: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1Bp_mwTbSE And a link to several books on Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw/002-1369953-8684832?url=search-alias=aps&field-keywords=iran
This is pretty bad if you ask me. the internet was one of the few places where you can get in contact with Iranians quite well, if they continue to block that the Iranians will even less have a clue of what is going on.
Can bigsoccer.com be far behind? Someone should infrom the Iranian authorities about all the dangerous Zionists on the web site.
Don't forget the ban on satellite dishes...and I seem to recall a ban on certain types of music, but i might be wrong about that.
IM: This has been done to promote Iranian Internet sites and most of the stuff on those other sites is garbage that nobody would want to see or buy.
Sites like youtube contain numerous Anti Islam, Ahmadinjead or whatever that is related to IR. Iran. How ever this site also includes a huge category of pro western videos. If I was president, I'd do the same. Stop all source of propagands from entering the mind of my people. Now this is surprising to see many misinformed drones cry out loud regarding a matter that has nothing to do with them or their country. If I'm not mistaking, the book '' Catcher in the rye '' was once banned in United States. So why would you care if Iran bans couple websites? Are you trying to say, that you allow your people to do anything, even if it was to harm your so called absolute freedom system? Go take a walk, thanks.
Here. Here's your Kool-Aid. Just sip. Relax. And close your eyes. Everything is gonna be just fine...
Until last week or thereabouts, Iran did not filter any serious news websites. While many such websites remain unfiltered today, ironically including practically every major Israeli news website (including Jerusalem Post, Yvetnews, Haaretz, etc), since last week there have been several news websites being filtered as well. I don't support that policy at all. More generally, while most of the political websites that Iran used to censor lacked any merit whatsoever, many associated with groups who peddled false and fictional stories to encourage the violent overthrow of the government, I always believed that policy was misguided regardless. I personally don't find filtering of pornographic sites problematic per se as it relates to a country like Iran, but did find the filtering even in that regard to be overbroad as it occasionally interfered with access to legitimate medical, sociological, and other useful sites as well. This is just to be clear so that no one confuses my attempts to correct misinformation as it relates to some of the facts with regard to what is happening in Iran, including regarding filtering of websites, with any support for the misguided policies and inconsistent practices on this issue. And, in that spirit, let me note that Wikipedia is not censored in Iran. For a brief period, you could not get access to the English language version of the site due to mistaken filtering, but that problem has been corrected.
Youtube has been filtered as a result of this sex scandal, Youtube is where the video was first uploaded.
IM, How do these types of decisions get made in Iran, like the filtering of certain internet sites? Does it come from the president's office? The Mullahs? Back when I was growing up, during the time of the Junta, Argentina had a morality commision which decided about books, movies, music and so on. They even held meetings with artists, such as rock stars, telling them what they could and could not do with their lyrics. They fancied themselves the guardians of our morality. Is this what is going on in Iran?
Is this on the level? Or is this a passage of 1984 that was left on the editing room floor, so to speak?
Filtering of websites takes place based on orders from the judiciary, based on criteria that IMO is nonetheless vague, imprecise and which leads to inconsistent and counterproductive practices. However, if someone believes a website is mistakingly filtered, they can petition the judiciary to correct the problem. Iran has several different different organs with responsibility on these kind of issues. The most active ones in this regard are not under the control of the government, but are answerable to the judiciary (which is independent of the government, and ultimately answerable to the Supreme Leader). In Iran, I should add, the judiciary oversees the law enforcement and prosecutorial arms of the government as well as the courts. There are government organs and commissions that have some responsibility in this area as well. They are connected to the cutural ministry, and while some of them fulfill advisory functions, others do have the right to issue and deny publishing licenses and hence exercise oversight in that manner. However, most of the objectionable practices don't involve the government, which until Ahmadinejad took office, was usually on the opposite site of the judiciary on most of these issues. Even today, despite the propaganda against him, Ahmadinejad's administration is not the one pushing for many of the restrictions you might read about. As an aside, my issue with some of these practices notwithstanding, you can get whatever kind of news and political opinion you like in Iran. The 'censorship' here is neither all encumpasing nor even consistent and, in any case, does not stop people from listening to foreign broadcasts and satellite. (The temporary clamp down on satellite dishes, which began a couple months ago, has already eased again and most people are back to watching their favorites satellite channels).
Does that scandal give the mullah the right to filter you tube or any website? I understand some people here are too patriotic to admit that the government of Iran is acting against the people , they shouldn’t filter any site and that’s the bottom line.
The first thing you bring up is your usual “Iran invented” this and that garbage , which is not related to this thread and is considered trolling .
doesn't change the fact that IM is obsessed with Israel and is always trying to portray it in the negative light. A mod can delete my joke-post, but given the history of that joke, surely it was a good time to stick it in there.
I don't want to speak for IM, but I thought the inclusion of the Israeli mention in his post was to show that censorship is not all encompassing in Iran. If it was, you'd expect the Israeli newspapers would be among the first to get banned. Is selective censorship better than heavy censorship - that may be the question here. We're perhaps expected to think better (or at least less "ill") of Iran's government because the censorship does not extend to Israeli newspapers.
i still don't see how inclusion of Israel in his post has any other purpose than to preach his typical anti-Israel propaganda. As for the fact that israel newspapers are not (yet) banned in Iran, it all plays well in-hand to the Ahmadinejad's comments on destroying Israel. Basically saying we want to wipe out Israel from the face of this planet, yet we have this large Jewish population here in Iran and we even allow them to read newspapers from Israel. back to the topic, i am sure there are many countries that have banned certain pro-western news sites and other such channels of information, yet IM tends to focus on Israel. And he does that ALL the time. That is a fact.
To answer your question, any censorship is wrong and should not be tolerated. It speaks volumes for the fear that the mullahs have of their people being able to read whatever they want and to be able to decide for themselves what is right and what is wrong. This type of censorship is more about control then it is about being offended by what those sites include. It is similar to the concept of book burning, only in this case it is blocking and preventing as much as they can what their people see. I am glad I live in the US where I can view any site I choose to. Of course I am sure it gets entered into a database somewhere.