DWAIN O.

DOCTANA BSEd-ENGLISH III

College/Department College of Teacher Education (CTE)

Course Code EdCK 5
Course Title Technology for Teaching and Learning 1
Place of the Course in the
Professional subject
Program
Semester & Academic Year First Semester, AY 2020-2021

Chapter 2: ICT Policies and Issues: Implications to Teaching and

Learning
Lesson 1: ICT Policies and their Implications to Teaching and Learning

Activity

Assume yourself as an investigator who would like to inform your learners and co-
teachers about the current issues on technology use.

Search the web and find out articles or cases about:

A. Freedom of Expression and Censorship

B. Privacy and Security

C. Surveillance and Data Retention

D. e-pollutants from e-waste

Choose only one or two articles or cases that you will work on. Use the template
below to answer.
Title of the Issue: Freedom of Expression and Censorship

Title of the Article: Internet Censorship and Freedom of Expression: A Critical

Appraisal of the Regulation of Hate Speech on the Internet
Source: Accessible via Internet at https://www.bileta.org.uk/wp-
content/uploads/Internet-Censorship-and-Freedom-of-Expression-Ronald-
Kakungulu.pdf
Author: Ronald Kakungulu-Mayambala

Summary Narrative:
Mayambala (2008) states that the Internet affected the social environment
of the society as hate speeches have become prevalent in the space. He also
mentioned the existence of the freedom of expression. These two concepts are in
conflict nowadays due to the fact that Internet is a venue of free speech but most
speeches that are categorized as hate for others are apparently sending
damage to others. In a democratic country, the author discussed his idea that
there should be a regulation in the Internet that will not trample the freedom of
expression of most citizens.
His background posits the obsolete laws, different laws, and short-scoped
laws in different countries should be addressed to maximize the regulative
measures on the use of Internet.
Moreover, he cited the legal backgrounds of freedom of expression in the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, quoted: ”Everyone has the right to
freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinion
without interference and to seeks, receive and impart information and ideas
through any media and regardless of frontiers”. However, in contrary, the said
international law also mentioned that the freedom is limited on freedom that
concerns the above mentioned but is not for advocacy of hatred that incites to
discrimination, war, violence and threats.
The article further states that the reason on why we should protect
democracy is in respect to the fundamental rights of everyone. Also, this
advocates strategies for an inclusive society—speaking of the Internet, he called
it the cyber democracy. He also said that freedom of expression is a tool to create
deliberation among people’s beliefs. Connecting the thought to censorship, he
stated that censorship would not enable deliberation among people and the
truth will not prevail. It means, censorship will not let both party benefit.
He adds a prediction that if the cyberspace in the long run will be
intertwined or interchangeable with democracy, once leaders learn to restrict
speeches in the Internet, people will suffer. He reminds that it is important to also
use the traditional demonstrations and not exhaust cyberspace for it will be in
danger for dictatorial leaders who would wish to suppress its existence.
In the last parts of his article, he stated the support on which shall be
censored in the use of Internet, he enumerated: criminal actions, hate speeches
that might hurt the people in the cyberspace—he said, hate speeches can be
determined if the ideas of the speech are directly about racist remarks,
homophobic slurs, cultural prejudices, religious discrimination and such that may
fall on the perpetrators of sectoral hates. For one to regulate the hate speeches
without trampling the democratic system of expression, the legalities should
create a clear distinction between Internet Censorship and Regulation in the
Internet.

What lesson have you learned?

I first learned that there is a difference between Internet censorship and it
has a rival view against the freedom of expression. Freedom of expression, in the
Philippines, is widely relevant because it is the basic tenets that holds our rights not
just in the national stance but also in the international community. Freedom to
express is one of our basic human rights. Thus, an idea of censorship may affect
how we can perform this basic human right of expressing our thoughts.
However, there is an imminent call to impose regulations in the Internet
because of the prevalent hate speeches that are circulating around the Internet.
To make a successful policy that will police this hate speeches that might turn into
advocacies of war and violence, we must distinguish the limits of our speech
activities. It means, our freedom to speak should only be subjected for social forum
and debates; it should not go against the set of other’s individual rights and also,
it should not go to the extent that the government’s activity will not be
performable because of the danger of violent anti-government stances.
To localize the legalities of the regulation of speeches, Article 19 of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights promulgates that there is a
restriction of freedom of speech as it should not be tainting the reputation of an
individual, the national security, the public morals and health (cited from
PhilstarGlobal, 2016)
This is a call for us to make sure that we are not going against the rights of
others but we still safeguard our rights to speech. We must be able to understand
the limits of our freedom because after all freedom of speech is not absolute
because in all rights comes with accountability.

What suggestions can you offer?

First, I see the threat of this Internet censorship in the thread of conversations
in the political field. This can strongly suppress our ability to construct criticisms in
our society and it will definitely trample our human rights if regulations are sought
to hide itself as a means to restrict bad influences but on the other hand it is could
be another regime of dictatorial leader. And a Filipino who has been subjected
to lots of colonial regimes and is also a subject of political dictatorship, I must
uphold that God-fated right of freedom to express my views. But in the stances of
perilous rebellions, we must very vigilant and we must be observant on the reads
that we come across in the Internet, it can be true that anti-government groups
are sharing black propaganda to ignite the growing criticisms of the citizens
towards the government into a violent movement. We would not want another
internal revolution in our country so what we should do is follow restrictions if we
already know that we are trying to smudge on somebody else’s reputation. We
should follow the law if we see it as something that will promote war and anger.
But we should be vocal with our ideas because it is our basic right.
Reflection

Based on your activity, answer the following by adding information’s after the
statement.

I as a future teacher…

1. learned that there are debatable scenarios on the ability of the people to socialize
and inform the people about the ideas that they have in the cyberspace. In the
Philippines, it is highly recognized and the idea of cyber-democracy is very much
safeguarded and a hot topic for people who are aware of their rights to express
as their basic human right. The conflict comes up when the free speech is utilized
as a tool to hurt other people by means of spreading hate to the point that it has
been becoming a propaganda for violence and hatred. The school as education
institution should instill the values of tolerance and diversity among its learners to
ensure that the rights to express is still existing but the accountability and
responsibility upon this right is still considered. This talks about the sensitive concept
of ideologies colliding together—now, which among those should be existing. I
guess the idea of regulation should not be too strict that the free discourse and
sifting of intellects of the people be restricted to just mere tolerance and respect.
Too much resilience will bring us to nowhere. I think, the hot debates should still
exist, but violence should be prohibited by the law.
2. realized that the stated anarchy in the cyberspace where laws are not really
scoped to ensure the violence that can be present in the Internet is not really
addressed so much not just in the Philippines but also among the countries of the
globe. Truly, the freedom of speech and the idea of censorship should co-exist to
create a harmonious dissemination of ideologies that is tolerant to one another
and will not promote violence among others. However, in the present state of the
politics in the Philippines, the will to regulate the cyberspace that connects to the
regulation of speech is a bit malicious in this administration because they are
known to be oppressors of democracy. It is important however, that we should not
contribute in the hatred but still be able to express ourselves in a factual stand.
3. plan to encourage active learners in the societal discourse in a way that they do
not trample on others individual rights. After all, the use of ICT is not just about
easing the teaching-learning but also to enable learners to delve deep in their
view to the society. Discourse and debates are essential component of an
individual to sharpen his/her ideology. It is important that I will instill behavior
among learners that it is not their ideologies that is to be only recognized in this
society of colliding ideas. It will always be a reminder for them to learn to
discriminate their reading materials and only view those information that are
factual.