This document discusses web censorship and public awareness in Japan. It outlines different perspectives on what censorship means, and notes moves toward increased internet regulation in Japan around content filtering and copyright legislation. While most public surveys show support for regulating "harmful content", opposition argues that censorship could stifle innovation and leave Japan behind economically. The document concludes that awareness and literacy are important aspects of the debate around internet censorship.

1. Web Censorship and Public Awareness:
The case of Internet regulation in Japan
Chris Salzberg

2. To censor:
to examine in order to suppress or delete anything
considered objectionable
(Merriam­Webster)

3. What does “Web Censorship” mean?

Different meanings in different contexts:

Censorship by governments against freedom of expression
and free access to information

Filtering of content seen as “harmful” to society

Violation of privacy rights: web monitoring, eavesdropping

“Censorship” against file sharing (copyrighted content)

What is “anti­censorship”?

4. “The Age of Net Regulation is Coming”

In the last year, moves toward net regulation:
1.Internet content (transmission + broadcasting = ?)
2.Copyright legislation (file sharing)
3.Mobile web access (filtering, “harmful” content)

Fears about: “deai” (dating) sites, obscene/voilent
content, child porn, “adult” anime, net bullying,
death threats (Akihabara massacre), etc. etc. etc.

5. Filtering of “harmful” content

Bill by LDP/DPJ passed into law on June 11th

Included in the bill:

Obligation on PC makers to pre­install national
standards­based filtering software on PCs/mobile phones

Filtering on mobile phones for users under age 18

ISPs required to eliminate harmful content/services

Government decides what is “harmful”

9. Support for Regulation

A survey on regulation of “harmful content” (2007):

67.8% said the Internet should be regulated

22.7% said they lean toward regulation

3.1% said they lean toward non­regulation

1.4% said the Internet should not be regulated

76% support web filtering, 51% want police to
strengthen monitoring, 87% support manga porn
regulation

10. Opposition to Regulation

Some of the greatest opposition from companies:
DENA, Yahoo, Microsoft, Rakuten, Net Star

Emphasizing positives of an open Internet

11. Opposition strategies

More so than free access to information, opposition
strategies emphasize economic considerations:

Regulation will stop innovation/creativity

Japan will be left behind, outcompeted

Also emphasizes knowledge issues:

Many proposals are technologically contradictory

Lack of transparency in legislation

12. The “people” are killing the Internet

Oppression of the people by governments and
corporations is not seen as a major concern

Conern is about other citizens:

Bullying, death threats, dating sites, obscene content,
copyright violation, etc. etc.

Conclusion: it is the people who are killing the
Internet, gov't needs to step in and regulate

13. The future is now

Citizen media coverage of Akihabara killings:

Instantaneous through Ustream, 2000­3000 viewers

No editing or censorship of footage

Large public backlash, criticism

14. Summary

“Web censorship” means different things to
different people/groups/nations

Different opposition strategies:

Technological problems with censorship

Lack of transparency in process

Economic considerations, innovation/creativity

Awareness and literacy are key