![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
I was thinking about the topic of 'freedom of expression' for quite sometime. The subject is a bit complicated as it is directly linked to mindset of individuals. I got more confused by reading a statement from Amnesty(the 'goddess' of Human Rights). It says, "the right to freedom of expression is not absolute - neither for the creators of material nor their critics. It carries responsibilities and it may, therefore, be subject to restrictions in the name of safeguarding the rights of others.....". It sounds good as it asks the people to be responsible for their creations. But, who defines your rights and responsibilities? Did anybody ever consult you to define your rights and responsibilities? :)
From my observation I managed to create my own version, "there is nothing called 'absolute freedom of expression'. Your words/thoughts will be categorized as 'right to freedom of expression' only when it is in match with the views of an elite group who are powerful enough to 'transmit' their ideas and views. If your thoughts are not with 'the propagandists' they will be killed before or after their birth."
From my observation I managed to create my own version, "there is nothing called 'absolute freedom of expression'. Your words/thoughts will be categorized as 'right to freedom of expression' only when it is in match with the views of an elite group who are powerful enough to 'transmit' their ideas and views. If your thoughts are not with 'the propagandists' they will be killed before or after their birth."
I don't like pets but like cats...
- lazy by nature but quick when attacked
- shy but aggressive when all other doors are closed
ps:
Thanks to "www.4shared.com" for the image
- Mood:
peaceful
"Change is inevitable", but at many occasions I tend to forget
this point or I haven't realized this truth completely. In past I
came across many institutions and organizations which changed
dramatically and I made myself a symbol of anachronism
when I shared time with them. At times it left me crazy, at
times it left me an 'enlightened soul'. And slowly I am realizing
the 'omnipresence' of change.
A very good example of an institution which changed during
last two decades is 'Fourth Estate' (I am talking about India,
more specifically Kerala). It is not about the revolution brought
in by communication technology, it's about the invisible force
driving the press. When I was a kid I use have a very ideal
picture of the press. I use to believe that the press works for
the benefit of the society. I use to fancy that they say the
truth for the sake of truth. Perhaps that was not true even 20
years back. It is quite possible that elders (parents and teachers),
who experienced the early days of independent India, gave
me such an idea. During the freedom struggle and just after
independence press might have been a synonym for truth. As
the time progressed they might have became more
'professional' as everything else in the society. And the invisible
driving force for most of the media today is business rather than
social commitment. Or the business mind behind media has
become stronger than social commitment.
Today I don't know how many news papers say the truth, I don't
know how many of them stand with an ideology to improve the
society. Nowadays publishing blown up reports on silly incidents
is a standard practice. As I was a regular viewer of news channels
in the past, I use to come across such incidents quite often and
use to get crazy thinking "how can they say something like that
so irresponsibly". Slowly I realized that the fault was with me. I
hadn't realized that the media was far away from my imagination.
But that is just a single instance. There might be a lot of similar
entities around me which might have changed and still I am keeping
its old image. When it come to people, with whom one is associated,
it will be much more complex. Yes, change is everywhere but I
can't perceive it always.
- Mood: calm
