Rabu, Tanggal 22 oktober 2014 sudah masuk
kuliah sesi ke-7 dengan judul materi slide ppt “Rights and information ethics”. Sebelum penjelasan materi oleh Pak Yaya diakhiri, ada tugas diskusi yang dikerjakan perkelompok,
nah tugas yang diberikan mengenai “Shi Tao”.
Shi Tao
In 2005, he composed an email from his office in China using
a Yahoo account, which he then sent to a pro-democracy website in New York
City. He attached to the email an article, which he wished to publish
anonymously, on China’s new policies regarding crackdowns on potential
pro-democracy dissidents in China (MacKinnon 2008). When Chinese authorities
became aware of the article they considered it a breach of state secrets and
sought to find out the author. They eventually received crucial information about
Shi Tao’s identity from Yahoo’s Asian business partners in Hong Kong (MacKinnon
2008).This evidence was then used to convict him in a Chinese court.
- Whether the Chinese government’s actions in suppressing Shi Tao’s free speech rights were ethically wrong
- How the ICTs used contributed to that situation
- Did Shi Tao have a reasonable right to expect his email provider to keep his identity confidential?
- Did Yahoo’s representatives in Hong Kong grievously breach the privacy rights of Shi Tao when they complied with the request of the Chinese government for help in investigating this case?
- Why were journalists, human rights advocates, and the United States Congress so morally outraged by the actions of Yahoo Inc. and its business partners?
- Why did the Chinese government consider it had the right to know the identity of the author?
- Why did Shi Tao trust the ICTs he was using would protect his identity?
Nama-nama kelompok:
- Gita Veronica – 1312402346
- Oky Wijaya – 1312400800
- Risma Ekawati – 1312402592 (ini saya hehe)
- Umar – 1312400870
- Fajar Hidayat - 1222403016
Hasil
Diskusi "Shi Tao" menurut kelompok kami yaa :
1. Whether the Chinese government’s actions in suppressing
Shi Tao’s free speech rights were ethically wrong
Secara
etika, pemerintah China boleh melakukan hal tersebut karena Shi Tao telah
menginformasikan rahasia negara kepada pihak lain yang tidak berhak terhadap
informasi tersebut.
2. How the ICTs used contributed to that situation
Dengan
ICT, informasi yang dikirimkan oleh Shi Tao dapat tersebar secara mudah, cepat
dan tanpa batas ruang dan waktu.
3. Did Shi Tao have a reasonable right to expect his email
provider to keep his identity confidential?
Shi Tao
tidak memiliki hak untuk melarang Yahoo membuka informasi identitas mengenai
dirinya. Karena Shi Tao sudah menyetujui syarat dan ketentuan saat registrasi
email di Yahoo bahwa identitas pemilik email dapat digunakan oleh Yahoo tanpa
pemberitahuan sebelummnya.
4. Did Yahoo’s representatives in Hong Kong grievously breach
the privacy rights of Shi Tao when they complied with the request of the
Chinese government for help in investigating this case?
Pihak
Yahoo tidak melanggar hak privasi Shi Tao karena sudah ada syarat dan ketentuan
yang berlaku.
5. Why were journalists, human rights advocates, and the
United States Congress so morally outraged by the actions of Yahoo Inc. and its
business partners?
Karena
mereka menganggap bahwa demokrasi bersifat universal, tidak terbatas pada
negara-negara tertentu saja sehingga Yahoo dianggap melanggar kebebasan
berdemokrasi.
6. Why did the Chinese government consider it had the right
to know the identity of the author?
Karena
pemerintah China menganggap bahwa perbuatan Shi Tao melanggar aturan negara,
sehingga perlu dilakukan investigasi lebih lanjut terhadap account id yang
telah menyebarkan rahasia negara tersebut.
7. Why did Shi Tao trust the ICTs he was using would protect
his identity?
Karena account id yang
digunakan, dianggap oleh Shi Tao sebagai sesuatu yang confidential dan secure,
sehingga Shi Tao yakin account id tersebut tidak bisa dilacak. Begitupun dengan
menggunakan provider yang independent, sehingga Shi Tao merasa aman dengan
security provider tersebut.
No comments:
Post a Comment