Dissecting regulations: Are bloggers subject to a standardized or ambiguous ethical publishing code?

Many countries that claim to respect freedom of speech often stress on the need of ethical publishing. Blogs are on the rise as a popular platform to convey information or opinions and it is fair to assume that blogs too are subject to the same condition; that there must be ethical publishing. It is fair for this condition to be respected but what happens when the term ‘ethical publishing’ is constantly manipulated to suit the government in power and used as a tool to suppress freedom of speech?

What constitutes the term ‘ethical publishing’?
To conform to ethical norms, bloggers are expected to publish the truth. However, as stated by Singer (2006), a dilemma exists when authorities put in laws and regulations that prevent the truth from being communicated .

Regulations as prevention of ethical publishing?
The Malaysian Sedition Act of 1948 prevents the public, bloggers included, to publish seditious articles. Human rights activists consider this Act as being extremely vague as Section 4 of the Act stipulates that an action is seditious "when applied or used in respect of any act, speech, words, publication or other thing that qualifies the act, speech, words, publication or other thing as having a seditious tendency". Authorities are seen to exploit on the vagueness of this Act by using it against those who are not in favour of the government in power.

In 2008, blogger Syed Azidi Syed Aziz was charged under Section 4 (1) of the Sedition Act for flying the national flag upside down on his blog (The Star 2008). The authorities considered the act of flying a national flag upside down unethical, disrespectful and seditious. However, flying a flag upside down is a universal symbol of a state in distress. In the United States, people began flying the flag upside down soon after the World Trade Centre attack (Kellogg 2001). It does not reflect anger towards the country but instead reflects sympathy to the way the country is being run. It is only disrespectful if the flag is shown as torn or being burnt.

Screenshot: The blog of Sheih Kickdefella with the upside-down Malaysian flag

Federal Constitution guarantees every citizen freedom of speech. While it is understood that malicious statements should not be made on an unfounded basis, due respect should be given to bloggers to exercise their right on freedom of expression as long as they do not result to defaming an individual or institution in a baseless manner (Zha & Perlmutter 2009).

There is nothing unethical about having opinions that are not in the same line with the authorities, and regulations should be imposed fairly so that responsible bloggers with clear consciences would not be subject to ambiguous laws that prohibit them from acting ethically simply because of political affiliation.

Reference List

Laws of Malaysia, Sedition Act 1948, viewed November 11 2009,

http://www.agc.gov.my/agc/Akta/Vol.%201/Act%2015.pdf

North County Times 2001, ‘Upside down flag is a distress signal’, 28 September 2001, viewed November 12 2009.

http://www.uni-muenster.de/PeaCon/global-texte/g-a/Upside%20down%20flag%20is%20distress%20signal%20-%209-28-01%20-%20NCTimes_net.htm

Singer, J. (2006), "'Truth and Transparency: Bloggers' Challenge to Professional Autonomy in Defining and Enacting Two Journalistic Norms", Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Comm convention, presented to Media Ethics Division, London.

The Star 2009, ‘Blogger Kickdefella arrested for sedition’, 17 September 2008, viewed November 11 2009.

http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/9/17/nation/20080917192953&sec=nation

Zha, W. & Perlmutter, D. D. (2009), "Blogs as Stealth Dissent?: 'Eighteen Touch Dog Newspaper' and the Tactics, Ambiguity and Limits of Internet Resistance in China.", International Media Communication in a Global Age, pp. 277-295. New York, Routledge.