Pls indulge me if I mainly C&P, but it’s important since thy

…after much rumination, I declare that I agree mostly with the writings and thoughts well put forth by three of my regular discourse mates, namely johnleemk, 2020freelunch and xpyred whom I often tease “minus da d”.

Herewith, without his permit which I unabashedly assume is granted — because we are agreed we exchange mentor-mentee roles since we “befriended” each other over several G7 meetings — I reprise in FULL this Y&A seventeen-year-old’s insightful article. Just one dimwitnitpicking — Please spell the ‘internet’ thus “Internet”, willya, mentor mind!johnLeeMK
Taking A Stand Against Defamation and For Freedom of Speech

The New Straits Times Press has sued Jeff Ooi and Ahirudin bin Atan (Rocky) for defamation. Although I believe Jeff and Rocky should fight this case, and will stand with them, I will not be supporting the Bloggers United movement - because I believe in the importance of defamation laws.

Written by johnleemk on 11:07:24 am Jan 21, 2007.

Taking A Stand Against Defamation and For Freedom of Speech

The recent spate of lawsuits by the New Straits Times Press against two bloggers - namely Jeff Ooi and Rocky - have caused much consternation in the blogosphere. After all, these are the first lawsuits of their kind in Malaysia. The general response has, justifiably, been that these lawsuits will only stifle criticism and dissent. While agreeing with this sentiment, I feel that a broader and more objective view should be taken - one based more on reasoning than on a kneejerk reaction.

I will not be placing that ubiqitious “Bloggers United” tag on this site. This is not because I fear government reprisal, or because I am going to back down from taking a definite stand on Malaysian politics and governance. It is not even because I oppose free speech - if anything, I am in strong agreement with the stand taken by Bloggers United for greater freedom of speech, particularly on the internet. The main reason I will be avoiding joining this campaign is simply because:

*Like the recent opposition decision to boycott the Batu Talam by-election, this campaign will be completely ineffective and useless - we all know from past experience how the government will ignore any attempts to point out its errors.

**I believe that the possibility should remain open for people to take legal action against defamatory statements made on the internet - something that Bloggers United has been rather ambiguous about (at first glance, they seem to actually want this possibility to be cut off).

That’s not to say that there isn’t, at least, some basis for the legal action. I suppose the question is: is legal action a flimsy excuse for silencing bloggers? I’m pretty sure it is to anyone who’s followed the dire warnings spouted by Internal Security ministers and such - it’s no coincidence.

Even jeff ooi admits: the internet does not exist in a legal vacuum. He must’ve known what he was getting himself into, and he must’ve known what steps the people in power would eventually take. There were many times when he insisted that there were no two ways about what he was doing: if you write something that’s libelous, you must be willing to face the consequences.

Avoid using 1st world country standard to sampling the case.

well, jeff ooi’s got his work cut out for him. i know there are many out there who support him, and i do too because he’s a blogger like one of us, but he’s crossed the line sometimes in pursuing his own agenda. maybe he has his own, perfectly reasonable explanation for his actions, who knows - either way, NST big shots are forcing him to put his money where his mouth is.

i was reading your recent post regarding Anwar Ibrahim’s denial of charges RPK has leveled against him, and it struck me that in many ways, the conspiracy theories that find their way on the internet have less basis in fact and more in a lucky coincidence of factoids given a personal interpretation.

let’s hope this isn’t the case with those postings of Jeff’s singled out by NST.