Báo cáo của Facebook tuân thủ các yêu cầu kiểm duyệt của chính phủ Vιệт Nαм không đặt ra tiền lệ đáng khích lệ. Thực tiễn ċó thể khuyến khích các chế độ độc tài vì các chính phủ đàn áp hơn ċó thể áp dụng các chiến lược тươɴԍ тự chống lại gã khổng lồ công nghệ.
By Umair Jamal
ân xá Quốc tế
report has accused Facebook and YouTube of aiding the Vietnamese government in censoring criticism and blocking posts expressing dissent in the country.
The report says that the companies have assisted “
censorship and repression on an industrial scale
” in Vietnam.
Vietnam is not the only country where Facebook has been accused of such practice. Similar patterns have been reported in other countries in Southeast Asia and beyond, raising fears that the global tech giant is willing to bend to authoritarian regimes to protect its business interests.
The dynamic could have global implications as more repressive governments adopt similar strategies.
Facebook faces growing pressure over data and privacy in Vietnam
Vietnam’s government has a reputation for restricting freedom of speech and online dissent. Trong những năm gần đây, Facebook accounts of activists and bloggers were
for criticizing authorities. Authorities in Vietnam have long jailed critics of the ruling party but the practice is now
at its highest
since Amnesty International started publishing data in 1996. Ở Vιệт Nαм, có xung quanh 170 “
prisoners of conscience
”Và 69 of them are serving jail time for their online activism, which the government considers a threat to its rule.
The recent surge started when a
controversial 2013 pháp luật
banned Vietnamese internet users from discussing current affairs. Luật, known as Decree 72, bars online blogs and social media websites from sharing content that may be critical of the government. The law also requires that foreign internet companies, including Facebook, keep local servers in the country. The regulation also declared that
Twitter and Facebook can only be used
“to provide and exchange personal information.”
In a push to tighten its censorship laws and assert more control over international technology companies, Vietnam’s government passed another
controversial cyber law
trong 2018. The law which went into effect in January 2019 và
imposed additional legal checks
on global technology companies, including requirements that they set up local offices, keep all user data records inside Vietnam and, if required, agree to hand over any requested data to the state. The law also requires that social media sites take down any content considered anti-state by the government within a period of 24 giờ.
Commenting on Facebook and YouTube operations in Vietnam,
Ming Yu Hah
, Amnesty International’s deputy regional director for campaigns, said that these platforms have become “hunting grounds for censors, military cyber-troops and state-sponsored trolls.”
“The platforms [Facebook and YouTube] themselves are not merely letting it happen—they’re increasingly complicit,Cô ấy nói thêm.
Are Facebook and other tech firms prioritizing profits over human rights?
According to Facebook’s own
transparency report, the platform
complied with 834 content restrictions from the Vietnamese government in the first half of 2020. This is a huge rise compared to the previous six-month reporting period.
International says that the recent increase was driven by the government’s efforts to contain debate on the
land dispute, a prominent issue that brought the media’s attention to a military plan to construct an airfield on land claimed by villagers.
Vào tháng Tư, Facebook was forced to significantly increase its compliance with Vietnamese government requests to
more content after authorities purposely slowed traffic to the platform by taking its local servers offline.
Instead of taking some quantifiable counter measures to preserve its autonomy, Facebook has been complying with Vietnam’s requests for years. One reason is linked to the country’s lucrative market for the company. Trong 2018, Facebook earned almost US$1 billion from the Vietnamese market. “Facebook is by far the most popular and profitable platform in
,” said Amnesty’s Ming Yu Hah.
Facebook follows similar practices in other countries
Vietnam is not the only country where Facebook may be choosing to aid repressive efforts from governments to protect its business interests. Trong khu vực Đông Nam Á, Facebook has also complied with requests from the Thai government by blocking access to content
critical of the monarchy
. The Philippines is another example, where President Rodrigo Duterte’s repressive government is using
Facebook to wage campaigns
against its critics. Trong 2018,
that people used its platform to incite violence in Myanmar. In a statement, one of Facebook’s executives said that the platform had failed to prevent itself from being used to “foment division and incite offline violence” in the country.
Outside the region, India provides another example, as Facebook has reportedly declined to ban a
violent religious group
because the company fears for its business interests. Trong tháng Một, Facebook also
live streaming of the Pakistan Broadcasting Corporation’s coverage of India’s alleged human rights violations in Kashmir. In other countries, including Myanmar, Facebook’s platform has
helped to amplify
misinformation campaigns. Facebook’s slow response and weak content monitoring mechanism in countries like Sri Lanka has
allowed rumors to spark violence
Beyond Vietnam, Facebook is fast becoming a government surveillance tool rather than a platform to voice dissent or broadcast views to a wide audience. không may, such practices will only encourage authoritarian regimes globally as other repressive governments could adopt similar strategies. Facebook needs not only to improve its content monitoring mechanisms but also to practice its own declared policy of upholding freedom of speech and privacy.
Chuyên mục: Tin tức