…flow my tears, the policeman said…
A study released on Thursday revealed that though many Jordanians support media freedoms, a majority support government restrictions when it comes to destabilising issues.
In the study, performed by WorldPublicOpinion.org and supported and coordinated by the Centre for Strategic Studies at the University of Jordan, 78 per cent of respondents agreed that the media’s freedom to publish news and ideas is important.
However, some 66 per cent of Jordanians favoured the government placing tighter restrictions on material which is viewed as politically destabilising.
Jordan was among three countries in the study where a majority of respondents approved greater government control over media issues deemed destabilising: the Palestinian territories (59 per cent) and Indonesia (56 per cent).
…Strikingly, 63 per cent of Jordanian respondents said the government should have the right to prevent access to certain items on the Internet, joining Iran as the only two nations where a majority shared this view.
Only 26 per cent of Jordanians believed that citizens should be able to read any content on the Internet without restrictions. [source]
If you ever take a political leadership course or even if you’ve ever read anything on constitutional powers, you’ll always run across the term “emergency powers”. Essentially it runs along the lines of somewhat philosophical questions that grapple with the nature of the state and what happens to a constitutional framework built on checks and balances and the ideal that no man is above the law, when an emergency scenario arises and “special” emergency powers are transfered to the executive or the leader. A situation arises where that person is granted the power and authority to do as they please in the name of “security” and in the name of “stability”. Once those elements are restored, the state of emergency is undeclared and things go back to normal. But then again, it’s the guy with all the power that gets to declare and undeclare; he’s the one in control of the on/off switch.
Yet, despite the ambiguity, history has shown, that in a fog of uncertainty the people will always acquiesce, and that’s how quickly power and authority can be transfered to the state sometimes, in even the most democratic of states: in a heart beat.
Now Jordan is far (far, far, far) from being a democracy, yet (and boy do I emphasize the word “yet“), the above scenario is very similar when it comes to someone uttering the term “politically destabilizing”, especially, especially, especially, when it is preceded with the word “deemed”.
What is “politically destabilizing”?
Who decides what is “politically destabilizing”?
Me?
You?
Them?
They?
Or 63% of Jordanian respondents in a poll?
So sometimes, upon reading such information, I think to myself, all things being equal, is fighting for media freedom, political freedom or just any type of freedom and justice in Jordan really worth it when the majority are content?
The will of the people.
As if you didn’t know it! I guess people want to read only what they would like to hear.
By the way you didn’t answer my question in the previous post: What is ibis?
it was a typo…it was meant to read “ibid” (latin for “same place”)
😀
Nas,, what do you expect from population that have been fed propaganda and lies from the day they are born? just look at the pathetic Jordan’s TV and the printing media mainly Al Rai and the rest are publishing ,it’s garbage..
We don’t deserve democracy, I swear. Democracy in our country has hurt our freedoms and rights in more than one case.
here laugh at this: http://www.alghad.jo/?news=326925
the really funny part: my comment on the topic was declined.
I am not disagreeing with you, but you know how you said “history has shown, that in a fog of uncertainty the people will always acquiesce, and that’s how quickly power and authority can be transfered to the state sometimes” … well if you look at the coverage of the november elections, and how many citizens (in vox pops) referred to them as a ‘3urs dimukrati’ and ‘isti7kak dustouri’… I begin to wonder, do citizens really believe the elections were a democratic wedding? probably not. Simialrly, do they really believe freedom of expression needs to be further restricted? probably not. But by now, they know what they are expected to say…. if that makes any sense…
• إدارة صØÙŠÙØ© “السبيل” الأسبوعية تستعد للتقدم بطعن أمام Ù…Øكمة العدل العليا ÙÙŠ امتناع مجلس الوزراء عن إصدار قرار بترخيص صدور الصØÙŠÙØ© بصورة يومية Øسب الطلب الذي تقدمت به الإدارة
منذ أكثر من شهرين. الصØÙŠÙØ© كانت زودت قبل Ù†ØÙˆ أسبوعين الØكومة ببعض الأوراق الرسمية، تتعلق بنقل سابق للملكية، لغايات استكمال طلب الترخيص لليومي
http://www.alghad.jo/index.php?speical_section=81&news=326877
I just don’t understand why on earth we need the council of ministers to approve the publishing of a newspaper that is already in circulation on weekly basis but wants to start publishing on a daily basis. Why? In essence I can care less if they give them an approval, or if they don’t get an approval it makes me no difference, I have never read this paper before, I’m just curious why everything had to be so complicated like that. Why not just let anybody that wants to start newspaper start a newspaper. Period.
Well al sabeel is more of a tabloid than a newspaper. Perhaps that’s why they’re reluctant to give approval.
We get the government we deserve
Farah,
No, it is because assabeel is controlled by the IAF.
I’m with Deena on this. Many would be afraid to say what they really think. So who asks the questions, the wording, and how anonymity is guaranteed (if at all) makes all the difference. Can you really imagine someone saying:
I have too much freedom, take it away!
In such polls, I always wonder how the questions were really formed, and what options existed in the choices…. coz it certainly would make a big difference….who helped in distributing the questionnairre! LOOOL !! Some questions are structured to just make you think in a linear way… and limits your ability to question the question itself… Specially given to people who might take the first choice instead of reading the rest(being too busy!! ) As you might have noticed… i tend to refuse to accpet the numbers above as a Representative sample…
“I think to myself, all things being equal, is fighting for media freedom, political freedom or just any type of freedom and justice in Jordan really worth it when the majority are content? ”
Fighting for your beliefs is always worth it…. It’s never about the majority.. it’s all about you! 🙂
I don’t want to shadow the strategic center with uncertainity, thats really destructive.
Like said by comments above, this is too much, take some of my freedom! or the dtructure of questions, or I would add the IQ and the sample chosen like people who read a book and got the world, university cool dudes, officials, educated, cultured.. what was the sample.
If yes, as the sample was fairly representing.. then surely we do not deserve democracy, as many people will hijack it at their very own current posts, no matter how personal or insignificant those were.
to answer some of the comments ill piggyback off of deena’s:
“well if you look at the coverage of the november elections, and how many citizens (in vox pops) referred to them as a ‘3urs dimukrati’ and ‘isti7kak dustouri’… I begin to wonder, do citizens really believe the elections were a democratic wedding? probably not. Simialrly, do they really believe freedom of expression needs to be further restricted? probably not. But by now, they know what they are expected to say…. if that makes any sense…”
yup, and this is exactly what i meant by all things being equal…in other words, if we choose to believe that all the elements are correct, that people are answering freely, that this isnt (as mapless pointed out) a push-poll. if all things being equal, if everyone answered honestly, if the sample was wide enough, if…
then the answers…well…are scary enough as they are