Because of the comments on previous post, I’ve decided to express my opinion. A disclaimer, though, I haven’t made any deep analysis of the Indonesian Cyber Law (UU ITE). All that I could remember was when the bill passed, there were disappointed people, including me. I forgot what was it that made me mad and disregard that crap. There were things that should be covered that went missing from the law. Just for fun, while googling, I found this.

So to begin with, I would say that implementation of UU ITE sucks. It is being abused by some people as a personal Subversive Law. They can put away freedom of speech in the name of good name. Worst, they can make elusive way to divert people from the real problem. For instance, NONE ever talked about GOOD SERVICE in hospital, how to PROTECT customer, or how to PROVE your innocent in servicing customer. All that we can see now is how a complaining customer surviving the law.

USA, in their first amendment guarantee the freedom of speech for its citizen. The amendment so powerful that even more powerful than Patriot Act. Unfortunately according to stacyb on blogher, on Bush Jr. administration, the Patriot Act would likely to win the ground.

What was the result? Blunder in every decisions, including wasting money on war on Iraq and Afghanistan. This war on terrorism made US so vulnerable to economic crisis and made them so unpopular that it would take years, if it can be achieved, to regain trust on US from other country.

Well, that’s other country business. What I want to take from it is a hard lesson: Whenever you put away freedom of speech there most likely a degrading country. Speech is like a censor device that can alarming people when something goes wrong. Many years in Yugoslavia people are not being able to express their ways of thinking. After Bros Tito died, it became a tragedy. Many things that should be fixed are not expressed, but it grew over time.

Even badmouthing is an indicator of a good communication. With that speech, we can have a view from certain group of people or individuals that having distrustful thought over something. The art of handling of badmouthing is simply using your answer backup with reason. Then, from each side will be decided which is correct and which is wrong and which is simply a misunderstanding. Misunderstanding leads many to war.

The key here is REASONING. Without a proper argument, an opinion simply can be regarded as a troll, flamebait, and so on. This kind of opinion then can be disregarded and the person whom expressed it should be buried in Digg.

Now, reasoning comes with a prerequisite: FILTERING. People living in the society of freedom of speech must have a common sense to filtering and judging which is false and which is true. This kind of thinking is the base of science. You would properly address matters and not rushing into conclusion.

For this kind of society, the truth is in the hand of a good argument. Good argument makes science. Thus, people will move in careful fashion. Government will not easily get fooled and corruption will not be this powerful. Everybody can express their thought without ever having excessive fear. That’s why in many modern country, existed a handful of private investigator known as investigating journalism. Something that went missing in this country.

Now, regarding what Luna said on Twitter, people on Infotainment should answer back with positive comment on why Infotainment is a good thing — if there is a good thing in it.

Hmm.. that last one is biased. Friends of mine have an objective view that view both side as equally unwise. Unfortunately, with the negative impact of Infotainment, how celebrities getting divorced/provoked because of the Infotainment, hardly I could see the Infotainment as a good media. This case sold me to a standing position that called this media is evil.  But, that’s me and probably anyone else that defend Luna. Just be careful to the number of people that have the same thought of me ithat when became significant could ruled out Infotainment.