An early morning discussion with @iwriteasiwrite and @renguila on Twitter brought to the fore some realizations which have been unnoticed over these past few days of objections against the Cybercrimes Prevention Law of 2012 (Republic Act 10175).
In the middle of our discussion as to why…
And that deserves an Amen. Because of the nature of most social media users (highly urbanized, educated) the effects of bills such as the Cybercrime Prevention Act are only considered in local, and fairly limited, senses. However, the long-term effects affect under-represented, marginalized groups such as IPs, farmers, and the rural poor, much more.
Social media and the internet provides them with an opportunity to engage in the broader national discourse unencumbered by geography or socio-economic status. This is a key issue that has not been touched on by so-called evangelists for social media. It is, as well, one of the signal reasons by Cybercrime is antithetical to national and human resource development.
Silencing those who barely have a voice is not the way to build a people-focused, human rights support, and development geared inclusive nation.
