Indians Find Ways to Watch Rape Documentary Despite Ban *Videos*

NEW DELHI — A British-made documentary about a grisly gang rape in India spread throughout social media on Thursday, gaining a wide audience despite a government ban and thwarting official efforts to block it.

A spokesman for YouTube in India said Thursday that the company had agreed to a government request to block the YouTube channels of multiple users who had uploaded the documentary. The original link posted by theBBC, however, was still available, he said. By Thursday evening, the film had been viewed more than 100,000 times from that one link, a figure that did not include viewings from other sources.

For government regulators, the most immediate challenge is to identify and remove links to the film, “India’s Daughter,” that were posted on social media, said a spokesman for the Ministry of Home Affairs, adding that officials from four ministries — overseeing law, broadcasting, information technology and external affairs — “have put their best heads together to find out the best course of action in the matter.”

 Embedded image permalink

**********************************************************

Interview Renews Horror of New Delhi Gang Rape

A new documentary that includes an interview with one of the men who raped and brutalized a woman aboard a private bus in New Delhi in 2012 has reignited passions about the case.

The film set off a furor this week after advance publicity highlighted its most sensational element: a jailhouse interview with Mukesh Singh, one of the men convicted of the 2012 crime, in which he callously described the rape and said the victim was to blame for being outside after dark with a male friend.

Indian officials faulted the filmmaker, Leslee Udwin, for giving Mr. Singh, who is awaiting execution, a platform for his views. They said the interview was offensive to women and could incite a “law and order problem.” A court issued a restraining order that banned any broadcast of the documentary in India.

“How can you show something so abusive?” the Home Affairs Ministry spokesman said. “Everyone knows that this kind of abuse exists, but to show it in such an explicit manner?”

But critics of the decision pointed out that the government’s ban was backfiring, raising interest in the film rather than tamping it down, and attracting a much larger audience online.

Nikhil Pahwa, editor of MediaNama, a firm that analyzes digital and telecom businesses in India, said such efforts often did not work. When government censors similarly banned the broadcast of a crude comedy show, viewership only spiked.

This phenomenon, which he called “the Streisand effect” — named for Barbra Streisand’s failed effort to suppress an aerial photograph of her home for privacy reasons, which only seemed to stoke interest — was in full force on Thursday, as many noted on social media.

 

The government of India is the “best promoter of the rape docu,” Shekhar Gupta, a journalist for India Today, wrote on Twitter. “I woke up in Johannesburg and waiter with bed-tea says he saw it on YouTube last night.”

The BBC showed the documentary Wednesday night despite an appeal from the home minister, Rajnath Singh, who condemned the BBC’s decision on Thursday.

“We had asked not to release the documentary, but BBC still released it,” Mr. Singh told NDTV, a news channel. “We will investigate, and the M.H.A. will take action accordingly.”

The last film to provoke a government reaction on this scale was about bloody religious riots that took place in 2002, said Lawrence Liang, a lawyer based in Bangalore, India, who specializes in technology and copyright law. In that case, the ban required approval by a censorship board, making it a more straightforward task. Blocking entire websites, something Indian authorities have done in the past, is simpler than blocking countless links, Mr. Liang said.

“How can they block YouTube?” he said.

He added that laws governing information technology permitted the government to block websites to defend the country and its “sovereignty and integrity,” maintain public order or prevent violence or crime.

“The question is what they are objecting to here,” he said.

source: The Telegraph / BBC Youtube

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s