<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.2" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Committee to Protect Bloggers &#187; WIA</title>
	<link>http://committeetoprotectbloggers.org</link>
	<description>Free speech for bloggers worldwide</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 03:42:22 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
			<item>
		<title>Criticism of WIA Report</title>
		<link>http://committeetoprotectbloggers.org/2008/06/24/criticism-of-wia-report/</link>
		<comments>http://committeetoprotectbloggers.org/2008/06/24/criticism-of-wia-report/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jun 2008 03:32:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Curt</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[WIA]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Press]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Threatened bloggers]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Imprisoned bloggers]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://committeetoprotectbloggers.org/2008/06/24/criticism-of-wia-report/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Arthur Bright, a student, wrote an interesting essay on the WIA Report, asserting that the distinction between being arrested for blogging and being a blogger who got arrested was not perfectly observed.
Is it helpful to include arrests like those of Fatah, McClellan, and Aljughaifi in the WIA survey?  I’d argue no.  While it is commendable [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Arthur Bright, a student, wrote an interesting <a href="http://www.citmedialaw.org/blog/2008/wia-releases-report-arrests-bloggers-does-it-overcount">essay on the WIA Report</a>, asserting that the distinction between being arrested for blogging and being a blogger who got arrested was not perfectly observed.</p>
<blockquote><p>Is it helpful to include arrests like those of Fatah, McClellan, and Aljughaifi in the WIA survey?  I’d argue no.  While it is commendable to analyze the efforts of governments around the world to muzzle bloggers, it is the repression of free speech that is the concern.  By including the arrests of those who happen to be bloggers in their count, the WIA researchers diminish the impact of their report, because they blur the value of that which they mean to defend.</p></blockquote>
<p>He may be right. Our feelings have always been that, short of arrests for criminal activities such as violence and assault (and child pornography, certainly), we&#8217;ll cover threats to bloggers and threatened bloggers and not restrict it to people who were arrested for their blogging. For one thing, it is very difficult sometimes to distinguish the &#8220;crimes&#8221; bloggers who&#8217;ve been arrested have been charged with. What a tyrannous government claims as its motivation and what its real motivations are are quite different.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://committeetoprotectbloggers.org/2008/06/24/criticism-of-wia-report/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Clarification Regarding List of Arrested Burmese</title>
		<link>http://committeetoprotectbloggers.org/2008/06/18/clarification-regarding-list-of-arrested-burmese/</link>
		<comments>http://committeetoprotectbloggers.org/2008/06/18/clarification-regarding-list-of-arrested-burmese/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2008 23:07:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Curt</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[WIA]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Niknayman]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Burma]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Threatened bloggers]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Imprisoned bloggers]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://committeetoprotectbloggers.org/2008/06/18/clarification-regarding-list-of-arrested-burmese/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Given the press coverage of the WIA Report, which included reference to a list of Burmese arrestees we posted a link to, I thought some clarification would be useful. Neither the source of the report, Burmese blogger Niknayman, nor the CPB, nor Duncan, the guy who formatted the list we used, have ever maintained that [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Given the <a href="http://www.topix.com/search/article?q=%22committee+to+protect+bloggers%22">press coverage</a> of the <a href="http://committeetoprotectbloggers.org/2008/06/08/blogger-arrest-report-from-the-wia/">WIA Report</a>, which included reference to a <a href="http://burma.buybuylist.com/list/">list of Burmese arrestees</a> we <a href="http://committeetoprotectbloggers.org/2007/10/01/list-of-arrested-in-burma/">posted a link to</a>, I thought some clarification would be useful. Neither the source of the report, Burmese blogger Niknayman, nor the CPB, nor Duncan, the guy who formatted the list we used, have ever maintained that all 344 of the detainees on this list were bloggers. I think it&#8217;s pretty reasonable to assume a number are, but no, not 344 arrested bloggers, 344 arrested Burmese, some of whom may have been bloggers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://committeetoprotectbloggers.org/2008/06/18/clarification-regarding-list-of-arrested-burmese/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
