百家争鸣
[发表评论] [查看此文评论]    郭国汀律师专栏
[主页]->[百家争鸣]->[郭国汀律师专栏]->[互联网自由度的测定方法]
郭国汀律师专栏
·錯帐俏曳傅模珨凳旰笥H自糾錯我還不偉大嗎?!
·文革教训原因考
·开放党禁与多党联合政治——回顾三大改造、三面红旗、反右、文革史有感
·论质、量互变关系
·学习与开放
·无产阶级领袖有感
·无产阶级领袖的重大作用
·勇敢地参政议政吧!中国律师们!
·郭国汀:从 “中国律师人”说开去
·中國律師朋友們幸福不會從天降
·律師的文學功底
·郭國汀:中國涉外案件沒有一起獲得執行
·南郭:堂堂正正做個真正的中國人!
·郭国汀:愿王洪民先生在天之灵安息.
·南郭:令郭國汀律師老淚縱橫的真情
·郭国汀:民族败类!你是否中国人?
·郭國汀:令我熱淚橫流的小詩
·郭国汀:专制流氓暴政本质的再暴露
·郭國汀:強烈譴責中共惡意迫害自由戰士楊天水 許萬平
·今天我絕食——英雄多多益善!
·一个中国人权律师的真实故事
·郭国汀:全球接力绝食抗暴运动的伟大意义
·郭国汀:闻律师英雄高智晟再遇车祸有感
·只有思想言论信仰结社出版新闻舆论的真正自由能够救中国!
· 南郭:自由万岁!新年好!
·志当存高远-我的理想与追求
·我的知识结构与思想
·人生 道德 灵魂/南郭
·男子汉的眼泪/郭国汀
·相信生命—郭國汀律師印象
·南郭点评
·Racism is the biggest enemy of Justice and equality
·The Essence Distinguish Between Marx and Lenin on the Dictatorship of
·Race Politic as the Enemy of Justice and Equality
·The Great Leap Famine: Natural Disaster or Political disaster or Murde
·Homosexuality: a legal or moral problem?
·1958-1962年中国历史上最具毁灭性的大灾难
·马恩列无产阶级专政研究手稿/郭国汀
·郭国汀:穷大律师与亿万富翁
·政治体制改革的实质与根本要件/郭国汀編译手稿
·台湾自由宪政民主之路/郭国汀编译
·Terrorism and state terrorism studying
·The Truth of Chinese Economic development studying by Thomas Guoting G
·Comparing Analysis of Marx and Lenin’s Theory on the Dictatorship of
·China overtake the USA becoming an economic superpower??? by Thomas G
·人性论:人性本恶或人性本善? 郭国汀
·《诗经》英译(精选)/郭国汀編译
·Running build up a sound man
·An top important massage sent by the Holy Spirit
·My special experience help me build up my faith to the God
·I saw five ghosts when I was eighteen
·My adventure in this wonderful world
·My cross road as the first Chinese human rights lawyers who has lost h
·Does Xi in nature(evil) is same as Hu?
·Art, painting, and Civilization by Thomas G Guo
·A great teacher on our time ?
·What kind of characteristic I have ?
·郭国汀律师业绩简介
·Guo's fighting for freedom and Justice will certify that "Freedom is n
·What Human rights lawyer Thomas G Guo had done and why he received suc
·中共在抗战期通日敌打国军卖国史实考证/郭国汀
·I always tears stopless without crying, am I still a genuine man???
·My sixty year struggle for freedom and justice
·My appreciation to all professors in the Uvic and friends in the world
·Is Thomas Guoting Guo really a great teacher on our time ?
·My sixty years struggle for freedom and justice II
·孙文和蒋介石与苏俄党国体制的原则性区别
·Probably the Last idealist of Chinese lawyer?
·What looks like Mr. Thomas G Guo in my eyes
·a virtues, righteous, wisdom, and courage,and distinguished lawyer
·郭国汀律师:法轮圣徒瞿延来为何令南郭敬重?
·专访郭国汀律师(下) :回首不言悔
·郭国汀律师:何谓真正的中国人权律师?
·My sixty years struggle for freedom and justice III
·思想、言论、出版、舆论、新闻的真正自由
·民族败类!你是否中国人?
·思想言论自由的理由
·思想言论出版新闻自由的价值
·律师的文学功底
·最高法院的院长们为何对郭国汀极为反感?
·反了你! 竟敢不尊敬我大法官!
·Critical analysis on the Chinese Communist Party’s Regime by Thomas
·马克思研究手稿/郭国汀
·大师大哲论勇气 /郭国汀译
·任何欲与郭律师公开辩论者敬请公示真名实姓
·天才的古代中国/郭国汀編译手稿
·The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution studying by Thomas Guoting G
·关于内因与外因关系的争论
·Canadian Indigenous people’s right of self-determination and sovereig
·世界思想大哲论暴政----反抗专制暴政是天赋人权
·My forty years struggle for freedom and justice IV
·Human rights lawyer Pu Zhiqiang
·A holy man or a moral man?
·He is a genuine hero and the hope of China!
·The first Chinese human rights lawyer was killed by the CCP regime
·you are not only a upright man, but also a heroic brave fighter!
·I will never give up my life duty and mission!
·Injustice as the root of terrorism: Social political and economic fact
·Why we much anti-communist party of China regime?
·My Forty years struggle for Freedom and Justice V
·Why we must anti-communist party of China regime?
[列出本栏目所有内容]
欢迎在此做广告
互联网自由度的测定方法

互联网自由度的测定方法

   版权所有人:自由之家

   译者:郭国汀

   
互联网自由度的测定方法

   自由的春色

   Freedom on the Net Methodology(draft)

   This 2009 pilot Freedom on the Net provides analytical reports and numerical ratings for 15 strategic countries. The countries were chosen in order to provide a representative sample with regards to geographical and regional diversity and economic development, as well as varying levels of internet and digital media freedom. The ratings and reports included in this pilot primarily cover events that took place between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2008.

   2009年互联网自由指南提供了15个国家的指数分析报告。被选择的样板国家,主要考虑其地理位置、地区多样性和经济发展、以及各不同程度的互联网自由度。本指南所含的互联网自由度等级和报告,主要根据自2007年1月1日至2008年12月31日发生的事件而做出。

   What we measure

   测定依据

   The Freedom on the Net index aims to measure each country’s level of internet and digital media freedom on the basis of two key components – access to the relevant technology and the free flow of information through it without fear of repercussions. Given increasing technological convergence, the index measures not only internet freedom, but also access and openness of other digital means of news media transmission, particularly mobile phones and text messaging services.

   互联网自由度指南,是根据两个关键要素做出:其一,相关网络通讯技术和通过互联网自由传播信息而无需担忧受到起诉;其二,衡量每个国家互联网和数码媒体自由度的水准。本指南不仅以互联网自由度来衡量,而且以存取和开放其他数据手段的新闻媒体传送,特别是移动电话和文本资讯服务为依据。

   Freedom House does not maintain a culture-bound view of freedom. The index methodology is grounded in basic standards of free expression, derived in large measure from Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

   “自由之家”不以文化背景来界定自由的概念。本指南的测定方法所采用的自由表达的基本标准,很大程度上源于“世界人权公约”第19条的规定:

   Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas through any media regardless of frontiers.

   “每个人均有言论和表达自由权;这种权利包括不受干扰地持有、寻求、接受和通过任何媒体不分国界地传送信息和观念的自由”。

   

   This standard applies to all countries and territories, irrespective of geographical location, ethnic or religious composition, or level of economic development.

   这项标准适用于所有国家和地区,无论其地理位置,种族或宗教成分及经济发展水平如何。

   In measuring digital media freedom, the index is particularly concerned with the transmission and exchange of news and other politically relevant communications, as well as the protection of users’ rights to privacy and freedom from both legal and extra-legal repercussions arising from their online activities. At the same time, the index acknowledges that in the some instances freedom of expression and access to information may be legitimately restricted. The standard for such restrictions applied in this index is that they be implemented only in narrowly defined circumstances and in line with international human rights standards, the rule of law, and the principles of necessity, and proportionality. As much as possible, censorship and surveillance policies and procedures should be transparent and include avenues for appeal available to those affected.

   在衡量数码媒体自由方面,本指南着重考虑新闻的传送、交换和其他与政治有关的通讯及用户权利和隐私的保护,以及免受由于他们的网络活动而引起的法律和法外追究。与此同时,本指南承认在某些情况下,自由表达和存取或传送网络信息可能会受到合法的限制。适用于本指南的此种限制标准乃是他们仅在严格限定的情况下,按照国际人权标准、法治和必要的原则和比例实行。审查、监视互联网的政策与程序,应当尽可能公开透明,并包括对那些受到影响的用户可用的上诉渠道。

   The index does not rate governments or government performance per se, but rather the real-world rights and freedoms enjoyed by individuals within each country. While digital media freedom may be primarily affected by state actions, pressures and attacks by nonstate actors, including insurgents and other armed groups, are also considered. Thus, the index ratings generally reflect the interplay of a variety of actors, both governmental and nongovernmental, including private corporations.

   本指南与其说是评价政府或者政府表现本身,不如说是对每个国家内个人享受的现实世界的权利和自由度作出评价。自由会受到国家行为以及非国家的主体,包括叛乱者和其他武装团体的影响。因此,本指南综合评价政府和非政府(包括私营公司)各种角色的相互反应。

   The scoring process

   评分程序

   The index aims to capture the entire “enabling environment” for internet freedom within each country through a set of 19 methodology questions, divided into three subcategories, which are intended to highlight the vast range of issues that can impact digital media freedom. Each individual question is scored on a varying range of points. Assigning numerical points allows for comparative analysis among the countries surveyed and facilitates an examination of trends over time. Countries are given a total score from 0 (best) to 100 (worst) as well as a score for each sub-category. The degree to which conditions in each country enable the free flow of news and information via the internet and other information and communication technologies (ICTs) determines their overall classification as “Free,” “Partly Free,” or “Not Free.” Countries scoring between 0 to 30 points overall are regarded as having a “Free” internet and digital media environment; 31 to 60, “Partly Free”; and 61 to 100, “Not Free”. An accompanying country report provides narrative detail on the points covered by the methodology questions.

   

   本指南旨在通过提出分成三大类19个分类92个子类的方法学问题,纪录每个国家互联网自由的整个“许可环境”,意在突显能影响数码媒体自由的大范围的问题。每个个体问题在不同系列点得分。确定数码点允许在被调查的国家中进行比较分析,有助于测验日后的发展趋势。各个国家给定一个总分,从0分(最好)到100分(最坏),并按每一个子类给定分数。每一国家通过互联网和其他信息通讯技术,能够自由流通传送新闻和信息的条件程度,决定他们总体归类为“自由”,“部分自由”,或“不自由”。总分在0分至30分之间的国家属于“自由”互联网和数码媒体环境;31分至60分的国家,属“部分自由”;61分至100分的国家,则属“不自由”。随附各国指数报告提供详细说明该方法学问题提及的各个问题。

   The methodology examines the level of internet and ICT freedom through a set of 19 questions, organized into three baskets:

   通过19个问题对互联网和信息通讯技术自由度的方法学检验,按下述分成三大类:

   • Obstacles to Access—including governmental efforts to block specific applications or technologies; infrastructural and economic barriers to access; as well as legal and ownership control over internet and mobile phone access providers.

   • 互联网使用权的障碍—包括政府极力封锁特定产品的申请或技术;登陆互联网的基础设施与经济障碍;以及对互联网和移动电话使用权供应商的法律与所有权控制。

   • Limits on Content and Communication—including legal regulations on content, filtering and blocking of websites; other forms of censorship and self-censorship; manipulation of content; the diversity of online news media; and usage of digital media for social and political activism.

   • 内容和通讯的限制—包括对互联网内容的法律法规,过滤和封锁网站;其他形式的审查和自我审查;操纵内容;网上新闻媒体的多元化;数码媒体用于社会和政治活动。

   • Violations of Users’ Rights—including legal protections and restrictions on online activity; surveillance, privacy; and repercussions for online activity, such as legal prosecution, imprisonment, physical attacks, or other forms of harassment.

   • 用户权利的侵犯—包括对网络活动的法律保护和限制;监视,隐私,和对网上活动的反应,诸如法律起诉,监禁,人身伤害,或其他形式的骚扰。

   Index Checklist Questions

   指南问题清单

    Each country is ranked on a scale of 0 to 100, with 0 being the best and 100 being the worst.

    每个国家均从0分到100分定级,最佳为0分,最差为100分。

[下一页]

©Boxun News Network All Rights Reserved.
所有栏目和文章由作者或专栏管理员整理制作,均不代表博讯立场