My Photo

My Other Hangouts

Image Ad





  • I reserve the right to remove comments that I find too personal, inappropriate and/or likely to have me eating chicken curry for two years. I also assert all my rights folks.
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported

You Are Number

  • Free Web Counter
    Web Counters

Google Analytics

  • Who Goes There?

« Give Love & Respect A Chance | Main | A Plug For The Class Of 1979 »

Sunday, 21 January 2007



Just to clarify Toby, its not Maurina the Brunei Blogger, but MarinaM the Malaysian blogger who said that. Regards, Emma


Maurina rocks. Smart chick. Rano's comments about needing laws to guide us? What a wimp. It's Maurina says. More rules and laws, we do not need. Use your common sense for a guide instead.


Rano was right in a sense that the blogosphere has been seen as a 'threat' to the print media e.g. remember the fuss with Bloggers vs. Borneo Bulletin last year? But it shouldn't have to be that way, BT has certainly integrated bloggers and its not the only one in the region to do so.

There should be Internet laws regarding blogs in Brunei, especially on censorship issues. I don't think anyone would like to be unpleasantly surprised by a lawsuit - or worse. Technology evolves faster than us and I suppose in many ways, we're still reeling from the fact that we can speak and be heard (at least, in cyberspace).


I feel what she chose to absorb from her interview with me was very vague. I mentioned how profound it is to state an opinion, and to remain 'anonymous' at the same time, as compared to being well-known and having to filter most of what you have to write about. As you know, once people know which blog belongs to whom, what you say could be used against you, and what you write about is scrutinised in a hawk-like manner. Drop a specific, and you're done for; I don't find that fair.

Everyone's entitled to an opinion, and the most open outlet to do so is via a blog [unless, of course, you have a password-protected blog, which really beats the purpose in my opinion]. However, there will be times when what is said, if done vaguely, is misinterpreted, and the dissatisfaction with a certain entity creates the need to voice out, which could be seen as defamation by a third party or the initial party one is dissatisfied with.

If such is the case, whereby one is not allowed to write about something that is 'personal' which was what one of the Malaysian bloggers was sued for due to a specific mention of an organisation, then how could the knowledge of that organisation's discrepancy be known? Whistleblowing is obviously a serious matter, but if the intention was, for instance, to improve the organisation, then I suppose there's nothing wrong with it.

On the other hand, I agree on what Rano said about Internet laws being amorphous and you sometimes can't be too sure on whether you should write about how shit the organisation you work for is in minute detail or not, as compared to just gritting your teeth and just bear with it...

In my opinion. And I hope that wasn't all 'over the place'.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blogging Nation