blocking between 2006 and 2007 and 2008–2009 included coalitions for democratic
change in Myanmar, such as the Web site of the coalition government of the Union
of Burma (www.ncgub.net), opposition movements (www.chinforum.org), and rights
groups (www.womenofburma.org).
There continue to be indications that the military government does not take an
entirely systematic approach to filtering. For example, MPT appeared to have reduced
filtering of certain content from previous testing periods, particularly of pornographic
or adult content sites. Based on testing conducted in 2008 and 2009, it now appears
that MMT has overtaken MPT in blocking pornography.
In addition, as was the case in 2006–2007, testing done in 2008–2009 found significant differences in filtering between the two ISPs. Of the sites blocked, less than a third
were filtered on both ISPs. The remaining blocked Web sites were blocked on one ISP
or the other, but not both. MMT blocked a greater number of Web sites dealing with
domestic issues, where the term ‘‘Burma’’ or ‘‘Myanmar’’ in the URL was one of the
common threads among the filtered list. Thus, groups critical of the government
(the Burma Lawyer’s Council) as well as peripheral personal Web sites (such as those
with photographs of Myanmar) were blocked. On the other hand, MPT chose to filter
some additional Web sites of international organizations, including the UN’s Human
Rights page (www.un.org/rights) and the Center for Constitutional Rights, and particularly those with projects related to Burma listed on their home pages, including EarthRights International (www.earthrights.org) and the International Confederation of
Free Trade Unions.
Conclusion
The Burmese military government has demonstrated that it is willing to take extreme
steps to maintain its control over the flow of information within and outside its
borders, including shutting down Internet access entirely. Despite the ability of a small
group of Internet users to continue to disseminate information online, access to connectivity as well as actual content are severely hampered by extensive filtering, stringent laws and regulations, and heightened surveillance, all factors contributing to a
pervasive climate of fear.
Notes
1. Seth Mydans, ‘‘Steep Rise in Fuel Costs Prompts Rare Public Protest in Myanmar,’’ New York
Times, August 22, 2007, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/23/world/asia/23myanmar.html?scp
=1&sq=myanmar%20fuel%20price%20hike%20protest&st=cse.
2. Washington Post Foreign Service, ‘‘In Broken Economy, Burmese Improvise or Flee,’’ Washington Post, August 16, 2008, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/15/
AR2008081503655.html.
442
Burma
change in Myanmar, such as the Web site of the coalition government of the Union
of Burma (www.ncgub.net), opposition movements (www.chinforum.org), and rights
groups (www.womenofburma.org).
There continue to be indications that the military government does not take an
entirely systematic approach to filtering. For example, MPT appeared to have reduced
filtering of certain content from previous testing periods, particularly of pornographic
or adult content sites. Based on testing conducted in 2008 and 2009, it now appears
that MMT has overtaken MPT in blocking pornography.
In addition, as was the case in 2006–2007, testing done in 2008–2009 found significant differences in filtering between the two ISPs. Of the sites blocked, less than a third
were filtered on both ISPs. The remaining blocked Web sites were blocked on one ISP
or the other, but not both. MMT blocked a greater number of Web sites dealing with
domestic issues, where the term ‘‘Burma’’ or ‘‘Myanmar’’ in the URL was one of the
common threads among the filtered list. Thus, groups critical of the government
(the Burma Lawyer’s Council) as well as peripheral personal Web sites (such as those
with photographs of Myanmar) were blocked. On the other hand, MPT chose to filter
some additional Web sites of international organizations, including the UN’s Human
Rights page (www.un.org/rights) and the Center for Constitutional Rights, and particularly those with projects related to Burma listed on their home pages, including EarthRights International (www.earthrights.org) and the International Confederation of
Free Trade Unions.
Conclusion
The Burmese military government has demonstrated that it is willing to take extreme
steps to maintain its control over the flow of information within and outside its
borders, including shutting down Internet access entirely. Despite the ability of a small
group of Internet users to continue to disseminate information online, access to connectivity as well as actual content are severely hampered by extensive filtering, stringent laws and regulations, and heightened surveillance, all factors contributing to a
pervasive climate of fear.
Notes
1. Seth Mydans, ‘‘Steep Rise in Fuel Costs Prompts Rare Public Protest in Myanmar,’’ New York
Times, August 22, 2007, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/23/world/asia/23myanmar.html?scp
=1&sq=myanmar%20fuel%20price%20hike%20protest&st=cse.
2. Washington Post Foreign Service, ‘‘In Broken Economy, Burmese Improvise or Flee,’’ Washington Post, August 16, 2008, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/15/
AR2008081503655.html.
442
Burma