Online supervision

Si Ershan (www.cjn.cn): Given the increasingly rapid development of network technology these days, many people choose to share their sentiments on the Internet. Posting and sharing whatever they want via various websites like blogs and forums, most users have little or no sense of personal privacy protection. Unfortunately for them, there are also many "curious" Internet users, who manage to probe into other individuals' private information. As a result, in less serious cases, the victim is plagued by all kinds of thorny issues, while in more serious cases, victims have even been driven to death.

For quite a long time, such privacy infringements have continued free of legal interference due to the lack of formal regulations or laws in place. The formulation of the SPC's latest regulation is thus a very important supplement to current laws concerning Internet use, and ordinary people will now have methods through which to counter privacy breaches in cyberspace.

Cyberspace, though, is a complicated platform, where the price for infringing on others' privacy may not be so high, and where it's also difficult to collect sufficient evidence of privacy infringement. Therefore, despite regulations, such issues will long remain difficult to solve.

It's important to note, too, that there must be certain differences between the protection of private information of government officials and of ordinary people. Authorities' privacy is supposed to be subject to the public's supervision, to some extent. This is important for the maintenance of a "clean" government. Celebrities may also have to make compromises when it comes to the disclosure of some of their personal information.

As for ordinary netizens, it's necessary to learn more about how Internet companies operate in order to guard against the risks and consequences of personal information exposure online. We must all work to reduce the prevalence of online privacy infringements.

Le Hongfeng (People's Daily): Who is to be responsible for the anonymous posting of individuals' information on the Internet and the spreading of rumors? How can you fight back against Internet mercenaries if your private information or home address is posted on the Web? Thanks to this new regulation, there's hope that some of these problems can finally be addressed.

However, there are also opposing voices, claiming that the new regulation will put a stranglehold on online freedom of speech in the name of privacy protection. They say that the human flesh search engine is useful in revealing evidence of bribery and corrupt government officials. If personal information cannot be posted on the Web, how can the public supervise these public servants?

Indeed, the supervision of government workers on the Internet is an important part of anti-corruption efforts. However, this does not mean that freely infringing on anyone's personal information should be allowed or tolerated.

Anti-corruption charges require hard evidence to support the accusation. It's unacceptable to irresponsibly post so-called "evidence" casually on the Internet, causing untold grief to the "exposed" person in question. A distorted fact is not as easily cleared up as the truth.

Thus, the most effective way to prevent the abuse of individuals' privacy in cyberspace is to increase punishments for law-breaking activities. With the new regulation being put into place, Web users must remember to use caution when posting information online.

In China, a country trying to improve its rule of law, freedom must be practiced within a certain legal framework. The punishments for online privacy infringements are actually the best protection for freedom of speech. In the Internet era, while enjoying the convenience of obtaining information, people also risk having their information misused. Therefore, there must be a legal bottom line, serving to protect all Internet users' privacy.

Similarly, those who are involved in the gray area of illegally deleting information can now be held accountable for their misdeeds. The regulation states that anyone who prevents others from obtaining information by asking a company or individual to delete posts should be held responsible, and the deleted information may be reinstated.