по этому поводу отсюда:
> New Zealand authorities have started arresting people that shared a video of the live murders of 50 people in Christchurch last week.
This unfortunate event has, in my opinion, been made worse by the knee-jerk reaction to it. Everything from banning websites that just host discussion about the event, to those who held a copy of the manifesto, or even the video. It is just full bore censorship, now people are being arrested for sharing information, not like they used to do in the USSR, and still do in certain dictatorships.
Yes, this event was horrible, and I do not condone it in the slightest, nor do I particularly desire to watch the video even if it was available, but that governments are using it as an excuse to forbid the general public from having access to raw evidence of the event "for their own benefits" is dangerous.
The idea being that the only "true" source of information should be government approved media is a dangerous one. Yet this is the first time people are directly being forbidden from accessing the "primary sources" as historians would say, of an event in a "western democracy". And not in a subtle way of the past, but straight up arrest for sharing information.
My worry is that this event will be used as a pretext for a draconian clamp down on the free dissemination of information. Yes, right now its a rather horrid mass killing video, but once the system is in place, I am sure a lot of other information will be added to the "black hole", and that does not sit well with me.
A populace that cannot be adequately informed is one that cannot make a good decision (due to lack of information). Information is power, and those who control the flow of information have power over you. In a democracy it is dangerous to let those whose power depends on votes, be the only source of information to those who do the voting.