I came across this laughable news article yesterday. A quick perusal immediately altered the mood from perceiving it as ostensible to ostentatious, and the change in the mood happened faster than the usual beetroot expression on your face when it was obvious that you were the one who let out a whiff in an elevator crammed with complaining fat people moving from the first floor to the 20th at a velocity so slow the turtle said goodbye.
There in the middle sits an arguably female person wearing a strange fabric on her head so that only a hint of her hair is exposed, possibly to declare that she's butch or just borderline Muslim. Okay maybe she was thinking that a bang would improve her look profoundly. Her hands positioned in such a way that exudes feral authority, like Mirana all poised to claw her prey before she delivers the fatal bite to the neck bone. Excuse me for the ad hominem ~ I will defend it by citing the incompatibility of Islam and the liberalizing of the aurat of its followers for obvious reasons.
And then there's this:
"The key to this is to make it a safe site that is free of everything that is haram or forbidden -- pornography, criminal activities, fraud, paedophilia and advertisements on gambling and alcohol."
You know what exactly that statement is insinuating? It is basically an indirect attack on Facebook's policy and terms of use, that it condones or at least implicitly allows pornography, fraud, pedophilia and stuff to be spread around like herpes simplex.
What is the opposite of halal again?
The current Facebook applies a regulatory standard to monitor its content. There is an option which will allow users to report malicious/offensive content to the admin, upon which actions would be taken accordingly, even though the standard that FB adopts when it comes to assessing the offensiveness of a subject is evidently more liberal to commensurate with their effort to go global and inclusive. It is a very efficient feature ~ personal experience tells me that it usually doesn't take long before the offending article is removed, followed by a notice of warning to the uploader. Depending on the nature of the offense, some users may even have their account permanently disabled, without prior notice. I suspect Salamworld will employ the same approach.
Now, since Salamworld is proud to distinguish itself as a haven for "safe" browsing, how does it ensure that Muslim or non-Muslim delinquents will not upload anything offensive in the first place? How is Salamworld different from Facebook in terms of preventive measures and damage control? Will they be held legally, socially and divinely accountable if, say, a pervert has uploaded a photo of Britney Spears not wearing her burqa, and prior to having it removed by the admin, thousands of Muslim users, children included have viewed said photo and decide to sue? The interim circumstance between reporting it and having it removed is what I am interested in; how is it different from FB?
If Salamworld cannot provide an answer, which I doubt they can (I think Zuckerberg is a genius), then it is proven that Salamworld is designed to be exclusive while riding on the success of FB.
"Nobody is forcing muslims to join salamworld.." according to one guy on FB when discussing this. But let me ask you this: "if this one is halal, the one you have is not halal, but we don't force you to go the halal way, although god will have a hard time liking you for it."
Is that not reverse psychology if not purely semantic?
I would have slightly been friendlier to the idea had they said that it was to solely bring Islam to the forefront, bridge the gap, spread values. But that it is halal and at the same time insinuating all others are sin-laden?
I am disturbed by the notion that Salamworld intends to "open" Muslims to the world and be universal, while at the same time constricting room for personal growth by promoting heavy censorship and demonizing MTV.
Seriously, censorship and "opening up"? That my dear, is an oxymoron.
Of course I think they are entitled to the establishment, hell I would even defend their right to create Salamworld to the death. I just think that Jummatun is a naive, close-minded, if not stupid, woman.
No comments:
Post a Comment