今期《經濟學人》有一篇關於荷里活與互聯網的專題報導，分析互聯網能為荷里活帶來甚麼商機，以及解釋為何片商視互聯網為洪水猛獸，對它敬而遠之。
「水能載舟，亦能覆舟」，互聯網真是一件讓人又愛又恨的東西──愛它為我們提供便捷的途徑，讓我們獲取最新的資訊；恨它落在壞人手中，卻成了傷人的凶器。
自艷照門事件以來 (獲林行止先生譽為「溫柔敦厚」之詞？！)，規管互聯網之聲又再度四起。贊成的一方，認為互聯網充斥太多荼毒青少年的資訊，政府應予以監管；反對的一方，認為監管會損害言論自由，剝奪市民獲取資訊的權利。
這種爭拗，一向都是公說公有理、婆說婆有理，很難下定論，判辨到底誰是誰非。以艷照門事件為例，栗子妹很不齒在網上有計劃地散播淫照的惡徒，但看執法部門處理事件的方法和態度，同樣是教人搖頭嘆息。
程翔假釋後，首次會見傳媒，提到香港有很多彌足珍貴的地方，第一是崇尚法治，嚴守無罪推定的原則，重視司法程序，而且不認同權力干預司法的做法。程先生過譽了。自胡仙案以來，「不認同權力干預司法的做法」早已成為歷史。
栗子妹以為，過度的自由即放縱，適度的監管未嘗不是好事。乘搭升降機時，聽見別人談論網上的淫照，說得眉飛色舞，實在倒足了胃口。
只是，我不放心讓這樣的政府、這樣的執法機關去監管。港人一向珍惜的法治，早已名存實亡；沒有了法治的保障，教人如何放心讓執法機關掌握大權？
Chestnut, your Chinese is so 高深 that I only got part of it. I thought you shared my concerns at the end there but I'm not sure.
回覆刪除HK's so-called "rule of law" is already pretty shaky compared to the civilized world. Did Elsie Leung refuse to prosecute a huge corruption case a few years ago solely because the defendant had CCP connections that Leung and her ilk constantly mistake for patriotism?
I wholeheartedly agree that 過度的自由即放縱 . I lived in such an environment for 36 years. But given our current environment, I'd prefer to tolerate a bit of internet 放縱 to 讓執法機關掌握大權 . Another thing is, I don't for a minute believe those successful in pursuing a career in the performing arts care as much about privacy as they let on.