Restriction of the Flow of Information Thru Internet Distribution Channels

As the flow of information becomes more and more crucial, he who controls the flow of information will become the most powerful. In the present period we have heard the phrase; He controls the Media, controls the minds of the people. We have also seen this scenario play out time and time again, as the mass media hysteria incites entire population to think a certain way, go to war or re-adjust what they want out of life.

As the Internet becomes more available in places like China, India, Middle East, Eastern Europe, South and Central America and Africa we will see ever-increasing changes in those societies. There will be new leaders emerge and the old leaders attempt to restrict or control the flow of information.Instead of allowing change and natural progression in the flow of this information they will try to force certain types of information to the forefront and in doing so force other information out of the mass communication mediums.

Restriction of the Flow of Information Thru Internet Distribution Channels is already occurring although no one is watching it much. Online news media is controlling what gets put into circulation. Professional Writers are attempting to control information in order to command a higher price for their writing services in the online world.

Politicians are attempting to control information to get into and to stay in power. Search Engines are trying to control information flow to make money off a small percentage of the flow by changing the ebb and flow of the Internet tributaries. But in all of this information will find a way.Human dynamics predicts this as history shows us that truth crushed to the ground shall rise again. The information will get thru and for those who restrict it their reign will be short lived. He who controls the flow of information without limiting its flow, but rather is constantly working to improve the flow will inevitably control the World.

Bet on it. Question is who might that someone be? Consider this in 2006.

By: Lance Winslow