The recent, almost-unrelenting assault on Harakah and other alternative newspapers has all but faded from our memories. The authorities anticipated this. And that they have been proven right surely is a sad reflection of us all as a people.

But for a while, the protracted harassment of these papers and the subsequent decision handed down by the Ministry of Home Affairs regarding Harakah 's permit, generated considerable debate, particularly in malaysiakini . And it is necessary that the debate continues.

Views thus far have ranged from those who vehemently denounce the attacks on Harakah and those who unflinchingly support the government line.

Caught somewhere in between are those who believe that curbing Harakah and other dissenting publications, even partially removing them from public view, will make no difference whatsoever to notions of freedom of expression and freedom of the press because of the existence and increasing use of the Internet.

According to this view, it doesn't really matter if alternative publications are removed totally from circulation. Such a situation, according to this argument, can easily be counterbalanced now because of the Net.

These publications, including Harakah , in other words, can be easily made available to the Malaysian public on the Net and thus will continue to remain relevant and influential because of this new technology which thus far has not been censored.

It is this view - a view which sees the Net as some magic, liberating wand - that needs to be more urgently addressed because, apart from its false sense of optimism, it also misses wider, more pertinent, points.

Irrespective of whether the Net is available as an option, curbing the print edition of any paper, whatever the excuses given, still represents a further curbing of the freedom of expression - undeniably a retrogressive move in an age when we are talking of globalisation and the loopy-sounding "k-economy".

Hence, at a time when we are talking about expanding the channels of expression, obsolete and undemocratic laws such as the Printing Presses and Publications Act, 1984 (PPPA) are still around and, more ominously, are still being used.

The excuses given for doing so are always so flimsy and tiresome, generally insulting our intelligence. (Indeed, just like the pathetic excuses now being given for the uncouth, barbaric behaviour of the Pahang MB last week.)

Be that as it may, we also need to remind ourselves that while the Net may be there as a supposed option, it is currently not very much of an option in Malaysia. This is because of the relatively small number of Net users in the country and these users being mainly in the business sector and in academia.

Hence, a web-based newspaper may indeed escape censorship, but the question that still remains is what will its spread be? Who really would be its audience, given the uneven access in Malaysia to this technology?

Of course, one could argue that the new technology could be combined with older technology (photocopiers, for example), where these web newspapers may be downloaded, multiple copies made, and then distributed to a wider public.

That sounds fine in theory. However, in reality such a scenario is logistically problematic. Moreover, while this would be manageable with leaflets or short newsletters, reproducing whole newspapers in this manner would prove well-nigh impossible.

Then again, even if such reproduction were possible, distribution would be a major problem. both logistically and legally. The logistical problems are self-evident. The legal problem, on the other hand, lies in the fact that distributing these reproduced web newspapers would most likely contravene the PPPA.

If you will pardon the legalese, under Part 1, Section 2, Page 2 of the Act, a "newspaper" is defined as "any publication containing news, intelligence, reports of occurrences or any remarks, observations or comments, in relation to such news, intelligence or occurrences, or to any other matter of public interest, or any magazine, comic or other forms of periodical printed in any language for sale or free distribution at regular or irregular intervals..."

With such a broad definition of what constitutes a newspaper under Malaysian law, it is quite easy for us to understand why the regime is not particularly concerned about, say, Harakah 's Internet edition being copied and distributed nationwide on a regular basis.

What we equally need to understand is that alternative papers like Harakah, apart from being political party organs, are also in the business to make money, not only from sales but also from advertising.

In Malaysia, many advertisers, especially the small businesses advertising in the Classifieds section of newspapers like Harakah , are not keen on web newspapers. They are aware of the limited reach of the Net, indeed the relatively small segment of the population currently accessing the Net.

So, in the case of Harakah , getting advertising revenue through this medium in order to compensate for whatever losses it would have incurred due to its print copy being curbed, would present a problem.

So, really, for quite some time to come, it would be a fallacy to assume that the Net will result in greater democracy and a genuine proliferation of differing views made available for everyone.

On the contrary, those who jump on this optimistic bandwagon, not caring about existing oppressive laws and believing that the Net will restore democracy, really need to remove their blinkers and continue fighting for legal, political and economic changes .

Indeed, it would be much more realistic under current circumstances to see the Net as the "last frontier" in a society where every other avenue for legitimate public expression continues to be severely curtailed. This certainly isn't democracy; indeed it is anything but.