Evgeny Morozov’s book, The Net Delusion (2011) is a sobering read. In an age where the Internet is often hailed as all-powerful—it is supposed to have the power to topple governments, get behemoth financial institutions to reverse their decisions, and launch manhunts for killers—it was very useful to read the other, less-reported side of the story.
According to Morozov’s thesis, the media and the masses like to think that since information is power, access to the Internet can set the oppressed free. They forget that the Internet can also be used by dictators, just as easily as it’s used by protesters. Countries like Egypt may block the Internet at times, but they can also take advantage of it, using it not just to help track down dissidents, but also to dispense propaganda. Others like Russia use it cleverly to keep its citizens occupied with other, more frivolous distractions, and thus curb dissent. This is how, Morozov says, the Internet may actually prevent revolutions from getting off the ground.
A poster calls for the return of the internet after it was shut down by the government in February in Cairo, Egypt. Image: Getty Images, via CNN.com.
I read with awe about Morozov’s examples from around the world where social networking sites, and the Internet, made it easier for governments to conduct surveillance on protesters and crack down on them effectively. The most telling example of the government’s technological prowess was the case of Iran, whose government used Facebook to contact Iranians abroad who were actively using Facebook and Twitter to help advance the cause of rebels back home. The Chinese government is widely known to censor all social media networks, even going so far as to regularly scrub tweets and Facebook posts for politically offensive words and anti-government propaganda. Using face-recognition technology, apps that display users’ location with the help of GPS data from their phone, and clever crowdsourcing techniques (as used in 2009 by the Iranian government), rebellions can be quashed effectively.
As I read these examples, I wondered why the media has not reported as much on this aspect of the Internet. There have been stray stories like this one by Malcolm Gladwell, about the limitations of an online-revolution, but on the whole, journalists have scrambled to pronounce the Arab Spring as an Internet-powered revolution. The reason, I think, is that everyone loves stories where the underdog wins—if they use technology, that’s even better! And reports on Twitter revolutions make great copy! Not to mention how easy they are to write up. Just log in, view tweets, work them into your story, and voila, you’re done!
Morozov points out in this article and in his book, about the failure of an anti-censorship software called Haystack in the Iran revolution. The media praised the software without asking pertinent questions such as: “Was Haystack really being used in Iran?” and “How might all this extra publicity in the Western media affect its users?” Therefore, when the software failed, it came as a surprise to everyone.
From this, I am led to believe that Twitter-revolutions and online slacktivism may well be a media hype. In the 24X7 news cycle, journalists are constantly being challenged to come up with new stories and interesting trends, and they might be resorting to hype just so they can fill up newsholes. The pressures of the profession, along with a lack of understanding about the deeper effects of technology and how it actually works in the hands of people, leads to unbalanced stories about the power of the Internet.
Morozov’s thesis strikes at the very root of the notion of unrestricted freedom of thought and expression on the Internet. I think one needn’t look too far from home to find examples of this. The media recently reported that the FBI is inviting proposals for an app that will help the FBI, among other things, to have the capability to automatically search Facebook, Twitter, and other social networking sites; automatically translate foreign-language Twitter tweets into English; and plot both domestic and international terror data. The intention behind it is good—on paper at least. However, the app, when developed, will raise questions about the role of Facebook and Twitter in promoting democracy, as well as the government’s right to violate citizens’ privacy.
In her book, Consent of the Networked:The worldwide struggle for Internet freedom (2012), author Rebecca MacKinnon says one of the solutions to stop Internet censorship is to “build and strengthen alternative netizen-driven institutions and communities that can exist alongside existing ones,” and to get “people to stop thinking of themselves as passive “users” and “customers,” and start acting like citizens of the Internet—as “netizens.” I agree. Citizens need to be more aware about technology, and develop a skepticism in media reports about the unlimited power technology. After all, as attractive as armchair activism might be, revolutions have almost never succeeded without blood.
References:
Bosch, Tory, (2011, February 1) Tangled Web. Slate.com. Retrieved from http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/books/2011/02/tangled_web.single.html
MacKinnon, Rebecca. (2012). Consent of the Networked: The worldwide struggle for Internet freedom. Basic Books.
Morozov, Evgeny, (2011). The Net Delusion. New York: PublicAffairs.
According to Morozov’s thesis, the media and the masses like to think that since information is power, access to the Internet can set the oppressed free. They forget that the Internet can also be used by dictators, just as easily as it’s used by protesters. Countries like Egypt may block the Internet at times, but they can also take advantage of it, using it not just to help track down dissidents, but also to dispense propaganda. Others like Russia use it cleverly to keep its citizens occupied with other, more frivolous distractions, and thus curb dissent. This is how, Morozov says, the Internet may actually prevent revolutions from getting off the ground.
I read with awe about Morozov’s examples from around the world where social networking sites, and the Internet, made it easier for governments to conduct surveillance on protesters and crack down on them effectively. The most telling example of the government’s technological prowess was the case of Iran, whose government used Facebook to contact Iranians abroad who were actively using Facebook and Twitter to help advance the cause of rebels back home. The Chinese government is widely known to censor all social media networks, even going so far as to regularly scrub tweets and Facebook posts for politically offensive words and anti-government propaganda. Using face-recognition technology, apps that display users’ location with the help of GPS data from their phone, and clever crowdsourcing techniques (as used in 2009 by the Iranian government), rebellions can be quashed effectively.
At least 5,000 websites are currently being blocked within Turkey. Image: indexoncensorship.org.
As I read these examples, I wondered why the media has not reported as much on this aspect of the Internet. There have been stray stories like this one by Malcolm Gladwell, about the limitations of an online-revolution, but on the whole, journalists have scrambled to pronounce the Arab Spring as an Internet-powered revolution. The reason, I think, is that everyone loves stories where the underdog wins—if they use technology, that’s even better! And reports on Twitter revolutions make great copy! Not to mention how easy they are to write up. Just log in, view tweets, work them into your story, and voila, you’re done!
Morozov points out in this article and in his book, about the failure of an anti-censorship software called Haystack in the Iran revolution. The media praised the software without asking pertinent questions such as: “Was Haystack really being used in Iran?” and “How might all this extra publicity in the Western media affect its users?” Therefore, when the software failed, it came as a surprise to everyone.
From this, I am led to believe that Twitter-revolutions and online slacktivism may well be a media hype. In the 24X7 news cycle, journalists are constantly being challenged to come up with new stories and interesting trends, and they might be resorting to hype just so they can fill up newsholes. The pressures of the profession, along with a lack of understanding about the deeper effects of technology and how it actually works in the hands of people, leads to unbalanced stories about the power of the Internet.
Morozov’s thesis strikes at the very root of the notion of unrestricted freedom of thought and expression on the Internet. I think one needn’t look too far from home to find examples of this. The media recently reported that the FBI is inviting proposals for an app that will help the FBI, among other things, to have the capability to automatically search Facebook, Twitter, and other social networking sites; automatically translate foreign-language Twitter tweets into English; and plot both domestic and international terror data. The intention behind it is good—on paper at least. However, the app, when developed, will raise questions about the role of Facebook and Twitter in promoting democracy, as well as the government’s right to violate citizens’ privacy.
In her book, Consent of the Networked:The worldwide struggle for Internet freedom (2012), author Rebecca MacKinnon says one of the solutions to stop Internet censorship is to “build and strengthen alternative netizen-driven institutions and communities that can exist alongside existing ones,” and to get “people to stop thinking of themselves as passive “users” and “customers,” and start acting like citizens of the Internet—as “netizens.” I agree. Citizens need to be more aware about technology, and develop a skepticism in media reports about the unlimited power technology. After all, as attractive as armchair activism might be, revolutions have almost never succeeded without blood.
References:
Bosch, Tory, (2011, February 1) Tangled Web. Slate.com. Retrieved from http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/books/2011/02/tangled_web.single.html
MacKinnon, Rebecca. (2012). Consent of the Networked: The worldwide struggle for Internet freedom. Basic Books.
Morozov, Evgeny, (2011). The Net Delusion. New York: PublicAffairs.
No comments:
Post a Comment