Archive for the ‘Free Expression’ Category

« Older Entries
« Older Entries

Twitter grapples with censorship issues

January 29th, 2012
Posted by Senior Director, Juliette Terzieff:

Microblogging giant Twitter recently announced plans to begin censoring some content in response to restrictions and/or laws in place within individual countries. The six-year-old Internet company has gained prominence as a tool for change in recent years as users employed tweets to reach a global audience during post-election protests in Iran, in the wake of the Haiti earthquake and throughout the 2011 Arab Spring uprisings. Some Twitter users and observers have blasted the censoring plans as social suicide, but the company has chosen to publicly address and engage on an issue that has plagued other Internet content related companies.

In a post on January 26, Twitter stated, “As we continue to grow internationally, we will enter countries that have different ideas about the contours of freedom of expression. Some differ so much from our ideas that we will not be able to exist there. Others are similar but, for historical or cultural reasons, restrict certain types of content, such as France or Germany, which ban pro-Nazi content.”

In the past, Twitter has deleted content, but was only able to do so on a global scale by deleting the tweet entirely. The company has thus far limited itself to snuffing out content related to things such as child pornography or pro-Nazi sentiment, but it could also include tweets from protesters in specific countries like Egypt, Iran, and Syria if given the right opportunity. With its new technology, the site will be able to determine if a tweet is breaking a law in a specific country and remove the tweet from that region while still leaving it visible for the rest of the world to see. If a tweet is removed, the site “will post a censorship notice” for users in that country, much in the same way Google Inc. practices in countries “where its service operates requires a search result to be removed.” Twitter, like Google, will use Chillingeffects.org to share the removal requests it “receives from governments, companies and individuals.” The site “sees the censorship tool as a way to ensure individual messages, or “tweets,” remain available to as many people as possible while it navigates a gauntlet of different laws around the world.” The company will also have the ability to censor individual accounts as well, given their location within a country where a law has been broken.

Alexander Macgillivray, general counsel to Twitter, helped draw up the censorship policy for the site, just as he did for Google when he worked for them, which explains the similarity Twitter’s new policy has to Google’s. “The critics are jumping to the wrong conclusions,” Mr. Macgillivray said. “This is a good thing for freedom of expression, transparency and accountability. This launch is about us keeping content up whenever we can and to be extremely transparent with the world when we don’t. I would hope people realize our philosophy hasn’t changed.”

But, Twitter may have suffered a backlash as users protested on January 28 in a boycott, organizing the event by using the hashtag #TwitterBlackout. In a similar fashion to the Internet blackout protest two weeks ago, which included websites such as Wikipedia, Google, and Reddit in response to the controversial anti-piracy bills SOPA and PIPA, many Twitter users planned to “turn off the tweets” for a day.

What seems to be forgotten is that Twitter has always had the ability to remove content when necessary, but the company does stand for freedom of speech, as it signed the letter to Congress about SOPA along with several other Internet companies like Google and Facebook.

“One of our core values as a company is to defend and respect each user’s voice,” Thursday’s Twitter post said. “We try to keep content up wherever and whenever we can, and we will be transparent with users when we can’t. The tweets must continue to flow.”

One thing protesters failed to notice was the bypass Twitter makes very easy to find in its Help Center so that content can’t be censored or deleted, and all it requires is changing the country in which one resides. The tweets can’t be censored if they’re being tweeted from a country where the law isn’t being broken.

ICT companies and their stakeholders broadly agree on the transformative power of the Internet and efforts to promote universal access. The reality that companies find themselves operating in environments governed by repressive or restrictive regimes that will attempt to limit access is one that all parties have to recognize and manage—and Twitter has shown it is prepared to do just that.

Permalink

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Posted in Business & Human Rights, Free Expression, Labor & Transparency, Technology | No comments so far »

Netizens get viral over SOPA/PIPA

January 20th, 2012
Posted by Senior Director, Juliette Terzieff:

Anyone surfing the World Wide Web this Wednesday couldn’t help but notice an unusual amount of black as websites across cyberspace blocked out their banners or went completely dark in protest over the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and Protect IP Act (PIPA). Some sites participated in the protest for a few hours, while others like Wikipedia for a full 24 hours. The effort brought together stakeholders from a variety of disciplines united in the desire to express concern over Internet freedoms. The effect was almost immediate.

In response to the protests, two of PIPA’s co-sponsors, Florida’s Marco Rubio (R) and Missouri’s Roy Blunt (R) have backed away from supporting the bill. Mr. Rubio posted on Facebook that he and his fellow Senators “heard legitimate concerns about the impact the bill [PIPA] could have on access to the Internet.”

While each bill covers specific agendas, both bills focus on online piracy and illegal copies/downloads of film and music, as well as other media and software. If the bills were to pass, they would not only outlaw those sites containing the pirated content, but they would also outlaw any websites that link to information on how to access the outlawed sites.

PIPA, a bill that looked like it would easily pass on January 24, 2012 now may be in trouble due to the protests.

Wikipedia, an online encyclopedia service, and WordPress, a blog service, were two of the many high-profile websites to block their content. Wikipedia’s English-language website left a note, stating: “Imagine a world without free knowledge . . . The US Congress is considering legislation that could fatally damage the free and open internet. For 24 hours, to raise awareness, we are blacking out Wikipedia.” Google, one of the world’s most popular search engines, placed a black box over its name for the US version of the site, but users could still access the search engine. The search engine also posted on its blog that the bills wouldn’t stop online piracy. Craigslist, an online marketplace, like many others, had a note up asking its visitors to contact representatives in Congress before accessing the main website. According to the US news website Politico, approximately 7,000 sites were blacked out by Wednesday morning.

At the end of the protest—midnight EST—Wikipedia said: “Thank you for protecting Wikipedia.”

The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), Hollywood’s key supporter of SOPA, “branded the protests as ‘irresponsible’ and a ’stunt’” on Wednesday. While no one protesting is pro-piracy, as some supporters of the bills have claimed, they are pro-freedom of speech, and when proposed bills such as SOPA and PIPA have the potential to infringe on that freedom, American citizens are going to speak up.

Technology has helped small and medium-sized businesses increase their productivity by 10 percent, and the U.S. Internet’s contribution to the GDP is larger than energy, agriculture, communication, mining, and utilities combined. Unfettered access to the Internet for hundreds of millions of Americans remains a vital asset to the world community and U.S. economic growth and job creation.

SOPA and PIPA, in enacted, could hinder the economic possibilities.

WordPress’ co-founder, Matt Mullenweg summed the whole situation up by saying, “The authors of the legislation don’t seem to really understand how the internet works.”

If they did, they could see the potential disaster and consequences of such legislation on America’s Internet freedoms.

Supporters of SOPA and PIPA describe the protests as an “abuse of power.”

“It is an irresponsible response and a disservice to people who rely on them for information,” Chris Dodd, former Connecticut Democratic Senator and now Chairman and CEO of the MPAA, said. Perhaps Mr. Dodd didn’t check that some of the websites protesting were still accessible. Mr. Dodd also claimed that the high-profile websites’ actions were “yet another gimmick.” The US Chamber of Commerce agrees, adding that any “claims against the legislation had been overstated.”

But the bills are out there for everyone to read, and quite a few have done just that, as well as analyzed and broken down the language.

Chris Heald, a writer for Mashable.com, is one of many who has studied the bills and explained them in an article posted on Wednesday.

“Implementing censorship protocols and giving the keys to the government is a scary, scary thing, and SOPA should be opposed simply based on this provision alone,” Mr. Heald said, referencing China’s Internet censorship and Iran’s Internet firewalls. “Any site that allows users to post content is ‘primarily designed for the purpose of offering services in a manner that enables copyright violation.’ The site doesn’t have to be clearly designed for the purpose of copyright violation; it only has to provide functionality that can be used to enable copyright violation.

“This means that YouTube, Facebook, Wikipedia, Gmail, Dropbox and millions of other sites would be ‘Internet sites . . . dedicated to theft of U.S. property,’ under SOPA’s definition. Simply providing a feature that would make it possible for someone to commit copyright infringement or circumvention is enough to get your entire site branded as an infringing site.”

There are three major supporters of SOPA—the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. And it looks as though “Hollywood has outspent Silicon Valley by about tenfold on lobbyists in the last two years.” In total, SOPA has the support of more than 400 businesses. But Wednesday’s blackout protests and the numerous calls to representatives and Senators, which caused many servers to crash, may result in further significant changes to that list.

GoDaddy had to pull their support of the bills because customers protested, and in two days, pulled over 37,000 domain names from the site, transferring them elsewhere.

Spain recently approved similar legislation, creating a government body with the power “to force Internet service providers to block sites” within ten days. Though Spain’s legislation is also supported by the media industries, it is also facing stiff criticism from Netizens.

Congress may still approve both SOPA and PIPA, but President Barack Obama has expressed concerns and may veto them. In a statement issued at the weekend, the White House’s official response was, “While we believe that online piracy by foreign websites is a serious problem that requires a serious legislative response, we will not support legislation that reduces freedom of expression, increases cybersecurity risk, or undermines the dynamic, innovative global internet.”

Permalink

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Posted in Business & Human Rights, Free Expression, Labor & Transparency, Technology | No comments so far »

Battle over censored content heats up

December 27th, 2011
Posted by Senior Director, Juliette Terzieff:

The battle against censored Internet content is heating up heading into 2012 with the U.S. Congress set to vote on a measure opponents worry would adversely affect the climate of innovation and free expression that helps drive the Internet, and related entrepreneurship and development around the world. From Internet users and private sector players protesting the proposed Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect IP Act (PIPA) to Michael Posner’s speech entreating multinational corporations (MNCs) to stand up and protect free speech and the World Wide Web, stakeholders are lining up to oppose the changes.

In his speech at the Silicon Valley Human Rights Conference on October 25, 2011, Posner—the Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor—said, “To advance these fundamental freedoms, we need the help of citizens, corporations and global civil society for what is likely to be a long, tough struggle with regimes that do not share our values or our views on the merits of openness. And I particularly want to call attention to the role of companies, because today corporations have more global influence than ever.”

Several Internet corporations have pulled their support of SOPA after customers have threatened to take business elsewhere. GoDaddy was in full support of SOPA until its customers voiced their opposition and threatened to pull thousands of domain names from the domain name registrar. And companies such as Google, Facebook, Twitter, Zynga, eBay, Mozilla, Yahoo, AOL, and LinkedIn wrote a letter, expressing their concern over the “legislative measures that have been introduced in the United States Senate and the House of Representatives.”

While the companies support the goals of SOPA and PIPA—to provide additional tools to combat “rogue” websites that practice copyright infringement or counterfeiting—none of these companies agree with the current drafts of the bills, which “would expose law-abiding U.S. Internet and technology companies to new uncertain liabilities, private rights of action, and technology mandates that would require monitoring of web sites.” The companies have asked the U.S. Congress to look for “more targeted ways to combat foreign “rogue” websites,” while protecting innovation and technology “that has made the Internet such an important driver of economic growth and job creation.”

When Internet-related innovations and technology have helped small and medium-sized businesses to increase their productivity by 10 percent, and the U.S. Internet’s contribution to the GDP is larger than energy, agriculture, communication, mining, and utilities combined, the success and substantial benefits of accessing the Internet for hundreds of millions of Americans is a vital asset to U.S. economic growth and job creation.

SOPA has the potential to halt that growth.

Over the next decade, the next 3 billion customers benefitting from that innovation and technology will be residents of developing countries, where companies like Samsung and Microsoft have created jobs and helped drive sustainable development. Samsung Africa, for example, has tapped into innovation to revolutionize education with the launch of the company’s portable, solar-powered classrooms in October 2011. Such advancements provide an opportunity for education to those in rural areas. However, as these technologies advance and are introduced to developing countries, some have used them as tools to silence dissenting voices. China, Vietnam, Egypt and Bahrain are among the countries where authorities routinely seek to censor the Internet and/or prosecute individuals for their online activities.

Though China began censoring its part of cyberspace before the Arab Spring, Posner voiced that the Arab Spring “brought home the power of the Internet to governments far beyond the Middle East, and the result has been more censorship, more surveillance and more restrictions.”

Unfortunately, these repressive governments have the money and the power to block external content and track what their citizens are doing online, Posner noted. “They are exerting overbroad state control over content, over users, and over companies. And they’re trying to change national and international legal standards to legitimize it all.”

There are three major supporters of SOPA—the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. In total, SOPA has the support of more than 400 businesses.

The Senate Judiciary committee approved PIPA and the floor vote is scheduled for January 24, but Sen. Ron Wyden has put a hold on it. SOPA supporters lead in the majority on the committee, and when Congress returns in 2012, the bill is expected to be approved, but “Rep. Darrell Issa, a California Republican, has introduced the so-called OPEN Act that would cut off the flow of funds to alleged pirate Web sites without requiring them to be blocked.”

“Silicon Valley has already given birth to game-changing technologies and a profoundly new approach to philanthropy. Many people here have made it their life’s work not only to develop transformative technologies but also to put them in the hands of people in places where digital empowerment is leaps ahead of political or financial or educational empowerment. Never have great ideas gone from dream to global distribution so quickly.

“But with great code comes great responsibility.”

Posner is correct. There is a giant responsibility that comes with the World Wide Web, but if we don’t figure out how to preserve its current nature; if we don’t protect its freedom, “the autocrats will figure it out for us” and that freedom could vanish.

Permalink

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Posted in Business & Human Rights, Free Expression, Technology | No comments so far »

Russian street goes viral over election results

December 15th, 2011
Posted by Senior Director Juliette Terzieff:

Angry citizens have taken to the streets en masse in recent days—bringing Arab Spring-style protests to Mother Russia. A host of factors are contributing to Russians’ displeasure with their leaders, though the immediate catalyst has been widespread allegations of fraud in Dec. 4 elections that resulted in a victory for Prime Minister Vladimir Putin’s United Russia party. Like protestors across the Arab world, Russians have turned to social media websites like Facebook to organize events and help raise the profile of their actions to a global audience.

Across 70 cities, protesters gathered this past weekend to voice their anger and demand the cancellation of parliamentary election results. Protestors have also been calling for the resignation of Putin, who has led Russian politics with a heavy hand for over a decade. The protest action was the largest in Russia in 20 years. Organizers secured approval from city officials in each location and used social media sites to spread the word—resulting in what some observers characterized as “a heartening example of popular mobilization in a country where politics have become increasingly virtual under Putin’s “managed democracy.”"

Throughout the development of the protests across the country, “the websites of Russia’s two major state-run channels ignored developments in an act of Soviet-style censorship.”

Flags of every political party in Russia flew on the day of the protests, from the liberal Yabloko and Party of National Freedom to an anarchist flag, Communist Party flags, and the yellow-white-and-black banner of tsarist Russia, all in support of at least one common goal—ousting Vladimir Putin.

Mikhail Kasyanov, former Prime Minister, claims that the Saturday protests were a happy day. “People are finally waking up. Russia is waking up. I think that it’s the beginning of the end of Putin’s regime today. Today all political groups are here … talking about the same thing,” he said. “These elections were not valid. That’s what our demand is, to announce these elections void and to call for a free election. We need free, fair and credible elections.”

Eugenia Albats, the editor-in-chief of The New Times, Russia’s liberal opposition magazine, stated that she was impressed by the number of young faces of the protesters. “I am disgusted with the people in power. … It’s no longer tolerable. I think it’s time to tell Putin, ‘It’s time for you to step down,’” Albats said. “We’ve never seen such young faces at the democratic rallies. This is young Russia, the people of this new generation who are telling Putin, ‘Go. Step down. Your time is over; we are not going to tolerate this anymore.’

“This rally shows that Russia is waking up, that the civil society in Russia does exist, that the middle class in Russia does exist. All across Russia, people are ready for the party in power, and most importantly Putin, to step down.  He has to go. It is just the very beginning of a very difficult protest to get the country back to the people. It will take not weeks, it will take months,” Albats told ABC News. “The whole question is whether Putin decides not to shoot at his own people, or he decides to use power against us. It’s a very likely possibility.”

Faces in the crowd on December 10 showed a generation of individuals who understand social media and know how to use it effectively. While the Russian government still has control over traditional media such as television and newspapers, they hold no reigns on social media websites like Facebook, or blogs such as LiveJournal, where Alexei Navalny, an anti-corruption blogger, blogs regularly, opposing his government. In fact, it was Navalny who organized the protests via Facebook, and who has warned Putin that “he could face an Arab Spring-style revolt,” a statement similar to that of US Senator John McCain, who tweeted Mr. Putin, “the Arab Spring is coming to a neighborhood near you.”

Navalny, a 35-year-old blogger, has become known to protesters as the face of the anti-Putin campaign. Even while serving a 15-day jail sentence after protests the week before the December 10th rally, Navalny sent a note to the thousands of protesters.

“You cannot beat up and arrest hundreds of thousands or millions,” Navalny said. “We are not cattle or slaves. We have a voice and we have the strength to defend it.”

Federal Security Service officials attempted a preemptive move to blunt the effect of social media with a request to Russia’s largest social networking site VKontakte to block opposition groups’ access. The site, which has 100 million registered users, refused.

That Russians have employed social media in their efforts is hardly a surprise. Beyond the exposure social media has gained as a tool for change in places like Tunisia and Egypt, Russians are some of the world’s most active social media users. It’s a reality even Russia’s leaders understand.

When responding to the protests, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev—who frequents Twitter and is often spotted with an iPad—took to Facebook to announce an investigation into charges of irregularities. Thousands of Facebook users responded to Medvedev’s communication telling the President the overture was simply not enough and reiterating protestors’ demands for new elections.

Protest organizers have vowed new actions December 24 if authorities fail to meet their demands, and Russia’s vocal netizens are likely to lead a virtual charge to rally the Russian street.

Permalink

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Posted in Free Expression, Labor & Transparency, Technology | No comments so far »

Yemen activists count on social media

October 24th, 2011
Posted by Senior Director, Juliette Terzieff:

As the one year anniversary of Tunisian protests that launched Arab Spring uprisings across North Africa and the Middle East approaches, pro-reform activists across the Arab world are looking to maintain momentum and cement gains into systemic changes. Given the prominent role of technology – and in particular, social media – in helping to drive protest movements it’s hardly a surprise that once again activists are turning to the Internet to deliver their message.

Tunisia’s successful elections this past Sunday will no doubt give reform movements hope that continuing to apply pressure on political leaders can produce results. It was events in Tunisia beginning in December 2010 that triggered street movements across the Arab world. Authorities estimated 90% of eligible voters showed up to cast a ballot and have their say in electing those who will be tasked with drafting the country’s new constitution.

Yemen’s youth activists are continuing attempts leverage YouTube, Twitter and other social media outlets to tell the international community just what kind of change they seek – and to keep their cause in the spotlight. Their Support Yemen video “Break the Silence” first aired more than a week ago, asking for the end of corruption, better education, and improved healthcare. They also want President Ali Abdullah Saleh, who has been in power and ruled with an iron fist since 1978, to step down.

(more…)

Permalink

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Posted in Business & Human Rights, Free Expression, Labor & Transparency, Technology | No comments so far »

Technology put to tortuous use

August 29th, 2011
Posted by Juliette Terzieff

Torture isn’t normally what you associate with text messaging. But in Bahrain activists detained by security forces are finding their cellular telephone records being used against them by authorities as proof of insurrection.

Events in Bahrain are not the first time – nor are they likely to be the last – that a repressive government uses technology to prosecute or persecute those who seek to take advantage of the freedom of communication enabled by other ICT tools. That authorities are once again using technology purchased from multinationals based in Western countries has brought criticism from human rights and pro-democracy activists.

Across the Middle East and North Africa over the last few years dissidents and pro-reform activists have turned to technology to create and drive mass movements for change. Text messaging capabilities via cellular telephones and Internet-based communications have been used to reach around government-dominated press to gather forces domestically to support movements. Activists have employed YouTube, Facebook and Twitter as means to broadcast their message instantaneously to a global audience, hoping to increase international pressure for change and promote accountability for government abuses.

Activists have had mixed results. The Twitter revolution – a concept that gained currency as Iranians challenged 2009 election results that kept incumbent Mahmoud Ahmedinejad in power – was the first time social media gained widespread recognition as a social and political tool in the international media. Iranian activists and their supporters worldwide strove to sidestep authorities’ efforts to block access to social media outlets with some pretty impressive success – even though Ahmedinejad was ultimately able to withstand the challenge from the streets with help from the country’s well-trained security forces.

Fast forward to 2011… and once again social media usage played a role in driving protests in Egypt, Bahrain and Syria. In all three cases authorities instituted a crackdown against protesters and sought to control the flow of information, either by attempting to throw an Internet kill-switch or by limiting access to certain sites like YouTube.

Egypt’s pro-reform movement was successful in its effort to force longtime incumbent President Hosni Mubarak out of power – though it remains to be seen how much reform to the country’s security forces, judiciary and political system sought by activists will actually materialize overtime.

Syrian authorities have unleashed a violent crackdown against protesters that has included mass detentions, house-to-house searches, and sending tanks into residential areas to quell demonstrations. And while the control measures have helped keep President Bashar Al-Assad in power thus far, activists continue to successfully get video footage and information out of the country preventing a repeat of a 1982 crackdown by Assad’s father, Hafez, when it took weeks for news of a deadly crackdown against the Muslim Brotherhood to reach the world.

Assad’s actions have drawn vociferous and sustained condemnation from the international community and rights groups the world round. European Union countries and the U.S. have placed additional sanctions on Syria, while the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay has asked the Security Council to refer Syria to the International Criminal Court.

Inspired by explosions of protest across the region and the use of social media Bahraini activists set out to push for political reform in February 2011 – even going so far as to set up an Internet tent to broadcast their efforts in Manama’s Pearl Square. But before analysts could even warn that Bahrain was not Egypt, and Bahraini authorities had experience quelling protests, security forces swept violently into the capital’s streets and overpowered demonstrators.

In every case Western politicians and civil society have expressed support for the “street,” urging the governments in question to institute reforms, or step aside. Western companies that produce the technology repressive governments have used to aid their counter-protest efforts have found themselves also under fire for the use of their products.

Iranian activists and their supporters blasted Nokia Siemens Network after reports surfaced that the company had provided a product called the Monitoring Center to Iranian authorities. The technology gave authorities the ability to monitor calls, voice and text messages, and Internet traffic. Nokia Siemens said the technology is standard infrastructure in most countries’ cellular networks but did acknowledge authorities might abuse such capabilities. Nonetheless, the company believes the risks of doing business in countries like Iran doesn’t eclipse the positives that come from the general expansion of cellular or Internet access.

It is an argument that has been used by other companies, such as Google or Yahoo! Inc., when challenged by human rights groups over doing business in countries with repressive regimes like China. And certainly, most stakeholders from across the spectrum agree that increased access to the Internet and consumer electronics can help address development, poverty and expression challenges.

In Bahrain authorities are using a Monitoring Center sold by Siemens and managed by Nokia Siemens Network’s divested unit Trovicor, according to Bloomberg Markets. While Bahraini authorities have not admitted using the technology as a tool against activists, industry observers say there is no other way authorities could obtain such transcripts of cellular communications. That the monitoring technology can also be used to change messages en route to a recipient or pinpoint an individual’s location makes it a powerful potential weapon for authorities. Egypt, Syria and Yemen also purchased centers from the company.

The European Union and the U.S. thus far have no legislation that restricts the sale of powerful inspection technologies even though some U.S. lawmakers considered casting a legislative eye on the subject in the wake of the Arab Spring. In fact existing U.S. law requires that carrier-grade cellular and Internet equipment carry intercept capabilities, leading manufacturers to build them into production lines.

Significant changes to the market are unlikely any time soon.

There remains broad agreement among stakeholders that ICT tools can be a powerful force for positive change, able to magnify and increase movements for social change. And companies in the ICT sector will continue to face pressure to ensure that people can access and use their products freely.

Permalink

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Posted in Business & Human Rights, Free Expression, Labor & Transparency, Technology | No comments so far »

India Internet law draws fire

August 9th, 2011
Posted by Juliette Terzieff

Indian Internet users have begun to discover the limits imposed by a new law on web content, encountering interruptions in their surfing in the form of screens displaying a message that content has been blocked under instruction from the Ministry of Telecom.

Human rights activists, bloggers and Internet users are lashing out at the new on the grounds that its provisions constitute infringements on the rights to privacy, free speech and expression. Indian authorities have characterized the new law as a balance between individual freedoms and collective security, but critics say the restrictive provisions rival Chinese attempts to censor web access.

The new law prohibits web sites and service providers from disseminating any material that might be harmful, blasphemous or insulting – and requires them to remove any such content within 36 hours of a complaint registration. Internet café will have to increase current security measures – which include installing surveillance cameras and obtaining identification from all customers – to keep a detailed record of each individual’s surfing activities. Owners are required to turn over the records to government authorities at the end of each month.

India has suffered two large-scale terrorist attacks in recent years and is contending with armed conflict in Kashmir. In November 2008 terrorists unleashed a four-day long attack on hospitals, cafes, community centers and educational institutions in Mumbai that left 164 people dead and over 300 injured. Earlier this year 18 people died and 81 were wounded when assailants detonated bombs in three Mumbai neighborhoods. In both cases, investigators have reported traces of Internet activity as central to building their cases.

While rights advocates express sympathy for the government’s efforts to address security concerns associated with the Internet, critics charge the vague wording of the law potentially leaves it open to wide interpretation by authorities.

“With this kind of blanket surveillance regime, we are on a very slippery slope,” Sunil Abraham, executive director of the Center for Internet and Society told the Washington Post. “The language is so vague that it is open to arbitrary interpretation. . . . In comparison with other democracies in North America and Europe, the Indian rules appear to be on the China end of the spectrum.”

India is home to the world’s third largest number of Internet users behind China and the United States, even though less than 10 percent of the population has regular access. But growth over the last decade has been spectacular – rising from 5 million to 100 million between the year 200 and now.

In many countries the increase of Internet penetration has led to social and political upheaval as dissenters are able to reach a global audience to expose abuses and push for reform. In countries with repressive regimes and state-controlled media, individuals have been able to sidestep official controls to reach like-minded countrymen and help launch protest movements.

It’s a reality that has triggered censorship battles between governments and civil society, the private sector and rights advocates around the world over the last decade. In many countries, such as Egypt and Vietnam, bloggers have been specifically targeted for harassment or arrest for their online activities. In other countries, such as Saudi Arabia, Syria and China, authorities have moved to censor Internet access more broadly.

The advance of Internet access around the world has also provided militant groups and terrorist organizations with more advanced tools to both accelerate internal communications and reach a broader audience. As a result of these and other criminal activities, such as pedophilia, governments in even the most democratic and open countries have moved to place some restrictions on the Internet.

“While there are legitimate security concerns to deal with, repressive governments that cite such issues for broad restrictions often have domestic political concerns in mind,” says Islamabad-based defense analyst Mohammad Bokhari. “Ultimately it comes down to those dedicated individuals and groups that are being targeted for dissenting activities being willing to keep taking the risk that are the best hope for pushing change.”

While unrestricted and universal Internet access has the broad support of the United Nations, human rights groups and most Western governments, there is no real mechanism at the international level to compel a government to ease restrictions on the Internet.  With little chance an enforceable mechanism will come into force anytime soon, the combined pressure of stakeholders from across the spectrum to wield the power of the Internet as a building block for the future.

Permalink

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Posted in Free Expression, Labor & Transparency, Technology | No comments so far »

Social film takes viewers Inside

July 21st, 2011
Posted by Juliette Terzieff

Hollywood has joined forces with Intel and Toshiba to launch an innovative collaborative film project that will intertwine traditional movie making with a modern social media component. Movie fans won’t be just sitting in their favorite theater with a container of buttered popcorn; they’ll actually be helping direct the picture.

Inside is the story of a woman trapped in a room with a laptop and an untraceable Internet connection. Christina, played by Emily Rossum of Shameless and Phantom of the Opera, uses the computer access to reach out to family, friends and strangers via social networking in a bid to help her identify her location and plot an escape.

And that’s where this film departs drastically from the normal movie production process.

The film will air in installments, with the first scheduled to premier July 25, leveraging accounts on YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other Internet tools to engage the audience in real time. Viewers will be encouraged to submit clues, tips and advice to Christina’s Facebook account. The production team plans to then elect the best submissions that fit the story line and incorporate them into the next installment.

“Social film is still in an experimental phase and collaborations like this one will help bring new concepts, opportunities and ideas to the world of entertainment,” the film’s director D.J. Caruso said. “We had to approach the film differently because there are blanks that need to be filled in by the social media audience, but that is what makes it an exciting new experience for the viewer; the opportunity to participate in the film itself.”

For Intel, the Inside experience is part of the company’s broader Sponsors of Tomorrow branding effort that highlights the myriad ways technology and silicon – the key ingredient in microprocessors and for which Intel is the largest supplier – are facilitating changes in the way the world operates. Intel’s communications around the campaign look at how innovators are driving issues such as developing cleaner transportation options, using technology to provide home health care and expanding educational opportunities around the world.

The movie Inside is the latest in a string of initiatives examining how social media can be used to change the way we live, work and play. Disaster response is a key area where the transformational possibilities of applying social media to modernize and increase the effectiveness of an existing system are evident. From the 2010 Haiti earthquake and monsoon flooding in Pakistan, to post-election violence in Kenya and pro-reform uprisings across the Middle East, social media has been used to map events on the ground, and help design and implement a coordinated humanitarian response. Humanitarian organizations have teamed up with volunteer communities such as Ushahidi, CrisiMappers and OpenStreetMap to formalize processes to integrate new technological applications into existing humanitarian systems.

Within social media, which facilitates communication between people who have interest in similar issues, the ability to act on those issues unifies people across geographical, linguistic and cultural borders to form truly global communities that can act regardless of traditional challenges associated with time and distance. As developers test out new ways to leverage existing technology, such as the Inside effort, enthusiasm for and the ability to use social media to power change grows.

Permalink

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Posted in Free Expression, Labor & Transparency, Technology | No comments so far »

Communicating a new kind of economy

July 14th, 2011
Posted by Juliette Terzieff

Technology has already changed the way people around the world communicate with one another and reshaping global economic systems to reflect a more modern approach is the next great opportunity of the 21st century, Carbon Disclosure Project says in a new report. The Internet and ICT tools can help erase challenges associated with time, distance and infrastructure, the group argues, while simultaneously aiding in the global battle against climate change.

CDP’s report, “Building a 21st Century Communication Economy,” lays out a vision for how future economic systems might look – taking what might have looked like something out of John Wyndham novel 25 years ago and laying out a solid case for a realistic expansion of technological capabilities to promote prosperity and sustainability to carry the world into the centuries to come.

CDP’s vision of a communications economy is simple enough – a reality where “economic value will increasingly reside in bits and bytes, rather than in the atoms and molecules of products and

commodities. In the future, economic opportunity will no longer be limited by time, distance, resource constraints or geography.”

A communications economy increases opportunity for growth drawing the most benefit from less intense use of fossil fuels through technology. It also promotes global security by reducing competition for natural resources, and provides individuals with a more equitable arena for economic growth. CDP Founder Paul Dickinson delivered his vision of a communications economy during this presentation at Webster University.

For example, telepresence solutions are already gaining popularity with private sector players across the globe, with major ICT companies forming partnerships to expand services and major brand names in other sectors, like Sheraton in the hospitality industry, also moving to offer their clientele telepresence meeting options.  The use of telepresence  – which allows users to simulate a meeting room by connecting participants across multiple locations simultaneously via high-tech video and audio connections – cuts business operating costs and travel-related emissions, and promotes energy efficiency.

“The communications economy can take hold across sectors. We have seen that Webster University can provide a top quality education to students around the world through their online learning platform. It provides all the benefits of a physical course with added flexibility,” the CDP’s Rosie Reeve explains. “In healthcare people who live in more rural locations can have a consultation with a specialist without making a three hour journey to their nearest city.  Finally, any business irrespective of their sector can start to increase their net income per unit carbon emitted by adopting broadband enabled efficiency strategies.”

So what is the first step to achieving the vision of a communications economy? Access.

In order for the vision of a communications economy to become a reality, individuals, societies and all the actors within them need access to available ICT tools. United Nations officials have already tagged access to the Internet as a human right associated with freedom of expression and free opinion, and have called on governments around the world to promote uncensored access. The world body is also working as part of a variety of multi-stakeholder efforts to achieve universal broadband access as a way to further development goals and facilitate social change.

The proliferation of broadband access, the CDP notes, can help decrease carbon gas emissions and the use of finite natural resources by reducing the need for travel and products that are resource-intensive to manufacture.

The U.S., the report notes, is well positioned to be a leader in making the shift to a communications economy. Already the ICT sector has proven its ability to outpace others sectors in job growth and produce a significantly higher net income per metric ton of carbon than other industries like consumer staples and transportation. The Climate Group’s Smart 2020 report, also cited by the CDP, shows how the ICT sector could help the U.S. reduce annual emissions by as much as 22 percent.

“The U.S. is already in the forefront in critical areas of broadband communications, led by companies including Apple, AT&T, Cisco and Microsoft. The fact that natural resources, especially oil, are more expensive and harder to access brings us to a critical decision point – a crossroads.  The U.S. can either continue business as usual, or the country can invest in building an advanced communications network, creating more jobs and economic growth, as it lowers [greenhouse gas] emissions,” says Reeve.

A massive 95 percent of the U.S. population lives in areas with access to broadband services but significant gaps remain. Nine percent of rural U.S. businesses still lack broadband access, as compared to less than 1 percent for urban enterprises. The U.S. congress allotted $7.2 billion for broadband planning and development in 2009 to look at improving speeds and access.

Other governments have already taken steps towards developing a communications economy, Reeve explains.

“The Republic of Korea has taken a very proactive approach to building communications networks and this has helped it to continue its impressive economic growth. Other countries that have robust and extensive networks include Singapore, the Netherlands and Denmark – all of whom have high levels of broadband penetration.”

From crisis mapping and mobile health applications, to telepresence and social networks, stakeholders from across the spectrum are throwing their support behind efforts to expand the application of ICT tools in new ways – integrating technological capabilities into existing systems, changing them to maximize efficiency and access. It’s an evolutionary process that will alter the way health care, humanitarian aid, disaster response and other systems operate as the world moves further into the 21st century.

Permalink

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Posted in Carbon, Climate, Energy, Free Expression, Labor & Transparency, Technology | No comments so far »

Censorship fallout from the Arab Spring?

June 29th, 2011
Posted by Senior Director, Juliette Terzieff:

The use of Internet-based and other ICT tools to drive reform protest movements captured the imaginations of tech-savvy individuals across North Africa and the Middle East over the last year. Facebook, YouTube and Twitter helped drive street demonstrations in a dozen countries and secure international support for reform efforts around the world. But the trend has also drawn the attention of repressive governments and some within the ICT sector fear censorship battles may heat up in the aftermath of the Arab Spring.

Google Inc. Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt says his company fully expects to be the focus of disagreements with repressive regimes and fears Google employees may be at risk from detention and torture in some countries.

“I think this problem is going to get worse. The reason is that as the technology becomes more pervasive and as the citizenry becomes completely wired and the content gets localized to the language of the country, it becomes an issue like television,” Schmidt said at the Google-organized Dublin summit on militant violence this week.

“If you look at television in most of these countries, television is highly regulated because the leaders, partial dictators, half dictators or whatever you want to call them understand the power of television imagery to keep their citizenry in some bucket,” he continued.

Governments ramping up their efforts to shut down the information highway is something Internet service providers have been grappling with on and off for the last decade. Experience with China’s censorship efforts in particular has drawn significant attention. Yahoo! Inc. faced serious public backlash after its 2002 provision of user information led to the arrest, abuse and imprisonment of Wang Xiaoning.

Since then ICT sector players have clashed on and off with authorities in China, and elsewhere, as the tide of support for universal access has gained prominence. Both Google and Yahoo! are members of the multi-stakeholder Global Network Initiative, an effort to promote freedom of expression and privacy, and like other major ICT companies have initiated efforts to increase access to services in developing countries.

Earlier this month the United Nations affirmed its support of access to the Internet as a human right, with Special Rapporteur Frank La Rue issuing a report making the case for Internet access to enjoy the same legal protections under international standards as other methods of mass communications.

But the practical truth is that as long as authorities maintain control over networks and infrastructure, fully unhindered access to the Internet, its tools and information is still just dream for hundreds of millions of users worldwide.

The U.S. State Department confirmed shortly after the release of La Rue’s report that American authorities are investing millions to fund efforts to bypass government censorship through the use of “shadow” voice and digital communications networks that allow users to send information, according to the New York Times and other media. The benefit, say proponents of alternative networks, is that even in cases where dissidents can use circumvention technologies to sidestep censors, if authorities have slowed down network speeds users may still be unable to post most content.

A variety of innovative options are being considered – some of which sound like they could have come right out from Q’s workshop in a James Bond movie. Consider the following examples cited by the New York Times and other reports:

  • The suitcase project uses small wireless antennas and base stations disguised as suitcases, boxes or bags to help transform electronic devices like cellular telephones or laptop computers and build a wireless Internet network that is outside official control. If authorities seize a unit once a core network is established in an area the other stations will compensate.
  • U.S authorities are helping develop cellular telephone applications, or apps, such as the “panic button” which will erase a cellular telephone’s contact lists and emit an emergency signal to alert other activists.
  • Another idea seeks to build on the use of Bluetooth headsets, which Iranian dissidents have used to transmit data outside authorities’ control. Developers are looking to create a system that allows users to mark data so that when other trusted individuals come into range their mobile devices automatically get the transfer.

Until governments around the world cease efforts to restrict Internet access and the international community develops a legally enforceable mechanism to compel countries to comply, censorship circumvention efforts will remain at the forefront of the battle for fair, equitable universal global access.

Permalink

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Posted in Business & Human Rights, Free Expression, Misc, Technology | No comments so far »

« Older Entries