|
Democracy News
A Brief Survey on the Status of Internet Freedom in the World
The following survey of the issues surrounding this topic was compiled by CCD Program Assistant Randi Zung with the support of CCD Staff |  Printer Friendly
INTRODUCTION
In the last decade, the usage of the internet for commerce, interaction and idea-sharing has grown exponentially. Due to the increased prevalence of computers, mobile phones, and other internet-related technologies, the internet has become an important tool for global communication. The internet has enabled activists and other individuals from around the world to communicate and share ideas at a common forum – such as a website, blog, or message board.
For advocates of global internet freedom (such as US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the US-based Center for Democracy & Technology), the internet is a tool that can stimulate knowledge sharing, educational initiatives, and economic development. However, because the internet itself is only a tool, in the hands of authoritarian governments and other repressive groups, the internet can be used as a weapon to further subversive aims. Although the internet has the potential to cause harm, its utility as an instrument to further the audience of activists across national borders and other previously restrictive boundaries has proven to be one of the main arguments for the proliferation of a free and open internet. In the context of promoting freedom and respect for human rights around the world, internet freedom allows for increased political participation and civic involvement by individuals who live in countries with repressive governments.
Similar to freedom of speech and press, internet freedom expands individuals’ capacity to voice their opinions concerning the economic, political, and social settings that they live in. Although citizens in most democratic countries have the ability to express a bevy of opinions through blogs, websites, and social networking sites without fear of government reprisal, internet freedom is not an international standard. Global internet freedom is threatened on a daily basis by repressive governments that manipulate the internet to violate basic human rights such as freedom of expression and privacy. The policing of internet freedom by authoritarian governments has resulted in heightened security restrictions, blatant censorship, and the arbitrary arrest of bloggers and other individuals utilizing these new technologies to expose government corruption, voice opposition to a government policy or other acts deemed by the ruling regime as “dangerous” or counter to their governing agenda.
Authoritarian regimes attempt to control the flow of information in and out of countries by utilizing a variety of increasingly sophisticated methods to censor the internet, including the blocking off of certain websites, the creation of filters that block specific content, or more crudely, the shutdown of the internet altogether. According to Paris-based Reporters Without Borders, crackdowns on internet freedom are now a widespread occurrence. Countries that have engaged in recent internet censorship and/or that have jailed internet journalists and activists include: Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Burma, China, Colombia, Cuba, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Mauritania, Nigeria, North Korea, Pakistan, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Thailand, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan, Vietnam, and Venezuela. With such censorship becoming increasingly sophisticated and widespread, the issue of internet freedom has now been thrust into the spotlight as a leading global issue.
CRACKDOWNS ON FREEDOM
The internet now plays an important role in the struggle for freedom. For activists who reside within the borders of repressive countries, traditional media outlets are typically under the control of the government – meaning that newspapers and other media broadcasting outlets often function as conduits for disseminating government ideologies. In addition to maintaining a firm grasp on traditional media outlets, a growing number of repressive governments are now perpetrating widespread crackdowns on individuals that use the internet to voice dissent. However, since the use of the internet as a tool for political activism is still new, many repressive governments do not have specific legislation to address incidents of online activism. As a result, reports of arbitrary arrests of bloggers, journalists, and other activists have increased.
Most notably in 2009, two bloggers were arrested in Azerbaijan after they posted a video that mocked the government’s spending habits on the video sharing website YouTube. Emin Milli and Adnan Hajizada, who have been held since July 2009, were later detained and charged with “hooliganism.” According to Reporters Without Borders, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliev was identified as one of the world’s worst “predators” of press freedom. Under President Aliev, journalists are now commonly the targets of physical violence and other forms of abuse. The case of Milli and Hajizada is an example of the Azerbaijani government’s initial foray into cracking down on internet activism. The Azerbaijani government is currently working to pass legislation that would further limit the work of opposition journalist voices.
In addition to impeding activist voices, regime-implemented censorship also prevents others from being exposed to those opinions, resulting in the narrowing of opposition dialogue. When dissenting voices are blocked, authoritarian governments are able to increase their stranglehold on every element of daily life. Crackdowns on internet activism, as well as crackdowns on other forms of dissent-based activism, are perpetrated with the intent to prevent the spread of democracy and human rights.
THE IMPORTANCE OF SOCIAL NETWORKING MEDIA
Although internet freedom is challenged on a daily basis by authoritarian governments, social networking media – such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and the like – have become powerful tools for online activists because of their communicative ability to transmit messages to a large number of individuals around the world. Identified by CCD Board Member Larry Diamond as “liberation technologies,” social networking media has become a vital tool that activists can use to challenge authoritarian governments. Additionally, Diamond asserts that these types of “liberation technology” work to “empower individuals, facilitate independent communication and mobilization and strengthen civil society,” and therefore have the ability to expand political, social, and economic freedom.
Iran’s Green Revolution
During the fallout from the 2009 Iranian presidential election, activists of the now-labeled Green Revolution used social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter to organize demonstrations to protest the fraudulent election. Following the demonstrations, the Iranian government blocked access to social networking sites to prevent activists and other social justice organizers from collaborating. The Iranian government also responded by staging a violent crackdown on suspected internet activists. Following a raid on a university dormitory, beaten students posted pictures of their bruised bodies on Facebook for the world to see (Bertelsmann Foundation 2010).
The Iranian regime and other authoritarian governments seek to censor outlets for online dissent because of the internet’s ability to function as a medium for wide-scale reporting. Twitter, a micro-blogging platform, was also heavily utilized during Iran’s Green Revolution and enabled activists and other citizens in Iran to instantly report on developments on the ground by posting pictures and taking videos using their mobile phones. Almost instantaneously, the Iranian government’s crackdown on freedom was visible to the entire world. As a symbol of solidarity, individuals from all over the world tweeted their support for the people in Iran and simultaneously helped to showcase the political potential of social networking platforms and the power of the internet.
“Liberation technology” is a fundamental component of internet freedom because it enables a society to communicate and interact with the international community. The use of Facebook and Twitter during Iran’s 2009 presidential election fallout demonstrates the utility of social networking media and internet access. Without access to Facebook and Twitter, individuals in Iran would not have been able to inform the world of the Iranian government’s human rights abuses and electoral misconduct. The ability of social networking media to expose government corruption, organize opposition movements, and highlight human rights abuse in one country and then have it become international news overnight would not be possible without the internet.
DEGREES OF CENSORSHIP AND REPRESSION
Due to varying degrees of technological development, authoritarian governments use different tactics to restrict access and censor content on the internet. The sophistication of government-led censorship tactics depends on a country’s economic and technological resources as well as the capacity of their personnel. In countries that lack sophisticated censorship software, governments sometimes act by temporarily shutting down the internet only to restore it later. Although temporarily shutting down the internet is a quick way for repressive governments to silence opposition voices, such actions also risk crippling the country’s economy by halting business transactions and all communications conducted via the web. Aware of this risk and the costs of doing so, many authoritarian governments have completely shut off the internet during political events, such as presidential and parliamentary elections, in order to more closely monitor and control the spread of information, particularly if any reports of misconduct and abuse surface and are circulated throughout the country and to the international community.
Africa: As Internet Connections Increase, So Do Acts of Repression
According to BBC News, as of 2008, internet users were found in every African country, though many users were found to be connecting through costly satellite technology. Due to recent technological developments on the African continent, such as the launch of the first fiber-optic internet connection, it is expected that the cost of connecting will decrease, thus allowing more individuals to get online. As of 2008, Nigeria had the highest overall rate of connectivity within sub-Saharan Africa with nearly 24,000,000 users and according to the US State Department, the Nigerian government did not conduct internet censorship or monitoring.
Although Nigeria received a positive evaluation, other African countries were found to have deplorable internet freedom records. One of the more extreme cases of the restriction of internet usage was found in Ethiopia. Leading up to the country’s May 2010 legislative election, the government silenced multiple opposition websites and online media outlets. The Ethiopian government was also significantly criticized by international human rights groups for jamming Voice of America broadcasts. Other countries such as Guinea and Rwanda were not found to have engaged in widespread government censorship, but were guilty of monitoring emails and restricting text messaging within their respective countries. Additionally, in March 2010, the Mauritanian government temporarily suspended the operation of the country’s two main internet service providers only to restore internet access after three days due to local and international protests.
China and Google
China is recognized as one of the worst abusers of internet freedom. The Chinese government works to control the internet and its contents by heavily limiting, monitoring, and censoring internet usage and activities. These methods of censorship, mainly targeted at controlling all information within the country, are part of the government’s multipronged approach for combating dissent. In addition to targeting individual activists and internet users, the Chinese regime has also learned to target internet service providers in order to limit the amount of information that is made available.
In 1996, the Chinese government established the Surveillance Center for National Information Security to monitor internet usage and has since passed more than 60 laws to regulate individuals’ internet usage. According to a law created in 2002, individuals must censor their own websites or risk being shut down. The Chinese government currently employs approximately 50,000 police officials that are dedicated to searching the internet for government-identified “harmful content” – including anything that expresses negative opinions about the state or anything that challenges the state’s authority. Once “harmful content” has been identified, the state removes it from the internet within 24 to 48 hours (Diamond 2010).
In China, as well as in other countries with repressive governments, censorship creates a type of communicative isolation that works to prevent activists from banding together. Within China’s borders, top global websites such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Google are no longer easily accessible due to government restrictions. The censorship of these websites is significant because the digital revolution has made the aforementioned sites some of the most popular in the world. Receiving traffic from all over the globe on a daily basis, the Chinese government’s efforts to restrict online content and monitor internet usage signals that the internet is a powerful tool for creating strong united social movements.
Since launching in January 2006, Google’s Chinese server had been instructed by the Chinese government to filter its search results or be shutdown. According to a report prepared by the Congressional Research Service, in 2009, the Chinese government repeatedly accused Google of hosting “vulgar content.” The tense relationship between Google and the Chinese government came to a head in January 2010, when a Google investigation uncovered a cyber attack on its Chinese server, google.cn. After it was found that the company’s server had been hacked by the Chinese government, Google announced that it would be shutting down its Chinese web presence.
Google closed its mainland China office in March 2010, and began redirecting its users to Google’s uncensored Hong Kong site, google.com.hk. On July 9 2010, Google posted a blog that announced that the Chinese government has renewed the company’s internet content provider license – meaning that Google would continue to provide web search and local products to Chinese users. The compromise allows for Google to continue to direct users to its Hong Kong site, which is prominently linked to on its China site. This nuanced change allows users in China who click over to Google Hong Kong to see unfiltered search results, but prevents them from accessing any censored material.
According to Chinese activist Xiao Qiang, the Chinese government heavily censors the internet because the internet is an important tool for political activism. The Chinese government believes that free speech combined with a free flow of information is a dangerous threat and has the potential to challenge the state’s control. Specifically commenting on the Chinese government’s disputes with Google, Xiao, who is also a professor at University of California at Berkeley and the Founder and Editor-in-Chief of China Digital Times, said that Google is viewed as a threat because of the company’s ability to organize large amounts of information in an accessible format.
Repressive regimes face a paradox over the internet. While governments want to limit the internet in order to silence opposition voices, governments also need the internet to keep up in the global economy. In the instance of China, the government originally worked to promote the expansion of the internet in order to stay competitive in the global marketplace (Xiao 2003). Due to the dual need to use and censor the internet, the Chinese government has implemented various legislative and surveillance initiatives. Although other repressive governments are in the beginning stages of regulating internet usage through legislation, China remains at the forefront of sophisticated internet censorship.
Although authoritarian governments seek to curb the activities of individual activists through threats of imprisonment, many Chinese activists (as well as activists elsewhere) continue to use the internet as a place to broadcast their political writings. These Chinese activists, who risk being put in jail for violating the government’s decree – by posting “harmful” or “subversive” content – are considered to be enemies of the state (Xiao 2003). While some Chinese activists choose to self-censor themselves for fear of government retaliation, other online activists willingly risk legal punishment.
COMBATTING CENSORSHIP: HOW DEMOCRACTIC COUNTRIES CAN HELP
Although governments are constantly working to increase their capacity to monitor and censor the use of the internet, the technology industry is working to create software that will allow activists and other internet users in repressive countries to evade state-implemented firewalls. Software programs, such as Haystack for Iran, are being created to specifically address censorship in certain countries. By tailoring anti-censorship software specifically to the Iranian regime’s censorship system, the creators of Haystack are trying to ensure that their software is as effective as it can possibly be.
According to the United States Department of State, the issue of internet freedom is quickly becoming an integral component of 21st century statecraft. In January 2010, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s speech on internet freedom stated that internet freedom is a human right. Coupled with the issue of the right of individuals to access information, Secretary Clinton asserted that the internet plays a vital role in global diplomacy and promoting democracy and human rights across the globe. Addressing the importance of the internet, Secretary Clinton stated: “It’s about whether we live on a planet with one Internet, one global community, and a common body of knowledge that benefits and unites us all, or a fragmented planet in which access to information and opportunity is dependent on where you live and the whims of censors.”
Stating that there should be a set of global norms for internet usage, Secretary Clinton said that access to the internet has the ability to improve people’s daily lives and that global society needed to begin to research ways to use the internet more effectively. Specifically addressing the issue of internet censorship, Secretary Clinton mentioned that censorship denies essential rights to information and expression. Noting that the global community must be weary of groups and individuals that use the internet for devious and harmful agendas, such as terrorist groups and additionally authoritarian regimes, Secretary Clinton proposed future cooperation between technology-related businesses, governments, and individuals to increase internet access and freedom. Secretary Clinton also proposed future action that would make internet freedom an issue for the United Nations (UN) and UN Human Rights Council.
The US State Department now tracks internet freedom in its annual Country Reports on Human Rights Practices. Since 2008, the US government has allocated a total of $35 million dollars to fund initiatives for global internet freedom (FY2008 – 15 million, FY2009 – 5 million, FY2010 – 15 million).
CONCLUSION
Although authoritarian governments around the world are increasing their efforts to limit internet freedom through legislation and the use of increasingly sophisticated censorship technologies, online activists continue to find ways to evade detection. The internet is one of the most powerful new tools that global society has at its disposal, and the ability for activists to voice dissent, identify accounts of electoral misconduct, and highlight incidents of government-led human rights abuses demonstrate that internet freedom is a vital component of the agenda to advance freedom and democracy.
Sources:
BBC News – Mapping the Growth of the Internet
Reporters without Borders – Internet News
Center for Democracy & Technology – Global Internet Freedom
US State Department – 2009 Human Rights Report
Google’s Official Blog – A New Approach to China
Google’s Official Blog – A New Approach to China: an update
Google’s Official Blog – An Update on China
The Guardian – Holes in China’s great firewall
CCD Board Member Larry Diamond Discusses “Liberation Technology”
Freedom House – Freedom on the Net: A Global Assessment of Internet and Digital Media
Xiao Qiang - 2003 Cyber Speech: Catalyzing Free Expression and Civil Society
|
