|
Back to Index
Dictatorships get to grips with Web 2.0
Reporters
sans frontières / Reporters Without Borders
February 01, 2007
http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=20839
A decade ago,
regime opponents in Vietnam or Tunisia were still printing leaflets
in their basements and handing them out to fellow militants at clandestine
meetings. Independent newspapers were no more than a few hastily-stapled
photocopies distributed secretly.
These days,"subversive"
or "counter-revolutionary" material goes on the Internet
and political dissidents and journalists have become "cyber-dissidents"
and "online journalists." Most of them know how to create
a blog, organise a chat group, make phone calls through a computer
and use a proxy to get round censorship.
New technology
allows them to receive and share news out of sight of the authorities.
The Web is also a blessing for human rights groups, which can now
build a file on a political prisoner with a few mouseclicks instead
of over weeks and sometimes months.The Web makes networking much
easier, for political activists as well as teenagers. Unfortunately,
this progress and use of new tools by activists is now being matched
by the efforts of dictatorships to fight them. Dictators too have
entered the world of Web 2.0.
Sixty people
are currently in jail for posting criticism of governments online,
with China’s 50 making it by far the world’s worst prison for cyber-dissidents.The
Chinese have been aped by other countries - four such dissidents
are in jail in Vietnam, three in Syria and one each in Tunisia,
Libya and Iran.
Parliaments
in these countries, along with the local cyber-police, closely follow
the latest technological developments. When instant messaging, such
as MSN Messenger, became all the rage, China asked the firms that
made these programmes to automatically block some key-words, making
it impossible for Chinese users to talk about the Dalai Lama and
Taiwanese independence, for example.
And with the
success of YouTube, China and Iran are keen to filter the videos
that appear there - too much "subversive" content for
China and too much "immorality" for Iran. In Vietnam,
police and dissidents chase play cat-and-mouse with "chat rooms"
and three people were arrested there in October 2005 for discussing
democracy on Paltalk, a US website that organises remote meetings.
One of them, Truong Quoc Huy, was still in prison at the end of
2006.
Spyware
that filters e-mail
The Internet
was not designed to protect message confidentiality. It is fast
and fairly reliable but also easy to spy on and censor. From the
first mouse-click, users leave a trail and reveal information about
themselves and what their tastes and habits are.This data is very
valuable to commercial firms, who sort through it to target their
advertising better.
The police also
use it.The best way to spy on journalists a few years ago was still
to send a plainclothes officer to stand outside their house.This
can be done more cheaply and efficiently now, because machines can
spy, report back and automatically prevent subversive conversations.
Cuba has installed
spyware in cybercafé computers so that when users type "banned"
words in an email, such as the name of a known political dissident,
they see a warning that they are writing things considered a "threat
to state security" and the Web navigator then immediately shuts
down.
The
internet giants work with the dictatorships
The predators
of free expression are not all the same. China keeps a tight grip
on what is written and downloaded by users and spends an enormous
amount on Internet surveillance equipment and hires armies of informants
and cyber-police. It also has the political weight to force the
companies in the sector -
such as Yahoo!, Google, Microsoft and Cisco Systems - to do what
it wants them to, and all have agreed to censor their search-engines
to filter out websites overcritical of the authorities.
This makes the
regime’s job very much easier because these firms are the main entry-points
to the Internet. If a website is not listed by these search-engines,
material posted on them has about as much chance of being found
as a message in a bottle thrown into the sea.
Not all countries
are strong enough to make the US multinational Internet firms bend
to their will, but all authoritarian regimes are now working to
censor the Web, even countries in sub-Saharan Africa.The Ethiopian
regime of prime minister Meles Zenawi has blocked openly-critical
websites and blogs since May 2006 and Zimbabwean President Robert
Mugabe is considering a law allowing security forces to intercept
online messages without reference to the courts. One of the first
moves by Thailand’s military rulers after their September coup was
to censor news websites, even foreign ones, that criticized the
takeover.
When a dictator
cannot effectively censor the Internet, he can take a more radical
approach - barring Internet access to virtually everyone, as in
North Korea and Turkmenistan. And when a tyrant dies, as Turkmenistan’s
"President-for-Life" Separmurad Nyazov did in December,
his successor starts work by declaring his policy towards the Internet.These
days, dictators talk about the Web when they want to show their
regime is progressive.
Internet users
are organising themselves and conjuring up new solutions to tackle
these dictatorships, get round the filters and protect their anonymity.They
use and create new technology, encrypt their email and use other
tools that are still not detected by cyber-police.
The Web phone
service Skype, for example, has made it much easier for journalists
- and Reporters Without Borders - to communicate with their sources.
It works especially well because it is encrypted and so conversations
are hard to tap. But China has already signed an agreement with
Skype to block key-words, so how can we be sure our conversations
are not being listened to? How do we know if Skype will not also
allow (or already has allowed) the Chinese police to spy on its
customers?
It has become
vital to examine new technology from a moral standpoint and understand
the secondary effects of it. If firms and democratic countries continue
to duck the issue and pass off ethical responsibility on others,
we shall soon be in a world where all our communications are spied
on.
Please credit www.kubatana.net if you make use of material from this website.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License unless stated otherwise.
TOP
|