Social Networks – Access Denied
Posted on 18. Aug, 2011 by Al Black in Social Media
Don’t be evil. Many of us know that phrase to be the catchcry for Google, but with recent overseas events perhaps that motto should be applied to all users of online services. Failure to heed the phrase will quite possibly see us hurtle down the path to increased governmental control over our online behaviour, something I think we should do our best to avoid.
So what’s this all about?
July’s massacre in Norway and this month’s riots in the UK have seen both the Norwegian and British governments propose plans to affect our use of the Internet. Whilst Norway is discussing limiting the methods users can employ in order to make themselves more anonymous, the UK Prime Minister David Cameron is adopting a more aggressive stance, raising the prospect of shutting down entire social networks such as Facebook, Twitter and Blackberry Messenger (BBM) in times of civil unrest.
But it hasn’t happened yet … has it?
In the United States, just last week a San Francisco Transit group called Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), shut down a cellular network, not because a situation had developed, but because they thought one was going to develop. This is reminiscent of the Tom Cruise movie Minority Report whereby the government seeks to arrest members of the population before they actually commit a crime.
Who thinks this is a good idea?
China is ecstatic as they see this as vindication of their continued oppressive stance with regard to Internet censorship and their Great Firewall of China. An article in their state media recently stated, “Media in the US and Britain used to criticise developing countries for curbing freedom of speech. Britain’s new attitude will help appease the quarrels between East and West over the future management of the internet”. The article then further took advantage of the UK proposal by stating, “As for China, advocates of an unlimited development of the internet should think twice about their original ideas.”
Who thinks this is a bad idea?
Anyone with a strong belief in freedom of speech including groups such as Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) are aghast at both what is being proposed and what has already taken place. We even saw a director of BART make a statement that she did not agree with the action taken by the organisation.
Why should you care?
By introducing an Internet filter there is the potential for reduced broadband speed and in an Australian study the most effective filter as far as accuracy is concerned still allowed 24% of blocked content to pass, whilst all of the users in the study reported a measure of over blocking There is also the fact that such systems are easily bypassed by those who seek to obtain access to the restricted content. By using methods such as open proxy servers and private circumvention systems users can operate computers in geographic areas where the filtering technology has not been applied.
Whilst the intention of preventing civil unrest is commendable, the political, technological and cultural consequences of sliding down the slippery slope of censorship are just too great.
