Forcing the Internet on Dictatorships.

Dictators may realize that it would be more efficient to simply remove Internet access. The U.S Military has the ability to establish a temporary Internet signal. Spencer describes this technology, “Commando Solo, the Air Force’s airborne broadcasting center. A revamped cargo plane, the Commando Solo beams out psychological operations in AM and FM for radio, and UHF and VHF for TV. Arquilla doesn’t want to go into detail how the classified plane could get a denied Internet up and running again, but if it flies over a bandwidth-denied area, suddenly your Wi-Fi bars will go back up to full strength” (Spencer). It is feared that forcing the Internet on a country maybe considered an act of war. “The trouble is, if a government follows Egypt’s lead and turns off the Internet, it’s not going to be keen to see a meddling foreign power turn it back on. That act might not be as provocative as sending in ground troops or dropping bombs. But it’s still an act of what you might call forced online entry by definition, a hostile one” (Spencer). More on this recent technology can be found here.

Governance of the Internet.

Oppressive dictators believe that the Internet should be controlled and monitored by the United Nations. They call for regulation and censorship. Critics believe that allowing the U.N. to have governance over the Internet can threaten freedom and prosperity the world over. The Obama Administration is under scrutiny for failing to voice America's interest in these discussions. Newman discusses the Internet current governance, “today, the online world is largely governed and regulated by a decentralized network of non-profit groups, most of which are based in America where the Internet was born. And private-sector interests — companies such as Google, Facebook, and others — still dominate the web at present” (Newman). Oppressive governments are outraged that many of the private companies that regulate the Internet are U.S. Based. “Like many other governments around the world, the regime ruling Russia is not happy about the current situation — especially as most of the key Internet stakeholders are based in America. And so, the “solution” — for dictators and oppressive rulers around the world, at least — is to shift that power into the hands of a global body, or at least to national government.”(Newman). More information on this legislation can be found here.

Is the Fourth Amendment "Obsolete"

It can be argued that social networking sites such as Facebook make use of malicious software that can violate privacy. Authoritarian regimes can make use of these features to target human rights activist. But is our own government using this same technology to track criminals? Since these individuals are confirmed criminals is it ethical to violate there fourth amendment rights? Crovitz describe such a case in which the FBI uses a GPS to track Antoine Jone's. “The justices did their best. The facts of U.S. v. Antoine Jones are that District of Columbia police, working with the FBI, suspected a nightclub owner of being a drug dealer. They installed cameras near Antoine Jones's nightclub, got his cellphone records, and attached a GPS tracking device to his Jeep Grand Cherokee. In 2005, acting on the information they had gathered, police executed a search warrant and found a huge stash of cocaine, firearms and cash. The defendant's lawyers objected to the GPS, saying that tracking car movements over several weeks violated his expectation of privacy,” (Crovitz). Crovitz argues that the fourth amendment should be “modernized” to apply to recent technologies. Technology should be amended so that it does not violate the fourth amendment. He gives an example, “consider a case brought in the late 19th century. Actress Marian Manola was playing a Broadway role requiring her to wear tights, a racy outfit for the era. To protect her modesty, she got an injunction when someone in the audience used the new technologies of a camera and a flash light. By contrast, today actresses would be insulted if they were not photographed”, (Crovitz). The actresses has the right not to be photographed. Such is the case with once popular musician Britney Spears who sued paparazzi for taking lewd photographs. This is not true for the Facebook user either they are unaware of the surveillance or they believe that they have a social obligation to participate. Due to Facebook's terms of service the user is unable to take legal action against Facebook or any of its subsidiaries. More information pertaining to this article can be found here. 

Google Opens it Search Engine to Chinese Users

 

Dictatorships have very little control over Internet and rely on cooperation with American companies like Google to censor sensitive material. Until recently Google has agreed to censor political material for user in China. Following malicious attacks on Google's servers, that Google believed were aimed at collecting information on human rights activist, Google officially opened its search engine to its Chinese users. Of course Chinese officials employed the use of a firewall. Tania Branigan describes China's current expectations of Internet services, “The move follows a clampdown on the Internet in China over the last year, which has seen sites and social networking services hosted overseas blocked – including Twitter, Facebook and YouTube – and the closure of many sites at home. Chinese authorities-criticized Google for supplying "vulgar" content in results”. American companies willingness to work with dictatorships can be detrimental to the spread of democracy in authoritarian regimes. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton expressed her concerns, "We have been briefed by Google on these allegations, which raise very serious concerns and questions. We look to the Chinese government for an explanation. The ability to operate with confidence in cyberspace is critical in a modern society and economy" (Clinton). Many human rights organization responded positively to Google's decision “A transnational attack on privacy is chilling, and Google's response sets a great example,"(Ganesan ). Although Google position is admirable, their reasoning may not be motivated by human right as Ganesan belives. Google has recently came under fire for violating antitrust laws. Their decision may be an attempt to regain faith in the corporation. Google has used similar tactics earlier this year with the release of its open source web browser Google Chrome.more information about the Google antitrust lawsuit can be found here.

Internet Censorship

Since the liberation of Egypt dictators around the world have started to realize that the Internet can act as a fprum of free flowing ideas and unlike other forms of media it is very difficult to sensor. They realize that censoring the Internet is an ineffective way of controlling the public. The sheer number of Internet users makes it difficult for dictators to remove entries. Such is the case with a controversial death in China. In his article “Dictators and Internet Double Standards”, Gordon Crovitz describes Egypt's revolution, “In Egypt, it was photos posted online of Khaled Said, who had been beaten to death by corrupt police officers In both cases, Facebook pages drew attention to the cases, and Twitter posts helped organize protests”, (Crovitz). Khaid Said became a martyr. Thousands of Egypt's citizens united behind his name. A Facebook page entitled we are all Khaid Said was created and played the center role in Egypt's liberation front. The Internet played a major role in Egypt’s revolution. Crovitz contrast this with China's choice to prevent access to controversial news stories involving public officials. Crovitz explains the case, “Zhao Wei was on his way home to Inner Mongolia from his studies in Tianjin when he got into a dispute with a railway employee over his seat assignment. His parents were informed that he had committed suicide by jumping from the train.” (Crovitz). Wei's family posted photos of their son's body that indicate that he was beaten. The Internet was inflamed with the controversial death. Officials found that it was futile to try to cover up the story. More articles from Gordon Crovitz can be found here.

Evegeny Morozov's Disscusion With TED

The TED (Technology Entertainment and Design) was founded in 1984. At first TED focused on technology but later broadened the focus of the conference to a myriad of topics. In 2009 Evegeny Morozov spoke at the TED conference about the relationship between the Internet and dictators. A recording of his discussion can be found below.

Morozov want to voice his concerns over the popular idea that the Internet alone can liberate oppressed nations. Technology alone doesn't liberate. A driving voice behind this technology is needed to sway public opinion. “But even beyond that, coming back to the Internet, what you can actually see is that certain governments have mastered the use of cyberspace for propaganda purposes. Right? And they are building what I call the Spinternet. The combination of spin, on the one hand, and the Internet on the other. So governments from Russia to China to Iran are actually hiring, training and paying bloggers in order to leave ideological comments and create a lot of ideological blog posts to comment on sensitive political issues.”( Morzov). Morozov fears that the government can harness the power of the Internet to create uncertainty over certain political issues. A free and open Internet can used as a haven for free flowing ideas. it can be used by human rights activist to exchange ideas. Without the Internet they would not be able to communicate. So the Internet can only be used as a liberation tool if it is free from governmental control. More articles from Evegeny Morozov can be found here.

The Purpose of This Blog

This blog's purpose is academic in nature. i hope to accomplish the following.

•  I will discuss authoritarian dictatorships and their relationship with the internet. 
• I will provide strong arguments from credited individuals. 
• I will analyze these arguments and provide my thoughts and opinions while keeping an objective eye.
• I will also provide links to information pertinent to this blog. 

Those who wish to express themselves in a productive manner may do so in the comment section.  These discussions should be pertinent to the corresponding blog post.