1 Consent of the Networked, 2012, Rebecca MacKinnonThe Worldwide Struggle for internet freedom

2 Why a book report in the form of a slide show. . .Innovative (thinking outside of the box or off the paper, as the case may be) Highlights rather than text; focus is on getting to the idea Easier to raise questions (rather than explore answers) Model that is newer to me and thus gives me the opportunity to learn more Model that serves users in a quick and efficient manner More interactive than an essay (wish it were more interactive than it is)

3 Central question of the bookHow can digital technology be “structured, governed, and used to maximize the good it can do in the world, and minimize the evil” (p. 16)

4 Questions I drew from the bookQuestions for us How do we use digital technology to do good? Questions for Information Science How can this book help Information scientists do the same? How can information scientists help structure, govern and maximize digital technology for our users while adhering to the ALA bill of rights?

5 How does technology operate without our consent?Really two questions here: Does technology operate without consent (and, if so, when?) If so , how? To what extent is using a technology consenting?

6 Operates without our consentTechnology platforms are not all governed by an elected government Those running technology platforms are not accountable to the people or to public interest (and may, in fact, be counter to these). When we click “agree” to terms of service, we give false and uninformed consent (is this true?) Operates without our consent

7 How do we support technology for freedom?How do we, as information scientists, make sure that technology empowers and does not disempower? A Core tenant of information science is information access to all (See Britz J, & Lor P, 2010) The right to be information literate: the core foundation of the knowledge society.  ALA position on intellectual freedom is here Britz, J & Lor, P (2010). Innovation 41: 8–24. Retrieved from

8 Where does responsibility lie?With owners and operators of technology? With governments? With us?

9 And responsibility for what?Our own technological lives (and our willingness to participate in networks where “freedom” is not guaranteed to us)? If we click agree, then we agree Other’s technological lives (where other people’s rights are not guaranteed?) Do we support filters on library computers? Do we support international companies that allow governments to invade privacy? Important question for information Scientists (See ALA position on filtering here)

10 Part one: Disruptions The internet, driven by the private sector, challenges the nation state and supports an international digital commons

11 Influences on freedom Freedom People Government Technology

12 People desire security entertainment Material comfort

13 Which would you give up for Freedom?Security Entertainment Material Comfort Freedom

14 What if we don’t realize we are giving it up?Digital platforms mediate relationships between us and our government, between us and other citizens and corporations Who controls and shapes these platforms? Who are the tech corporations accountable to? Google, Facebook, Twitter, Apple, are corporations whose main goal is to make a profit.

15 Maximize value to advertisersRemember, people want security, entertainment and comfort. 01 How does our excitement with technology lull us into either accepting limitations on our freedom and/or accepting increasing technology creep into our lives? 02 Internet companies not only sell us products and services, they shape the platforms on which we work, play and conduct business. 03

16 Democratic Government’s RoleTo ensure that our rights and interests are protected. To make policies and laws that are grounded in “the consent of the governed” Are they doing a good job? Why or why not?

17 Digital Commons Provides users with a platform to speak to millionsOpen access shares resources, often for free Controlled by the few Controlled by commercial interests Policed by whom? And in whose interests? Abused by whom?

18 Software code and technical standards are for all practical purposes a new form of law, because just like laws, they shape what people can and cannot do (44) Who writes the code? Who develops the standards? Who has the right to shape the network’s future? And, in whose interests?

19 Are information Scientists in the unique positon of managing some of these issues?Oversight of what is showing up in searches (what is privileged?) Active voice to remind people of the power of information Voice for minorities and those excluded from power Digital and information literacy advocates Local advocates

20 Part two: Control 2.0 Behind the scenes digital technology enables authoritarian governments to violate privacy and to take away freedoms

21 Online discussion benefits Authoritarian RegimesAllows them to monitor the chatter 01 They know who is talking and what they are saying 02 Alerts them to potential unrest 03 Intercept any communications 04

22 Chinese censorship Great firewall blocks sites the government does not want accessed (keeping people safe!). Wall was significantly upgraded in 2011. Companies are required to delete and make inaccessible any objectionable materials so they don’t even have to be blocked. Chinese search engine “Baidu” and Sohu and Sina, twitter like platforms, provides access to entertainment and goods (remember, that’s what people want)

23 DPI deep packet inspection, 72Originally created by Western companies to improve network security (and to detect illegal file sharing), it was quickly adopted by foreign governments to intercept, analyze, block and even alter information. DPI is used to block citizen communication in Bahrain, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Yemen, Sudan, Tunisia, Iran, Egypt Patterson, D. (2017, March 9). “Deep Packet Inspection: The Smart Person’s Guide.” Tech Republic. Retrieved from DPI deep packet inspection, 72

24 Digital Violence Russia does not block websites but engages in both digital and f2f violence Hackers take websites offline Warrantless surveillance is built into Russia’s search engine, Runet Digital Bonapartism, make the people feel free while monitoring and engaging in Digital violence

25 Part Three: Democracy ChallengesAs the relationships between government and tech firms become more intertwined the consequences of those relationships become more opaque and without accountability.

26 Government SurveillancePatriot Act: (2001) FBI is allowed to obtain our telecommunications records without a court order Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)— companies are immune to suits from customers if the company complies with the government to provide surveillance Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), last update allows the government to request data in the cloud that has been stored more than 180 days without a court order

27 DDP Digital Due processIn 2011, the Senate Judiciary Introduced a bill to make a warrant necessary for digital communications (though not for GPS coordinates)

28 Panopticism The theory that if we know we may be watched some of the time we will change our behaviors most of the time, just in case.

29 Simon Chesterman, author of One Nation, Under Surveillance writesWhat we are witnessing now is the emergence of a new social contract, in which individuals give the state . .. Power over information in exchange for security and the conveniences of living in the modern world (quoted, p. 90). What do people want: security, entertainment and comfort

30 How the internet threatens democracy (From The Offensive Internet)Anonymous speech allows for irresponsible and inflammatory comments Decreases some peoples willingness to participate in public discourse False rumors and fake facts spread and become entrenched Can reinforce the tyranny of the majority Cyber Harassment

31 Solutions are problematicAny kind of censorship can become a slippery slope 01 Anonymity leads to people’s willingness to disclose illegal and abusive behaviors 02 Who would be in charge: companies? They have no investment in protecting civil liberties 03 Internet filtering has actually been shown to increase criminal activity (“Internet Blocking: Balancing Cybercrime Responses in Democratic Societies”), p. 106 04

32 Intellectual Property issues: CopywarsShould websites be responsible for filtering the misuse of intellectual property? If so, at what point in the process? What kind of due process is strong enough to protect both intellectual property rights but also the rights of citizens? Do “Take Down” demands stifle free speech? Free speech is often sacrificed for stronger copyright (and this can aid authoritarian governments) These issues are very relevant to information science.

33 Copyright Law “If democratically elected leaders adopt the policies pushed by lobbyists and make Internet and telecommunications companies vet and track their users to stop all ‘infringing’ activity, not only can dictators breath a sigh of relief, but so can incumbent politicians everywhere who would rather not have to face Internet-organized grassroots citizens’ movements” (118). (See here for some interesting stats on copyright from ALA)

34 Part Four: Sovereigns of CyperspaceTech companies do not take responsibility and lack accountability, corroding the democratic potential of the web.

35 NeT Neutrality Equal access to anybody anywhere vs. tiered accessShould companies be allowed to run their networks however they want? Should the government control how companies share information? Is information a public good? How would tiered access affect those who are the most poor? What role do information scientists have in ensuring net neutrality? (see resources at the end of the slideshow for more on Net Neutrality)

36 Free Speech Should digital technology companies be subject to free speech expectations or can they make their own rules? Do we (should we) have control of our own speech if we post it in digital technology commercial spaces? (See resources at the end for more about free speech and the internet)

37 What should we do? . . . If I decide not to leave Facebook, yet I know that they do not care at all about my privacy, what does that mean? How is that different from the people who continue to use the Internet in China day in day out despite the prevalent and prolific practices of censorship? This is not a rhetorical question. Of course, I realize Facebook is not the Chinese government, but I do think there are similarities between them, in kind although perhaps not in degree. Lokman Tsui, quoted, p. 152

38 Radical Transparency Zuckerberg stated that people would be better off if everything were transparent. . Facebook users must use their real name Facebooks “hate and harassment” team received two million reports from users every week of content that is abusive, harassing or hateful (p. 156) Facebook enforcement is arbitrary and inconsistent In 2011 they did establish an appeals process for those who felt they’d been removed without just cause

39 Part Five: What is to be done?People are attempting to address these issues and threats. (This section is the weakest of the entire book—MacKinnon is very much personally involved in trying to deal with the issues she raises. But what is clear, at least in 2012 when she wrote the book, was that there are not clear solutions.) See resources for more on updates with her programs

40 Trust but verify We need to make sure that companies are doing what they say they are doing Regarding our privacy How is data gathered? With whom is it shared? Regarding human rights

41 How? Regulation Global online freedom act (GOFA) too outdated now, and one size does not fit all Regulation is a problem because often Government is complicit in the problems the regulations are trying to address; they too want access to people’s records, for example. Put your money where your mouth is Some investment funds promise to honor digital free expression Global Network Initiative (GNI)—dedicated to helping companies uphold their users’ and customer’s rights to freedom of expression and privacy

42 Internet Freedom Freedom through the use of the internet (think Tunisia’s liberation) Liberation technology (see more on this in resources) Global Internet Freedom Consortium (GIFC) US government technology policy should not support regime change (The Net Delusion) Freedom within the internet (think no censorship) Freedom for the internet (all platforms available to all with no interference) A strong public sphere secures personal freedom World Summit for the Information Society (WSIS)

43 Technological Innovation the answer?Freedom of expression is not an inevitable outcome of technological innovation It can be diminished or reinforced by the design of technologies, policies and practices—sometimes far removed from freedom of expression” (Quoted from the UNESCO Freedom of Connection—Freedom of Expression, p. 197).

44 The Wealthy West and The Digital DivideWho makes the policies for whom? Is the wealthy west, where most of the technology and policies is coming from, in a position to make decisions for other cultures? Should all countries have an equal voice in regulation? Internet Governance Forum (IGF) is a non- binding international body designed to meet annually to discuss internet policy issues

45 Cyberliberty There can be no cyberliberty without a political movement to define, defend, and institutionalize individual rights and freedoms on a transnational scale. (quoting Milton Mueller, p. 213)

46 Netizen movement Build and strengthen alternative netizen-driven institutions and communities that can exist alongside existing ones Devise effective and innovative ways to constrain all forms of digital power Build public awareness and participation among users to recognize their responsibility as netizens Global Voices Wikipedia Creative Commons Drumbeat, powered by Mozilla (no longer exists) Mesh networking Cyper separatism has practical and ideological dangers Utopian ideologies attempting to crate a “separate” internet can lead to both demagoguery and totalitarianism The people on the internet are the same as the people off: utopia does not exist online Technological determinism: technology doesn’t solve problems, people do

47 NGO’s The Electronic Frontier Foundation Open Rights GroupCenter for Democracy and Technology Bits of Freedom Netzpolitik

48 Charter of Human Rights and Principles, 2011Ten Core principles Universality and equality Rights and social justice Accessibility Expression and association Privacy and data protection Life, liberty and security Diversity Network equality Standards and regulation Governance Charter of Human Rights and Principles, 2011

49 Netizen Centric and Netizen DrivenBoost corporate transparency—companies should publicly and clearly show how they gather and retain information Build a more citizen-centric and citizen driven information environment—we need to dictate the terms and not let corporations or government do The Cluetrain Manifesto and Vendor Relationship Management (VRM) Build processes for corporate engagement with users, customers and stakeholders

50 Limitations of the bookObviously dated for today, but the issues still pertain Doesn’t really deal with what our role should be as people who use the internet Solutions are vague and not clearly defined

51 Resources: Net NeutralityColdewey, D. (May 23, 2017). FCC’s case against net neutrality rests on a deliberate misrepresentation of how the internet works. Techcrunch. Retireved from https://techcrunch.com/2017/05/23/the-fccs-case-against-net- neutrality-rests-on-a-fundamental-deliberate-misunderstanding-of-how-the- internet-works/ . Network Neutrality. ALA Retrieved from

52 Resources: Free Speech and the InternetElectronic Frontier Foundation Leetaru, K. (March, 2016). Is the Internet evolving away from freedom of speech? Forbes. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/kalevleetaru/2016/01/15/is- the-internet-evolving-away-from-freedom-of-speech/#6a07d7956c37. Sydell, L. (Aug, 2017). Unlikely allies join fight to protect free speech on the internet. NPR. Retrieved from allies-join-fight-to-protect-free-speech-on-the-internet.

53 MacKinnon Resources Ranking Digital Rights 2017 index of corporate accountability Global Voices, Mackinnon is one of the founders Global Network Initiative Berkman Klein Center for Internet and Society at Harvard Open Society Foundation

54 Resources: Liberation TechnologyStanford has a series of lectures from , many of them available on video The Technology Liberation Front, https://techliberation.com/ National Endowment for Democracy, Newland, S. & Lorentzen, P. (2015). Countering Liberation technology: Internet access and media freedom in Autocacies. Retrieved from

55 Central Question of the BookHow can digital technology be “structured, governed, and used to maximize the good it can do in the world, and minimize the evil” (p. 16) Answer? As information scientists, we have a lot of influence and impact on how information is structured, used and governed (note how ALA attempts to lobby for net neutrality for example).

56 How does your information use maximize the good and minimize the evil?