Reader’s Response:
Who’s the true enemy of internet freedom- China, Russia, or the US?-
Morozov, E.
According to Morozov (2015) in ‘Who’s the true enemy of
internet freedom-China, Russia, or the US?’, United States (US) despite being
an advocate of internet freedom demanded to obtain internet information
regardless of where it was stored as long as it was handled by US companies.
This greatly offsets China’s policy in the blockage of foreign websites and
Russia’s regulation which restricts the storage of surveillance data on servers
inside the country.
US backing of internet freedom is indeed a mask to achieve
her egotistic aims of increasing her internet sovereignty at the expense of
violating civil and political rights of technology films and other nations.
In 2014, US, China and Russia were among countries that were
marked as ‘enemies of the internet’ by Reporter Without Boarders, a distinction
to highlight countries with the highest level of internet censorship and
surveillance.
Despite the low level of internet censorship as compared to
China and Russia, US had tried to propagate an extensive internet surveillance
over technology films and other nations in the name of ‘internet freedom’. This
is demonstrated in the article, where US demanded to bypass the legal
procedures involved to obtain internet information from other countries as long
as it was handled by US companies. Furthermore, US companies had also installed
advanced network systems in other countries that were complex and costly to
undo. Therefore, it is rather ironic for US to be supportive of internet
freedom at one end and exploiting the political rights of other nations at the
other.
In terms of economic purposes, US support of ‘internet
freedom’ can be a cover for the rapid expansion of US Info-communication
Technology (IT) companies in other countries to dominate the global IT sector.
Referring back to the article, Google had even funded a $60million undersea
cable connecting Brazil to Florida in order to promote connectivity between the
two countries. Instead of the political reason of promoting a swift transfer of
internet resources between the two countries, a possible reason for US to
initial this project is to ensure her server stays relevant in other countries.
Referring to an online news report by Australian
Broadcasting Corporation News (ABC News), US Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI) and Justice Department had even demanded Twitter to
hand over user data without the acknowledgement of the users due to
surveillance law. This had deeply violated the privacy of users of Twitter,
whom every word was constantly monitored by the US authorities. In addition, US
internet surveillance on Twitter users had violated the US constitution’s First
Amendment which entitled citizens to the freedom of speech.
From the US perspective, the propagation of internet
surveillance mainly brings about benefits for the nation. For instance, the
omission of legal procedures in order to obtain internet data from other
nations; globalization of US IT companies; deterrence against social unrest,
child pornography and promotion of national security. However, propagation of
internet surveillance by US may bring about mass surveillance worldwide, which
violates the political and civil rights of other nations. It is also seemly impudent
to demand every nation to disclose digital surveillance in order to promote
internet freedom. These digital documentations are supposed to be highly
confidential. Even if these digital documents are handled by US companies, the required
legal procedures have to be done to prevent the leak of confidential
information.
In conclusion, it may be difficult to put a definition on
the degree of digital surveillance that nations shall impose, as that truly
depends on the interest of the people involved. Nevertheless, US overbearing
demands to propagate her internet surveillance over technology films and other
countries is not acceptable. To build an ‘internet free’ society requires the
cooperation between every nations and US self-centred ideology of building her
digital empire in the name of promoting internet freedom is rather one-sided.
References
Morozov , E. (2015, Jan4). Who’s the true enemy of internet
freedom - China, Russia, or the US?. The Guardian. Retrieved from: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/04/internet-freedom-china-russia-us-google-microsoft-digital-sovereignty
ABC News (2014, Oct8). Twitter sues US government claiming
freedom of speech is being violated by surveillance laws. Retrieved from: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-10-08/twitter-suing-us-government-for-breaching-freedom-of-speech/5799666
No comments:
Post a Comment