Digital Authoritarianism Is On the Rise Around the World, Report Warns (cnet.com) 41
An anonymous reader quotes a report from CNET: Internet freedom declined for a ninth consecutive year as governments around the world used social media to monitor citizens and manipulate elections, according to a new study that warned of creeping "digital authoritarianism." Thirty-three of the 65 countries surveyed were found to have experienced worsening internet freedom since June 2018, compared with 16 that were found to have improving conditions. The study, conducted by Freedom House, a nonprofit human rights advocacy, said domestic disinformation had grown as a threat to democracy with populist leaders and their online supporters using the internet to distort political discussions. The organization found domestic interference in 26 of the 30 countries that held elections over the past year.
The report said internet freedom in the U.S. had declined, in large part because law enforcement and immigration agencies used social media to monitor people, though the country was still deemed "free." China was dubbed the "worst abuser of internet freedom" for a fourth consecutive year as the government tightened information controls because of the 30th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre and protests in Hong Kong. Noting that the biggest platforms were American, Freedom House called on the U.S. to lead in the effort to fix social media transparency and accountability. "This is the only way to stop the internet from becoming a Trojan horse for tyranny and oppression," wrote Adrian Shahbaz, one of the authors of the report.
The report said internet freedom in the U.S. had declined, in large part because law enforcement and immigration agencies used social media to monitor people, though the country was still deemed "free." China was dubbed the "worst abuser of internet freedom" for a fourth consecutive year as the government tightened information controls because of the 30th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre and protests in Hong Kong. Noting that the biggest platforms were American, Freedom House called on the U.S. to lead in the effort to fix social media transparency and accountability. "This is the only way to stop the internet from becoming a Trojan horse for tyranny and oppression," wrote Adrian Shahbaz, one of the authors of the report.
"Social" media (Score:2)
Had enough yet? (As I post on a form of social media...)
Re: "Social" media (Score:4, Insightful)
Who needs government censors when Google, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, etc will do the job for free?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Who needs government listening to our conversations when all they have to do is go to social media and read what we broadcast to the world.
Re: (Score:1)
..or what we don't broadcast to the world but to our friends....
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Who needs government listening to our conversations when all they have to do is go to social media and read what we broadcast to the world.
Do you remember when Google allowed the US government to tap the lines between their data centers? Do you think Facebook, Twitter, etc. are not cooperating behind the scenes?
Re: (Score:3)
Papers pick and choose what letters to the editor they publish, and nobody bats an eye. TV stations cancel shows every year, and nobody claims the producers' free speech is being infringed. Guess what? If I refuse to loan you my bullhorn or allow you to stand on my rooftop and scream nonsense, I am not infringing your free speech rights.
Want to get your message out? Buy your own damn website. Forcing others to reprint or rebroadcast your free speech is, in fact, denying others the right to free speech. You
Re: (Score:2)
Facebook and friends are now sitting here with the spectre of politicians threatening to hurt their company if they don't block their political opponents.
So, no, your statements are not accurate. It's even beyond "consider censoring them as we decide if you should be broken up." It's moved to direct threats of legal harm.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I'm going to need to see some proof that politicians are simultaneously threatening to break up social media platforms, while at the same time demanding that their political opponents be censored. Not saying that isn't the case, but if it is, it's a fucking huge deal I somehow missed, and I follow politics pretty obsessively.
Re: (Score:1)
Fake stories are being REQUIRED to be broadcast by Government via a certain administration!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
your tagline is false
Re:"Social" media (Score:5, Informative)
Slashdot hardly counts as "social media".
social media; noun
websites and applications that enable users to create and share content or to participate in social networking.
We (slashdot users) don't create, or share content (we can submit stories that we found, but we didn't create that content), nor do we know each other's real names, so social networking is out.
slashdot is more like... (Score:1)
anti-social networking.
Re: (Score:2)
We (slashdot users) don't create, or share content
You just created some content, and the rest of us are reading it. Doesn't that count?
nor do we know each other's real names
No one knows my real name on Reddit, either, but more people would argue that it's social media. It's substantially similar to Slashdot, though, in all the ways that count: links, discussion, ratings of that discussion (upvotes vs moderation).
Social media is more about the networking than sharing content. (despite how people on Facebook operate, which seems to be entirely shared content, nothing original anymore, follow
Re: (Score:2)
You just created some content, and the rest of us are reading it. Doesn't that count?
It can, if you'd like. But generally "content" (from the perspective of "social media") is more along the lines of pictures/video/crafts-to-sell, etc... Slashdot is simply us commenting on a subject that was picked by an editor.
social networking; noun
the use of dedicated websites and applications to interact with other users, or to find people with similar interests to oneself.
I don't think Slashdot falls into this category. Slashdot is really just a news site with the ability to comment.
Ban on political ads (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Hahahaha...you think political ads are information.
Re: (Score:2)
In a pure scientific way, yes. Then again, in that context, the composition of the shit I took earlier is also information...
Re: (Score:2)
Hahahahaha...you think it stopped all political ads rather than just ones the democrats dislike, isn't itself driven by fear of politicians hurting them.
So long, America. Nice knowing your First Amendment.
Re: (Score:1)
My actual experiences with today's Internet:
Burner SIM?
Re: (Score:1)
Or as reported on their news (Score:4, Funny)
China was dubbed the "worst abuser of internet freedom" for a fourth consecutive year as the government tightened information controls because of the 30th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre and protests in Hong Kong.
Or as reported on their news ..China is the best protected from Western interference, immorality, and terrorist radicalisation.
Re: (Score:2)
Or as reported on their news ..China is the best protected from Western interference, immorality, and terrorist radicalisation.
One man's "protecting my country" is another man's tyranny.
Re: (Score:2)
Did Pooh Bear pull a Louis XIV? I.e. equate himself with the country?
Re: (Score:2)
Given that he is also dictator-for-life, potato-pataahto.
Worthless Politically Biased Study (Score:1, Troll)
Freedom House...said domestic disinformation had grown as a threat to democracy with populist leaders and their online supporters using the internet to distort political discussions
It sounds like Freedom House only approves of freedom when people are posting opinions that are inline with their own and they don't approve of alternative viewpoints that "distort political discussions." They likely consider suppression of so-called "hate speech" not to be a violation of people's freedoms, just as long as it's people they disagree with who are being censored.
law enforcement and immigration agencies used social media to monitor people
Enforcing the law by using information that people voluntarily broadcast to the world is a violation of freedom? Freedom House are
Re: (Score:3)
Freedom House is like National Endowment for Democracy. It's a foreign policy tool with a veneer of legitimacy.
Re: (Score:2)
Voters watching a funny coughing fit meme and LOL at a political leader the West "media" feels should be elected.
Cant stop the coughing fits due to poor health?
Call LOL at the funny coughing fit meme "domestic disinformation".
"Digital" isn't the issue (Score:4, Interesting)
This is just tyrants modernizing their tech. Forget about the tech. Fight the tyrants.
Re: (Score:2)
This is just [censored]. Forget about the tech. [censored].
Guilt by Association (Score:1)
Fortunately, the first world has several formalities that are adhered to (as outlined by our founding fathers) that give us an easy litmus test to avoid authoritarianism. If any of the fundamentals are missing (stiffled communications, compromised privacy, forced lifestyles, etc), you are not dealing with someone/something that was born or raised with freedom. Its
We did it! (Score:3)
I know it took a lot of effort by programmers everywhere but we're finally getting the results we all knew were inevitable. You can claim it's not what you had intended but it's exactly what you made possible.
Congratulations everyone!
Ruthless effeciency (Score:2)
Nothing rose, at all! (Score:2)
Only our awarenes of it.
It being "digital" is almost irrelevant to the problem.
Anyone who remembers any wars knows that. Be it WWII, Vietnam, Russia's expansions, the USA's puppet states, Nixon, you name it.
At least now the masses start to wake up.
Where's 8chan? (Score:1)
Just a friendly reminder (Score:2)