I recently read The Net Delusion by Morozov. One of Morozov’s main claims throughout The Net Delusion is that solutions to censorship alone cannot overcome authoritarianism. The assumption many policy makers hold is take simply breaking down the “information wall” with censorship eluding technology will undermine these regimes. This assumption is flawed on multiple levels. In one aspect, some citizens view censorship as a responsibility rather than a lack of freedom. Failing to take into account the sentiments of the citizens where censorship is being practiced ignores the value that censorship has in that society. Furthermore, authoritarian regimes are beginning to find censorship, to an extent, almost obsolete. Instead of viewing the Internet as a weapon used against them, governments are beginning to use the Internet to their advantage. Authoritarian regimes bypass the need for censorship by utilizing the Internet as their own tool to create what Morozov so lovingly refers to as the “Spinternet”. The Spinternet is a web space with lots of propaganda and spin to reinforce political ideologies. Rather than censor something; authoritarian regimes can now “spin” news that wasn’t in their favor. Morozov gives the example of the Chinese government allowing Internet users to investigate the death of a prisoner in what was thought to be a cover-up by the police. In reality the Internet investigators had no power, and couldn’t even view videos tapes from the incident. The public outcry online was responded to, rather then censored, by the Chinese government, and ended up bringing positive publicity to the government because they seemed open and transparent. Censorship is unneeded when the Internet can be used to polish up a regimes digital public image.
Additionally, the ineffectiveness of online censorship is further exemplified with what Morozov dubs the Barbara Streisand effect. The more we try to cover something up, or censor it, the more attention and credibility it receives. Streisand originally didn’t want photos of her home eroding costal shoreline on the Internet, and desperately wanted them offline. These photos were hardly getting any attention, until she filed a$50 million lawsuit. Trying to censor something often brings more attention than would have ever been garnered in the first place. While many policy makers tend to think that eliminating censorship would help overcome authoritarianism, I would tend to agree with Morozov, that authoritarian regimes are already a step ahead of pure censorship, and our focus should instead shift to combating their Spinternet tactics online. If outsiders want to help create change, Morozov suggests creating systems to rate commenters and sites online, to give them a type of reputation. While this would provide a background on who was leading public discourse, it could potentially put those who oppose authoritarian regimes at risk. Personally, I found he had one valid pathway. Democratic governments and institutions can educate those who oppose the government on how to better navigate and use the Internet, to have a greater impact amidst all the government spin. In educating the opposition, we can provide a more level playing field for balanced public discourse to begin. Helping dissidents have an equal voice on the cyber-sphere may not be as exciting as tearing down “information walls”, but it seems to be the most beneficial and effective course for democratic governments and human rights institutions to pursue.
Follow Us!