Is the Debate on Internet & Human Rights Nothing More Than American Propaganda Against China?
Welcome to Gauravonomics Blog! Subscribe to my feed now and you'll never miss a single post!
AFP quoted me on a story on the Yahoo! Business & Human Rights Summit held at Yahoo!’s Sunnyvale office on May 5 –
Western countries have been striving to “close the Internet” in the names of causes such as fighting pornography or cyber crime, said Gaurav Mishra who blogs about happenings in India.
The story was also reproduced in The Age, Brisbane Times, France 24, The Sydney Morning Herald, and CNN Money, amongst others.
Taken out of context, my comment might sound strange, or even outrageous, so it’s important that I put it in context.
The popular narrative about human rights and the internet is that there are two types of countries: open democracies like USA which have a free and open internet and closed totalitarian regimes like China which have a closed, censored internet. However, as the internet is “essentially free and borderless”, the hope is that, over time, it will make these closed societies more open, more like Western democracies.
This narrative is flawed at two levels.
First, the internet isn’t inherently free or borderless. It has already become evident that governments have both the will and the means to force the internet to conform to the rules and regulations within their national boundaries. It has also become evident that the internet itself, like any other technology, is neutral and value-agnostic. So, it can be used for free expression and activism, but it can also be used for propaganda and suveillance. China, Russia and Iran, amongst other repressive regimes, are using a combination of censorship, astrofurfing and old school intimidation to control the internet, in one form or another.
Second, the internet in the open (Western) democracies isn’t really open anymore. Open democracies like USA, UK, Australia, South Korea, India and Brazil are closing down the internet in many ways by instituting over-strong pornography and cyber-crime regulations that censor content at ISP level, limit anonymity by linking internet access to real world identity, and force internet companies to share user data. Most of these regulations are supposed to protect internet users, but in the hands of extremist or paranoid elements in these open democracies, they can be easily misinterpreted and misused.
So, my fear is that both open democracies and closed totalitarian regimes are moving towards each other and will meet in an unhappy middle that is very different from the free and open internet we know today.
The discussion around internet and human rights needs to move beyond its US-centric China-Russia-Iran fixation to include “open” democracies like USA, UK, Australia, South Korea, India and Brazil. Unless the focus of this discussion changes from “bad countries” to “bad practices”, there’s a risk that it will be seen as nothing more than US propaganda against unfriendly countries.
Suhasini, 
Mary and one other person are discussing. 
Jagadish, 
Great to hear that !
What are the next plans ?, Coming back to India .