Instead of freeing us, the internet is making us conform
The fact that we’re far less likely to engage in deviant behavior if we think we’re being watched isn’t a new discovery.
In 2012, a group of researchers from the University of Newcastle in the
UK used simple signage in three spots on campus that had an extremely
high prevalence of bike theft. The signs featured a pair of eyes along
with prominent statements suggesting that the area was now under
surveillance.
The net result? A 62% decrease in overall theft in each of those three locations.
While I’m all for using technology to promote the public interest and
reduce criminal acts, the reality is that surveillance may have a far
more chilling effect on our behavior than initially thought.
A new study seeking to examine the relationship between mass
surveillance and online opinion found that people tend to suppress their
true beliefs if they think their opinions constitute a minority view.
Far from just stopping illegal acts, mass surveillance may compel us to mold our behavior to please the majority.
Again, maybe this discovery isn’t exactly new. “Democracy in America,” a
19th-century treatise written by French sociologist Alexis de
Tocqueville, warns about the “tyranny of the majority”—a scenario where
public opinion comprehensively overshadows minorities and those holding
unpopular views.
Tocqueville was a fervent admirer of American individualism, but he felt
that its characteristics could lead to a society where all citizens
would, paradoxically, try their best to be like each other. And while he
died far before mass surveillance took effect, his words could have
been a prophecy of what was to follow.
The Snowden effect
The internet was designed to foster community and bring people closer
together. It aimed to promote free speech, cast aside authoritarianism,
eradicate barriers to information, and allow people to engage in
meaningful debate online.
Events such as the Arab Spring of 2011, also known as the “Twitter
revolution,” gave us a glimpse of how powerful online communities had
become. Even repressive governments with monopolies on the instruments
of violence couldn’t prevent mass uprisings organized purely via social
media.
Whether social media actually helps democracy and reduces tyranny is a
topic for another day, but it’s pertinent to note that the events of the
Arab Spring haven’t exactly resulted in stronger democratic
institutions in the Middle East.
On the other hand, just a couple of years after the Arab Spring,
the bombshell Snowden revelations of mass surveillance in the U.S. and,
potentially, around the world, confirmed our darkest fears. The internet
wasn’t the safe haven we had thought it to be.
So how did Snowden’s disclosure impact online behavior? According to Jon
Penney, a former fellow at Harvard Law School’s Berkman Klein Center
for Internet & Society, there was a drastic decline in Wikipedia
searches for terrorism-related keywords such as Al Qaeda, chemical
weapon, and jihad.
The researcher documented that the searches were declining even a year
after the end of the study. And given the lack of evidence for
punishment or prosecution for trying to access such information, Penney
declared that it was unlikely that the fear of prosecution was a reason
behind the decline. The explanation he offered was “self-censorship.”
Bruce Schneier, of the Harvard Kennedy School’s Belfer Center for
Government and International Affairs, has stated that “the fact that you
won’t do things, that you will self-censor, are the worst effects of
pervasive surveillance.”
Welcome the panopticon effect, with slightly modified tools.
It’s the surveillance, stupid
Some of this behavior is simply human nature. We’re political animals,
as Aristotle declared in fourth century BC. We gravitate towards social
acceptance and community. Most of us don’t seek to be exclusionary and
are far happier when accepted by others. Hence, if we knew that an
unknown entity was tracking our every move, we’d do a lot more to be
perceived as ‘normal’ and just like anybody else.
But Penney’s findings are far more troubling because they point to a
situation where the boundaries of debate are being arbitrarily
delineated. It’s okay to argue over whether the Kardashians are useful
for society, but not a word against the government. And if you step out
of line, rest assured that the algorithms will catch you.
The decentralization of the internet and the lack of a controlling node
was a key facet in the development of the web by its original founders.
The fact that they didn’t patent the idea and chose to forgo profits
speaks volumes to their intention of building strong, global societies
in an environment free from repression and retribution.
The internet today is a far cry from the non-commercial ideals of those
who gave birth to it. Net neutrality is a thing of the past, unlikely to
ever return. Walled-off internet networks, selective in the information
and apps they allow, are more common than open and free ones.
Surveillance is so ubiquitous that we’ve taken a passive view of it,
almost to the point that it doesn’t bother us anymore.
Our future is only more devices, not fewer. More facial scanners,
surveillance cameras, IoT devices, and smarter machine learning
algorithms to complement them. Intelligent cities. What happens then?
Blind adherence to unspoken ideals? Apolitical citizenry? Uniformity of
thought?
Rather than encouraging and promoting diversity, the internet may end up
silencing it. And that’s a future we should be worried about.
When comes to the issue of online privacy and security, we suggest to use a
VPN service,
and our recommendation is RitaVPN. RitaVPN is a relatively new VPN
service, but it’s already making a name for itself,which makes it one of
the best VPN in 2019.
Qwer432
www.buysecurevpn.com/ www.buyexpressvpn.net/
The Wall