Terrorism, the Internet, and Google
http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/001111.html
For those of us involved in the early days of the Internet's creation
and growth, it would at the time have seemed inconceivable that decades
later the topic of this post would need to be typed. I think it's fair
to say that none of us -- certainly not yours truly -- ever imagined
that the fruits of our labors would one day become a crucial tool for
terrorists.
That day has nonetheless arrived, and it thrusts us directly into what
arguably is the single most critical issue facing the Internet and Web
today -- what to do about the commandeering of social media by the likes
of ISIL (aka ISIS, or IS, or Daesh) and other terrorist groups.
As we've discussed in the past, governments around the world are already
using the highly visible Internet presence of these criminal terrorist
organizations as excuses to call for broad Internet censorship powers,
and for "backdoors" into encryption systems that would be devastating
for both privacy and security worldwide.
Yet it's the horrific terrorist "recruitment" videos that have quite
understandably received the bulk of public attention, and they create a
complex dilemma for advocates of free speech such as myself.
We know that free speech is not without limits -- the "yelling fire in a
crowded theater" case being the canonical example.
How and where should we draw the lines on the Web?
Let's begin with a fundamental fact that is all too often ignored or
misrepresented. When a firm like Google -- or any other organization
outside of government -- decides it does not want to host or encourage
any given type of material, this is not censorship.
Just as book publishers are not obligated to distribute every manuscript
offered to them, and TV networks need not buy every series pilot that
comes their way, nongovernmental organizations and firms are free to
determine their own editorial standards and Terms of Service.
They need not participate in the dissemination of sexually-oriented
videos, kitten abuse compilations ... or beheading videos produced by
medieval, religious fanatic monsters.
Firms are free to determine for themselves the limits of what their
content and services will be.
Governments -- on the other hand -- can censor. That is, they determine
what private parties, firms, and other organizations are (at least in
theory) permitted to produce, disseminate, or hear and view. And
governments can back up these censorship orders with both criminal and
civil penalties. They can throw you in shackles into a dark cell for
violating their orders. Last time I checked, Google and other Internet
firms didn't have such capabilities.
So when Google's chief legal officer David Drummond, and policy director
Victoria Grand recently spoke of the need to fight back against ISIL and
other terrorist groups' propaganda and recruiting use of YouTube in
particular, and urged other firms to take similar social media stances,
I was very proud of their positions and those of Google's broader policy
team.
Even for a vocal free speech advocate such as myself, I cannot ethically
condone the use of powerful platforms like YouTube as genocide-promoting
social media channels by technologically skilled savages.
This is not to suggest that drawing the lines in such cases is anything
but vastly complicated.
I have some significant insight into this thanks to my recent consulting
to Google, and I can state unequivocally that the amount of emotionally
draining, Solomonic soul-searching judgments that go into decisions
regarding abusive content removals at Google is absolutely
awe-inspiring. The motivated and dedicated individuals and teams
involved deserve our unending respect.
Even seemingly obvious cases -- like those involving ISIL -- turn out to
be decidedly difficult when you dig into the details.
Some governments would love to try cleanse the entire Net of all
references to these terror groups via broad censorship orders.
That would be doomed to failure of course, and in fact attempts to
utterly banish information about the utter brutality of these beasts
would not at all serve in making sure the world clearly understands the
depth of horror with which we're dealing.
Yet there is vanishingly little true probative value -- and there is
vast salacious propagandistic recruitment power -- in the display of
actual beheadings conducted by these groups, and Google is correct to
ban these as they have.
A particularly disquieting corollary to this situation is the manner in
which some of my colleagues seem unwilling or unable to appreciate the
complexities and nuances inherent in these situations.
Many of them have expressed anger at Google for drawing these content
lines, arguing that YouTube users should be permitted to post whatever
they want whenever they want, no matter the content -- even if the
videos serve purposely and directly as vile terrorist recruiting
instruments.
Such arguments essentially attempt to equate all content and all speech
as equal -- an appealing academic concept perhaps, but a devastatingly
dangerous construct in the real world of today given the power and reach
of modern social media.
To be crystal clear about this, I'll emphasize again that decisions
about content availability and removal in these contexts are complex,
difficult, and not to be approached cavalierly.
But I'm convinced that Google is doing this right, and the Web at large
would do well to look toward Google as an example of best ethical
practices in managing this nightmarish situation in the best interests
of the global community at large.
--Lauren--
Lauren Weinstein ([email protected]): http://www.vortex.com/lauren
Founder:
- Network Neutrality Squad: http://www.nnsquad.org
- PRIVACY Forum: http://www.vortex.com/privacy-info
Co-Founder: People For Internet Responsibility: http://www.pfir.org/pfir-info
Member: ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy
Lauren's Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com
Google+: http://google.com/+LaurenWeinstein
Twitter: http://twitter.com/laurenweinstein
Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800 / Skype: vortex.com
_______________________________________________
pfir mailing list
http://lists.pfir.org/mailman/listinfo/pfir
