I want us to think about the implications of this new reality: In three of the four most populous countries in the world, governments have now given themselves the power to make the internet erase messages from citizens that the authorities don’t like.
Indonesia — the world’s fourth most populous country and a democracy — is implementing what civil rights organizations say are too broad regulations to require the removal of online posts that officials view as a disturbance to society or public order. . Most major internet companies, including Google, Meta, Netflix, TikTok, Apple and Twitter have tentatively agreed to the rules.
Indonesia’s regulations are another sign that strict online controls are no longer limited to autocratic countries like China, Iran, North Korea and Myanmar. They are also increasingly the domain of democracies looking to use the law and the internet to shape citizens’ discussions and beliefs.
In free societies, there has long been a dispute over freedom of expression and its limits. But one of the lingering questions of the online age is what governments, digital businesses and citizens should do as the internet and social media make it both easier for people to share their truth (or their lies) with the world and more attractive to nationals. leaders to shut everything down.
What is happening in three of the four largest countries in the world: China, India and Indonesia; the US is the third largest – is simpler than that. It fits the classic definition of censorship. Governments are trying to silence their external critics.
Officials in Indonesia have said their new regulations are needed to protect people’s privacy, remove online material promoting child sexual abuse or terrorism, and make the internet a welcoming space for all.
Governments sometimes have legitimate reasons for shaping what happens online, such as to prevent the spread of dangerous misinformation. But Dhevy Sivaprakasam, Asia-Pacific policy advisor for global digital rights group Access Now, said Indonesia’s rules are a fig leaf used by the government to suppress journalism and citizen protests, with little control over that power.
Regulations require that all types of digital businesses, including social media sites, digital payment and video game and messaging apps, constantly search for online material that violates the law and remove it within hours if discovered. Authorities also have the right to request user data, including communications from people and financial transactions. Companies that do not comply with the law could be fined or forced to stop operating in the country.
Indonesia’s regulations, which are new and have not yet been implemented, “raise serious concerns about the right to freedom of expression, association, information, privacy and security,” Sivaprakasam told me.
Access Now has also invoked other sweeping online censorship laws in Asia, including those in Vietnam, Bangladesh and India.
(My colleagues reported today that the Indian government has withdrawn a data protection bill that privacy advocates and some lawmakers said would have given authorities excessive powers over personal data, while exempting law enforcement and public entities from the bill’s provisions.)
It gets more complicated to decide what to do with these laws. Companies in technology and other sectors tend to say they have to abide by the laws of the countries in which they operate, but they sometimes push back, or even withdraw from countries like Russia, arguing that the laws or governments’ interpretations thereof violate the fundamental freedoms of people.
Access Now and other human rights groups have said companies should not bow to what they say are violations of international human rights and other standards in Indonesia.
Executives of US internet companies have said privately that the US government needs to do more to stand up to overly strict government controls on online expression, rather than leave it to Google, Apple, Meta and Twitter alone. They say that American companies should not be put in a position to try to independently defend citizens of other countries against abuse by their own governments.
There are, of course, far less clear-cut questions about when and whether governments should have a say in what people post. Countries like Germany and Turkey have state controls over online information, which are used in the name of rooting out hateful ideologies or keeping society healthy. Not everyone in those countries agrees that these are reasonable restrictions of the Internet, or agrees with how the limits are interpreted or enforced.
The US Supreme Court will soon decide whether the First Amendment allows government agencies to dictate expression rules on Facebook and other major social media sites, which now largely make these decisions alone.
The original, utopian idea of the Internet was that it would help break national boundaries and give citizens skills they never had before to challenge their governments. We saw a version of that, but then governments wanted more control over what happened online. “Governments are very powerful and don’t like to be displaced,” Mishi Choudhary, a lawyer who advocates for internet users’ rights in India, said last year.
Our challenge, then, is to empower governments to act in the public interest to shape what happens online when needed, while calling on them when authorities abuse this right to maintain their own power.
Tip of the week
The art of buying used gadgets
Are you curious about buying a used computer, telephone or other device? It’s great for saving money and being kinder to the planet – as long as you don’t buy a lemon. Brian X. Chenothe consumer technology columnist for The New York Times, has his own story about buying used products smartly.
Recently my wife wanted a new iPad Pro to create artwork and maybe send emails occasionally. I grimaced.
The largest version of the tablet costs $1,100. Add an Apple Pencil to draw on the screen ($130) and a keyboard ($100 or more), and we’d have spent $1,330. Instead, I did some legwork and bought everything second-hand. My prize was $720. Here’s how I did it.
I started looking for used iPad Pro devices on eBay. Models released in 2021 were still pricey – $850 or so. The 2020 models were much less. I ended up buying a 2020 12.9-inch iPad Pro with 256 gigabytes for $600. That’s about half the price of a new model with less data storage.
I was careful. I bought an iPad described as “in good condition” from a seller whose reviews were 100 percent positive. The seller even gave a one-year warranty and a 30-day return policy. Much to my delight, the iPad arrived days later and looked like new.
I couldn’t find a good deal on an Apple Pencil on eBay or Craigslist, but I could on Facebook Marketplace. I found a seller who lived near me with five star reviews. His profile had a picture of him with his girlfriend and he was very polite in our conversation. I felt comfortable. We met over lunch in the parking lot of a taqueria and I paid him $70 through Venmo.
The last step was to buy a keyboard. Apple sells its own models, but I opted for one from Logitech. I found one on Amazon listed as in “as new” condition, meaning the keyboard was previously purchased and returned with an open box. It was $50, compared to $115 for a new one. When the keyboard arrived it looked flawless and worked perfectly.
The bottom line: Buying second-hand is an art. There is some risk involved, but you can minimize the chance of getting scammed by looking for online sellers with high ratings, generous return policies, and product guarantees. And when it comes to in-person transactions, feel for good vibes — and meet in public. The money saved was worth it to me.
Should you buy a refurbished phone? (Consumer reports)
Before we go…
-
They even compared their army to a losing football team: On Chinese social media, many people took the rare step of mocking their government for not taking military action to stop Chairman Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan. My colleague Li Yuan wrote that the online resistance showed that the nationalism encouraged by the Chinese Communist Party can also turn against the government.
-
Buyer note: People looking for weight loss treatments have plenty of options for telehealth companies. Stat News reported that virtual options can be great, but experts also worry that some sites may be ineffective or produce prescriptions purely for profit.
-
We have feelings about sounds: Twitter’s app now makes swooshing and alien sounds when people refresh their feeds. Input Mag explored why sounds are so important in technology and product design.
Hug for this
Have a look at this hungry goat doing a good job destroying invasive plants. (I’ve shared videos of the goat herd in New York’s Riverside Park before, but I can’t get enough.)
We want to hear from you. Tell us what you think of this newsletter and what else you want us to discover. You can reach us at ontech@CBNewz.
If you have not yet received this newsletter in your inbox, then sign up here. You can also read previous On Tech columns.
