iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Rebecca MacKinnon: Let's Take Back The Internet!

First Posted: 12/ 7/2011 10:44 am Updated: 03/ 5/2012 11:43 pm

In this special year-end collaboration, TED and The Huffington Post are excited to count down 18 great ideas of 2011, featuring the full TEDTalk with original blog posts that we think will shape 2012. Watch, engage and share these groundbreaking ideas as they are unveiled one-by-one, including never-seen-before TEDTalk premieres. Standby, the countdown is underway!
Watch researcher, advocate, and author of Consent of the Networked: The Worldwide Struggle for Internet Freedom Rebecca MacKinnon's TEDTalk above and then explore her thoughts in this companion essay.


In the past five months since I called on the world's Internet users to "take back the Net" at TedGlobal in Edinburgh, the issues I highlighted have grown more obvious and urgent.

In October, the world mourned the death of Steve Jobs. Netizens in China, Cuba, and Iran made comments to the effect that they respected Jobs more than they respected their own leaders. This speaks to a phenomenon I highlighted in my talk: that global information technology companies have become what I call the new "sovereigns of cyberspace." New kinds of global constituencies are forming around certain brands of hardware, software, and virtual platforms created by multinational companies like Apple, Facebook, Google, Twitter. Members of these global constituencies can hold strong and even emotionally-charged loyalties towards technologies that they have integrated into their lives and even identities. These overlapping loyalties and constituencies will increasingly compete and clash with loyalties and identities tied to the physical nation-state.

No government -- not even Western ones claiming to champion Internet freedom -- is equipped to deal with the long-term consequences of this trend. But that doesn't mean that we should leave it to the world's multi-national technology companies to program and engineer the Internet in ways that best suit their commercial interests, or refashion global geopolitics to their own liking, just because so many governments are not getting it right. We the world's netizens must work to make sure that the Internet, the geopolitical system, and the international economy evolve in a way that serves everybody's rights and interests, not just those of the most powerful one percent.

The trends over the past five months have not been good. The sale and use of Western surveillance technology is rampant around the Middle East and North Africa and is aiding repressive governments. The social networking and mobile tools that helped fuel the Arab Spring have not enabled activists to stop a new round of state violence and repression in Egypt. Chinese Internet companies are bowing to government demands to ramp up censorship and surveillance of users. In Russia, digital repression is on the rise in the run-up to parliamentary and presidential elections.

In the democratic West, many technical and regulatory trends are moving in the wrong direction. Take for instance the proposed legislation now before the U.S. Congress that would effectively erect a "Great Firewall of America" in the name of protecting intellectual property. Bills now under consideration by the Canadian parliament would enable more aggressive online spying in the name of fighting crime and terror. The recent experiences with arrest and confiscation of property by members of the Occupy Movement have brought home to a new generation of activists just how vulnerable citizens who believe they are merely exercising their first amendment rights can be to abuses of government power via digital networks and devices.

As I pointed out in Edinburgh in July, and as I argue in my forthcoming book, Consent of the Networked, we must not let our excitement about new technologies blind us to the reality that all governments, powerful corporations seeking market dominance, and all kinds of other groups with resources and technical prowess can be expected to use digital networks to obtain and maintain power whenever the opportunity presents itself.

In the democratic West, the road to hell is often paved with a combination of good intentions and the pursuit of profits. The potential for the abuse of power via digital networks -- upon which we citizens now depend for nearly everything including our politics -- is one of the most insidious threats to democracy in the Internet age. If citizens and leaders of democracies cannot commit to guard against and prevent such abuses, the prospects for aspiring and fragile democracies in Tunisia and Egypt, let alone hopes for the future in places like Iran and China, look much less bright in the long run.

It is at the emergent digital intersection between corporate and political power where the most subtle and insidious threat to democracy lies. Fighting this threat requires a much broader and deeper global Internet freedom movement. If it had not been for decades of activism, governments would never have done the right thing on environmental and labor policy. Without global human rights, labor, and environmental movements, companies would still be hiring ten-year-olds as a matter of course and poisoning our groundwater without batting an eyelid. Similarly, we cannot assume that the Internet will evolve in the citizen's favor without strong and sustained activism by people who view themselves not as passive "users" but as citizens of the Internet.

Netizens of the world, unite! The time has come to occupy the Net. Existing political and legal frameworks have so far proven incapable of preventing and constraining the abuse of digital power. Democratic societies have yet to conceive, let alone enact, the political innovations needed to ensure that government and technology really do serve the world's people -- and not the other way around. We have no time to lose.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST TECH

jQuery(function($) { $('#ad_sharebox_260x60').prepend(''); }); In this special year-end collaboration, TED and The Huffington Post are excited to count down 18 great ideas of 2011, featur...
jQuery(function($) { $('#ad_sharebox_260x60').prepend(''); }); In this special year-end collaboration, TED and The Huffington Post are excited to count down 18 great ideas of 2011, featur...
Filed by Beth Davidz  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 139
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (5 total)
05:57 PM on 12/22/2011
I tried posting a comment earlier here that was not nasty but never appeared. Just wanted to point out that it would be nice if some of the many flaws with the Internet could be fixed. Like creating a secure email system that you could really feel secure that the sender was who it appears to be. And creating a system that does not have to be continually patched for security reasons.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
l monroe
I question authority.
09:32 PM on 12/22/2011
I agree. The problem is for every move there is a counter move. Packets can be spoofed, Back doors put in by the developers to be used for diagnostic purposes are discovered and havoc ensues. Congress made all Americans vulnerable by outlawing real security back in 2002(read Patriot Act). Good Luck!
04:33 PM on 12/22/2011
It would seem to me at some point a revamp of the Internet would be needed to correct some of the many flaws. Maybe my “want list” is much tougher than I realize but the current system of constantly trying to patch security holes does not seem like a great solution. Email is pretty much worthless for conducting many aspects of business because you can’t trust the email is really from the indicated sender. When you forward on an email you can edit it anyway you want to and the recipient does not know. So now businesses have to pay extra for secure email solutions but that is not compatible with everyone’s email.

Blocking out the all the spam and viruses has come to be way more costly and complicated than it should be. Someone can now steal from you from across the world without coming anywhere near you without you knowing it is going on.
12:56 PM on 12/13/2011
Everyday I run my security scan and everyday I have more tracking cookies. Sometimes I have Trojans. My program says it has fixed the unwanted Trojans and tracking cookies, but the next day I scan and they are back with even more tracking cookies.

The subjects in my emails show up beside my emails on google.

They should have to get legal permission to track people, from a judge, and prove the people need to be tracked, just like they do with a phone. Or do they still do it with a phone?

I really don't mind if I am shopping for a certain item and it shows up on the next websites I go to. But I do mind that my mail is being spied on, whether it is for business or for spying. I do mind if they keep lists of the websites I go to.

I don't mind if they track those who visit pedophile pages and violent porn.
12:13 PM on 12/08/2011
Like balanced trade and derivatives reform, most of the people do not understand what is at stake. Whether someone with a good idea can market that idea against a titan like Google will define business (i.e., Net Neutrality). We have seen what free communications can accomplish in the Middle East. China is fully vested in thought control. We need to get this right before it's too late.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Chaguru
10:52 AM on 12/08/2011
Freedom of speech is overrated :p
09:51 AM on 12/08/2011
People pay to go on retreats, silence and meditation, no electronic devices, just to stay away from being connected all the time.
A little common sense would go a long way. We can minimize the effects of lack of privacy. We can monitor ourselves not to go to certain sites, we can stay away from facebook, twitter, and all the other things that give away too much personal info. There's a price to pay for everything, however, using our critical thinking skills to protect ourselves is essential.
09:35 AM on 12/08/2011
THE REVOLUTION WILL NOT BE DIGITZED ! THE REVOLUTION WILL NOT BE DIGITIZED !
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Aneesia
09:08 AM on 12/08/2011
The Internet is mined by corporations for personal data and preferences, the government uses it to look for suspects(?), and for tax evaders etc. We should have privacy protection for the citizens from searches that do not have a warrant, and if anyone uses our personal data without permission...they should be prosecutable....including the government !
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
08:57 AM on 12/08/2011
forget online.
we are not free if we are in debt.
to the tune of $15 trillion.
you can thank congress.
10:22 AM on 12/08/2011
There will be more corruption and more debt if we are not free online.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
ChicagoBob
Save the Earth-It's the only planet with chocolate
05:57 AM on 12/08/2011
Powerful people have been the enemies of freedom since the dawn of time, with one major exception, our Founding Fathers.

We can save our freedoms but only if we act quickly. The corporations have the media, a good percentage of congress, and the Supreme Court pretty much controlled. The next few elections are still open to educated choice. After that, maybe not.
lastpost
see biography
05:49 AM on 12/08/2011
"Netizens of the world, unite!"
If a politician will not give an undertaking, that their personal ideology and understanding of reality contains a realisation, that a freeweb is the evolutionary way forward for humankind. As well as demonstrating that same belief in all pertinent circumstances. Then they reveal themselves as the threat to democracy, development, progress and survival of the species, they undoubtedly are. The 1% cannot function with the 99% incarcerated. The more bars forged the more the imprisonment becomes obvious, and the greater rebellion ferments. Not even a deity claims the right to poison the tree of the fruit of knowledge.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Richard Bartholomew
My micro-bio isn't empty.
03:47 AM on 12/08/2011
'Netizens in China, Cuba, and Iran made comments to the effect that they respected Jobs more than they respected their own leaders.'

'I believe I have an appointment at nine?', enquired Netizen 4Q timidly. The receptionist smiled cheerily and consulted her appointment calendar. A few moments later she looked up again.

'Yes, 4Q, you're therapist is expecting you,' she said reassuringly, 'please report to room 101. It's in subbasement three, all the way at the end of the corridor on the left.'
ajwriter
Healthy equilibrium, healthy democracy
02:13 AM on 12/08/2011
Sure, but anything you propose has to start with the basic value of privacy, which unfortunately has eroded in recent decades.

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ram Samudrala
Give more to the world than what I take from it
01:42 AM on 12/08/2011
I will admit to being a bit of technoelitist here but way back before AOL literally came online (in 1993) and the broader society started paying attention to the Internet and the Web, these issues were debated furiously. At that point I realised the function of anonymity and cryptography have always served a purpose in protecting the freedoms of humans and us going digital only made it even more necessary to protect avenues for varying levels of anonymity and varying levels of cryptographic encryption (including steganography).

Reduce anonymity and crytography to a cookie cutter solution, and the result will be the arbitrary ability of those who know more to engineer backdoors. While the initial learning curve for some of the basic algorithms involved in these technologies is a bit steep, I'd encourage anyone who values their privacy to learn more and use them freely.

(And anonymity and steganography is best masked by a public face that appears "normal".)
12:41 AM on 12/08/2011
The West is far removed from being democratic. Even the UK. If we were democratic we would still have capital punishment and not be politically in Europe and not be fighting wars in foreign countries. Even the UN is not a democratic organisation.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
firewired
Compared to what?
06:22 PM on 05/16/2012
America is a democratic republic.. Is there ANY country that is democratic in your mind?