Allison White was a college student who expressed her dissatisfaction about the idea of internet-censorship. Alison believes that internet censorship is against everything the internet stands for. Hillary Clinton stated in her Remarks on Internet Freedom speech that the United States wanted to ensure the internet remained a place where social, economic, and political exchanges thrive. We must also protect the Internet itself against plans that could undermine its fundamental qualities. The US government has tried in many cases to pass laws and act that are against Internet freedom. The US authorities would then criticize China and Iran for implementing censorship within their respective countries. The US government may claim to be interested in Internet freedom but in reality, they are hypocritical because in their policies and laws, they can harm Internet freedom. They also have different views about censorship within friendly and strategic countries.
Prior to the Internet’s creation, people had a harder time expressing their ideas to a larger audience. Howard Zinn wrote in Failure to quit that money is important for freedom to speak: “With it, one can purchase prime television time. Without it, one must communicate on the street and be subject to police force.” Since the advent of the Internet and social networks, people are able to voice their opinions without needing to go on TV or on the streets. Everyone with Internet can now express themselves on the Internet. Social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter are a great way to spread opinions across the Internet. Some governments, however, did not enjoy the idea that individuals could express themselves anonymously or freely, and so they developed ways to censor Internet. The governments began blocking sites they didn’t like, establishing firewalls which restricted the freedom of people to navigate the internet, and forcing search engine results to be moderated. In the United States, it seemed as if they were going in the wrong direction. Since the US was founded and the Bill of Rights was created, it has actively promoted freedom of expression. The First Amendment gives everyone the right of free speaking and expressing their opinion. America also followed the intentions of the Founding Fathers when it came to the Internet. In their article, Madeline Bersch & Matthew Wallin state that “the United States plays an important role in promoting circumvention of censorship. It funds programs and tools to advance Internet freedom. It counters Internet censorship.
WordPress.com along with a few other sites shut down on January 18th, 2012 to object the anti piracy bill known as SOPA. The passage of SOPA, however, would result in a huge increase in government censorship. All republican candidates running for president in 2012 opposed the SOPA legislation. Mitt Romney, who spoke during the debates on the SOPA bill, said that it was “far to intrusive, expensive and threatening to the free speech and movement across the Internet.” The bill’s overly broad scope was the main issue.
The bill gave the Attorney General the power to remove sites outside the United States if they violated copyright. It did not, however, take into consideration whether the copyrighted information was being used with the intention to infringe. The bill stated that a “comment box” or “picture upload form” could be infringing. In the event that they uploaded any copyrighted information, the site’s SOPA violation would occur immediately. It was not the end of the problems. The problems with SOPA did not end there. SOPA gives the attorney general power to censor websites that are outside the jurisdiction of the US government. WikiLeaks would be an excellent example of someone abusing their power. This site posts secret information. SOPA forces internet providers, including WikiLeaks to block access for all users. It is a direct benefit to governments who can censor websites that are causing controversy.
According to SOPA’s definition, a website that allows users to upload content or create their own is primarily designed with the intention of enabling copyright infringement. It is enough that the site allows users to post content to violate copyright. So, sites like YouTube and Facebook that allow users post content will fall under the definition ‘Internet websites…dedicated…to theft of U.S. properties’. SOPA allows the government to censor sites that are not under US jurisdiction. It also gives copyright owners the opportunity to sue website owners and operators who have built-in features that allow copyrighted material to be posted. Chris Heald wrote in his Mashable article:
This bill makes us all criminals. If the bill is passed, you can stop using Internet or simply hope that you won’t be targeted by it. This law makes it illegal to use the internet, even if you’re not a criminal. This bill would kill American innovation and the development on the internet, because it’s too risky. This bill is dangerous and toxic, and it should never be supported.
The US authorities never mention friendly states in their speeches despite the fact they are confident that Internet freedom will be achieved in the United States or in strategic countries. The US Government did not mention Internet censorship in friendly or non-regime changing countries. In April 2011, Ugandan officials threatened to shut Twitter and Facebook down because they believed that those two social networks were used to disseminate information about violent riots in response to high food and fuel prices. Social Media may have played a role in the UK’s riots following a fatal police shooting. A member in Parliament demanded that the Blackberry manufacturer turn off their social networking services as they were “helping police outfox rioters.”
In its foreign policy, the United States also emphasizes Internet freedom. Hillary Clinton’s speech from February 15th, 2011, stated that ‘freedom-to-connect’ was an important part of American foreign policy. She gave 25,000,000 dollars to activists and technologists to fight “Internet repression.” The US authorities did not comment on whether the government would provide tools like VPNs or proxy servers to American citizens to allow them to bypass bans imposed by their internet provider. Benjamin Cramer writes in his article that “There will not be ‘Internet in Suitcase’ at home.”
Hillary Clinton spoke out for Internet Freedom in the Middle East, Asia, and specifically on Internet Censorship and Access Blockages. She did not make any mention of Barack Obama’s cyber-attacks against Iran. Barack Obama, in his first month as president following his re-election has launched secretive cyber attacks on Iran’s major nuclear enrichment sites. Attacks were launched in response to perceived Iranian threats. He didn’t comment on the actions he took, which were similar to what Iranian or Chinese government officials do against their citizens.
American companies have also shown hypocrisy. China’s Great Firewall has been praised as one of the best examples of government-led Internet censorship. Randy James writes that the Great Firewall is a system of Internet censorship used by a government. It blocks sites on sensitive topics such as democracy. Tens of thousands government monitors and volunteer citizens regularly check blogs, chat rooms, and emails to make sure there are no issues. Google, Yahoo! Microsoft and Yahoo! The most severe criticism was directed at Yahoo! because it admitted to providing information to government officials that resulted in the imprisonment of a Chinese journalist. They tried to defend their actions. Yahoo! According to Yahoo, they are just following the laws and do not know what the Chinese government is asking for or how this information was handled. Michael Callahan said compliance is a requirement of doing business in China.
Yahoo! Google, too, was guilty of trying to make money by using Chinese censorship. The company launched a censored version of its search engine in China in 2018. The engine, called ‘Dragonfly’ was meant to censor any content that had to do with human rights or democracy. The engine was also supposed to remove any references from banned websites like BBC and Wikipedia. The project was removed after Google employees protested. This raises the question of why American companies would help China implement censorship. It’s possible to assume they will also try to censor the Internet at home if the firms are willing to work with the Chinese government for money.
How can the Internet be Free if the U.S. dominates it? Such dominance has many governments concerned, because the United States could use it to promote their own political agenda. Because of this, government began developing tools to prevent using the Internet, which is dominated mostly by American firms. This led in some cases to the creation of a suitable alternative. The alternatives didn’t always coexist with American sites. Yandex the Russian search engines does not interfere at all with Google. This allows both services to be available to Russian users. Other countries, such Iran, have banned American services.
Authorities have attempted to stop companies that are establishing Internet censorship for profit. The Global Internet Freedom Act, a Republican bill proposed by Christopher Smith, had the main goal of “preventing U.S. firms from assisting regimes that block Internet access.” The legislation was presented to Congress in 2013, but has been largely forgotten since then. No other measures were taken since 2013, but the website of the official Congress shows that “Introduced” is the most recent step.
In January 2011, a group led by Marsha Blackburn of the Republican Party in Congress introduced a Bill called The Internet Freedom Act. The bill was intended to restrict the Federal Communications Commission’s ability to regulate Internet activity, except when it is necessary to protect U.S. security or public safety, or aid or facilitate federal and state law-enforcement agencies. The words “Internet”, “freedom”, and other similar terms should have been removed from the bill as they effectively limit the FCC’s ability to protect internet freedom. When the bill was first proposed, the FCC had been trying to regulate the Internet in order to stop discrimination between Internet providers and users.
Senator Joe Libermann commented that representatives from both the Republican and Democratic Parties proposed the Protecting Cyberspace Act in 2010. The bill was titled Protecting Cyberspace Act and its purpose was to require all Internet providers, Search Services and any other Internet Companies to comply with any order of the government to ‘preserve and assets as well our country and protect the people’. The bill proposed to implement a “kill button” that would shut the Internet down in the event of a danger. The bill was not initially reacted to until after the Egyptian protests. The Egyptian government ordered the five major internet service providers to block online traffic during the protests to stop people spreading information on social media about the protests. Sponsors of the ‘kill button’ dissociated themselves from the actions taken by ‘Middle Eastern tyrants’.
The United States’ actions show hypocrisy in its attitude towards Internet Freedom in other countries, even though they express an interest in Internet Freedom. With the attempt of creating SOPA, which would make posting content on the web impossible, passing several bills that would go against freedom of speech, US companies helping censor the Internet globally and the government being two-faced in their comments towards friendly and strategically-important countries, it is evident that America is hypocritical about Internet freedom. Hillary Clinton’s email to the Times said, “We see people all over the world using technology to voice their concerns and make their voices heard in protesting against injustices.”
