Online Oppression: Censored States and Social Media

In 2006, the France-based international media organisation, Reporters Without Borders (RWB), released a detailed list of what it calls the ‘Enemies of the Internet’.

On this list, RWB stated that “all of these countries mark themselves out not just for their capacity to censor news and information online but also for their almost systematic repression of internet users.”

A second list, published a year later, also contains countries that are under watch or surveillance by their governments.

Both lists are updated every year and currently there are no less than nine listed countries in ‘enemies of the internet’ (China, Syria and Cuba et al), and 16 in ‘under surveillance’, where France and Australia can be found listed alongside the likes of Russia and Egypt.

The United States is yet to be included, though the United Kingdom, if you are interested, features on neither list, though by consulting the 2013 World Press Freedom Index, you can find it nestled comfortably in 29^th place, just one lower than in 2012.

With however, the Government’s recent persecution of The Guardian (where it threatened the newspaper with judicial proceedings if it continued to report on the UK’s surveillance practices), it is expected that the country may well drop below 30^th position in 2014.

But are there any enemies of the internet currently found on social media?

Possibly without much surprise, there are several leaders, governments and influential people currently found on social media, especially accounts belonging to the communist governments of North Korea and Cuba.

Though both countries hold rank as the most oppressive in the world (found 178^th and 171^st respectively on the World Press Freedom Index), the profile of ex-president, Fidel Castro, can be found on Twitter, as can Uriminzokkiri, North Korea’s central news and propaganda agency.

It could be said that Castro (boasting more followers than brother and President, Raul), has had a seemingly uncomplicated history on the microblogging service, though the same cannot be said for North Korea as earlier in 2013, Uriminzokkiri was subject to a mass hack by Anonymous, after the hackers stole 15,000 user passwords belonging to the state.

It is here where we are able to find the fringes of North Korea’s power, as although it holds both a terrible and terrifying grip on its people, the internet is something that the government, much like space exploration, does not understand and is not able to control outside of its borders.

In fact, Uriminzokkiri’s Flickr account never recovered.

If oppressive regimes have faced backlash from the freer world, have they had to hush down resistance in their own countries?

The most interesting example of ‘some more equal than others’, is the case of Chinese news agency, Xinhua.

Though social media sites such as Facebook, YouTube and Twitter are banned in China, Xinhua has been tweeting stories in English since 2009 (seemingly out of Beijing, where it cannot be legally accessed), and did so relatively peacefully until the hypocrisy was brought into question by Chinese media in 2012.

Blogger Anthony Tao wrote on the Beijing Cream:

“It does seem slightly ironic for a government agency to be using Twitter when none of its people, technically, are allowed to.

“In China a law is only a law if you don’t know how to get away with breaking it.”

The story was widely covered by Chinese media and renewed calls for the dismantling of the Great Firewall of China were brought into focus. Despite the plea, no such action has been taken and Xinhua continues to tweet to this day.

Could we see a day when social media is available to all in the world?

Although the prospect is certainly appetising, as of yet there is no indication that China will legally allow its citizens to access social media. As for North Korea, it is yet to allow its citizens on the internet, though Google has pledged its case to the country.

Currently Mark Zuckerberg is unveiling great plans where there will be internet (and Facebook) access for the whole world via his group, internet.org.

Currently, only one-third of the world has internet access, though speaking on his Facebook timeline, it is something that the CEO of Facebook plans to change:

“There are huge barriers in developing countries to connecting and joining the knowledge economy.

“Internet.org brings together a global partnership that will work to overcome these challenges, including making internet access available to those who cannot currently afford it.”

With Zuckerberg’s plans already under fire however, it is clear that ‘internet for all’ is only meant for those in economic depravity, and not those individuals who are also forced to exist under strict totalitarian and authoritarian laws.

Until Facebook and Twitter are able to hold a significant sway in those critical countries (as they are basically irrelevant in some), the future looks dim, though there is somewhere, a soft line of light available to them, when and if they are ready to grasp it.