Censorship, Technology & Free Speech

Over the past year I’ve written pretty regularly on the value I see in technology as a tool to promote free speech.  Anyone who’s read my thoughts on the subject recognizes that I am clearly not without my biases or presumptive beliefs on the issue.  My beliefs aside, the past year’s ongoing saga of public unrest, contrasted by technological repression is obviously deserving of attention.  New technologies that allow individuals to communicate, motivate and organize with others have become a clear target of repression in the past year and the trend suggests this form of repression isn’t due to vanish any time soon.

Most recently Twitter (lauded by some as an essential tool throughout the year’s political uprisings) has announced a new censorship policy triggering rage across the blogosphere just days after changes in privacy policy from several tech companies and the recent action against SOPA and PIPA.  There is argument by some that the new policy from Twitter allows for greater awareness of government repression and provided tools for the tech savvy to circumvent censorship.  Certainly those competent in these technologies will find a way to be heard, as they always do, but how important are the voices of the technological elite contrasted with those of your average user?  Perhaps then these changes in policy are positive forces in the push toward transparency, but what does the fact that this discussion is occurring now amid so much unrest have to say about relationships between businesses and government repression?

For those interested in the interplay between technology and governance, these are exciting times.  The activity against SOPA and PIPA was relatively unprecedented.  Contrary to arguments from some that the responses to these legislations were fueled by businesses in the tech industry, or by people attempting to protect their right to piracy, the reactions were widespread and diverse.  Here and there news organizations have drawn attention to the impact of internet activists and the potential they present for social change.  Most recently some on Reddit have delved into a new experiment in essentially crowdsourcing concepts of legislation.  This is an easy idea to love if you’re one of those believers (like yours truly) in the the internet as a boon to democracy, yet it is also impressively outlandish.

These recent events raise critical questions for those in the business of technology as well as those who govern us.  There’s been argument over what right if any people have to the internet, yet ultimately a discussion of rights is in part irrelevant.  When, if ever, is a business responsible for more than that business’ bottom line? Just a few years ago we wouldn’t have been asking these sorts of questions about the internet, but it appears clear at the moment that in one way or another this technology has bolstered the ability of individuals to speak out publicly against repression.  In many spheres of business this question offers a foregone conclusion.  Yet perhaps in internet technologies the idea of corporate ethics and responsibility might find renewed vigor?