The Freedom of the Net Remains in a Declining Trend Around the World

1. The Freedom of the Net Remains in a Declining Trend around the World Freedom House – the nonpartisan NGO that engages in research and advocacy on democracy, political freedom, and human rights – recently released its newest overview of the state of freedom on the Internet around the world. I’m a Board member at Freedom House, so this is something I’m quite focused on, and the topic is also important to me in the context of my work more broadly. It’s vital that the Net remains free, and it’s something that all of us ought to be mindful and even vigilant about. The Net has developed rather quickly into an asset that many of us have come to rely on, much like the air that we breath. The bad news, as this newest Freedom House Report on Freedom on the Net determined, is that Internet freedom has declined once again on a global basis for the sixth consecutive year. Only 14 countries worldwide registered overall improvements, and these were often modest. More governments than ever are “targeting social media and communication apps as a means of halting the rapid dissemination of information, particularly during anti- government protests.” Of the 65 countries assessed, governments in 24 of these impeded access to social media and communication tools, up considerably from 15 the year before. In 15 countries, governments even temporarily shut down access to the entire Internet or mobile phone networks. Some governments are also interfering with quick and secure voice communication and messaging apps such as WhatsApp and Telegram. These apps are singled out for blocking largely due to the feature of encryption, which protects communications between users from being read and viewed by third parties. Users in some countries were jailed for simply “liking” offending material on Facebook, or for not denouncing critical messages sent to them by others. Several governments have passed new laws that limit privacy and authorize broad surveillance. This trend was present in both democratic and nondemocratic countries, often leading to debates about the extent to which governments should have backdoor access to encrypted communications. The most worrisome examples were observed in authoritarian countries, where governments used antiterrorism laws to prosecute users for simply writing about democracy, religion, or human rights. Andrewprozes | http://www.andrewprozes.com

2. While I am a very strong proponent of freedom of the Net, the proliferation of false stories and intrusion by foreign parties in the recent US elections, as the CIA has asserted, are very troubling trends, which may very well require some restrictions and checks simply in order to preserve the integrity of the election process. These are of course two separate issues: false stories are challenges to free speech, while the Russian intrusion into the US elections was mainly a problem of cyber espionage, data privacy and apparently even of subversion. Both issues raise the question: how to deal with these new issues in our new and now digitized political world? While it admittedly may be unrealistic to restrict info like pilfered DNC emails once they are in the public domain, we clearly need better protection of sensitive data and perhaps consideration of retaliation against Russia to stop or at least deter future interference in democratic elections. The Worst Offenders Of the 65 countries assessed by Freedom House researchers, 34 have been on a negative trajectory since June 2015. The steepest declines were in Uganda, Bangladesh, Cambodia, Ecuador, and Libya. China was the year’s worst abuser of Internet freedom. The Chinese government’s crackdown on free expression under President Xi Jinping’s “information security” policy is taking its toll on the digital activists who have traditionally fought against censorship and surveillance. Since June 2015, police in a “remarkable 38 countries” (Freedom House emphasis) arrested individuals for their activities on social media, compared with 21 countries where people were arrested for content published on news sites or blogs. Military courts in Thailand issued very long sentences involving Facebook posts that were deemed critical of the monarchy. Such punishments tend to cause people to censor themselves, robbing digital technology of its potential for galvanizing desirable change. According to the report, “World leaders proved particularly sensitive to altered images of themselves circulating on social media. In Egypt, a photo depicting President Abdel Fattah al- Sisi with Mickey Mouse ears resulted in a three-year prison term for the 22-year-old student who posted it on Facebook.” In March 2016, about a billion people received a huge boost in their cybersecurity when Facebook rolled out end-to-end encryption for all WhatsApp users. This is unfortunately of little solace to users in countries that are less than free. Telecommunications companies operating in authoritarian environments have few choices. They must either comply with state demands or leave the market. Otherwise they risk blocking, closure, or imprisonment of their local staff. SMS authentication has proven to be one of the weakest links in some encrypted apps, leading companies and activists to recommend that SMS authentication be turned off in favor of code- generator apps. Kazakhstan on the other hand has passed a law requiring users and providers to install a “national security certificate” on all devices. If this method is successfully implemented, Andrewprozes | http://www.andrewprozes.com

3. repressive countries around the world will take this as their cue for the circumvention of encryption, ostensibly in the name of national security. There are many examples in the Freedom of the Net report that clearly show how useful of a tool the Internet is, used as it is by citizens of many countries to fight for their rights, demand accountability, and amplify marginalized voices. This is why authoritarian governments are intensifying their efforts to impose control. It’s also why democratic societies have to continue to defend Internet freedom internationally, while upholding high standards at home. Which Countries Experienced the Biggest Declines? Russia is one of countries with most substantial five-year declines on the Freedom on the Net index, along with Ukraine, Venezuela, Turkey and Ethiopia. Russia’s rating declined by 3 points during the past year. The Russian government continued to erode user rights, imprisoning social media users. Online activists have experienced violence and cyberattacks. The authorities have repeatedly suppressed critical expression, blocking content critical of Russia’s annexation of Crimea and involvement in the conflict in the Eastern region of Ukraine. Officials continued to undermine citizens’ privacy and security online, passing laws that grant authorities greater legal access to personal data and more power over tech companies. Recent localization rules may make it easier for the Russian government to access Internet users’ information. A Russian court’s decision to block LinkedIn (over data localization requirements) is also very disturbing. Russian authorities censor a wide range of topics online, most often under the pretext of anti- extremism measures. The authorities have also pressured international platforms, such as Wikipedia, into removing select pages, which in some instances and circumstances is perfectly justified, at least in my opinion. For example, when peoples’ lives are endangered. Online outlets are subjected to political and economic pressure to publish Kremlin-friendly content, while the government actively manipulates public opinion through state-controlled media and paid commentators. A number of independent online media outlets in Russia have been forced to shut down over the past two years because of increasing pressure from the government. The authorities have taken steps to undermine the security of encrypted communications. A law was passed in July 2016 compelling encryption providers to grant access to authorities, a move that’s likely to expose more netizens to legal sanctions for their activities online. Russia has also adopted a set of laws and other acts that, coupled with repressive law enforcement and judicial systems, have, in a combined fashion, eroded freedom of expression. Even the Best Performers are not Without Blemishes Freedom House analysts determined that the United States continues to be ranked as free, with a score of 18 for last year on a scale of 0-100 (0= most free, while 100 = less free). Andrewprozes | http://www.andrewprozes.com

4. Internet Freedom in the US improved slightly thanks to the USA FREEDOM Act, which limits the bulk collection of phone records of Americans and established other privacy protections. Even so, mass surveillance targeting foreign citizens continues, and some information about American citizens still gets swept up in the process. The report says online media outlets and journalists in the US face increased pressure, both financially and politically, and that future news coverage may be adversely impacted by this. Donald Trump – the winner of the 2016 presidential race – repeatedly prevented journalists, (including several from online outlets) from attending press briefings in retribution for their critical coverage of his campaign. The speed, affordability and availability of American broadband networks have fallen behind those of several other developed countries. These problems constitute barriers for senior citizens, people in rural areas, and low-income households. At the same time, the telecoms industry has trended towards consolidation, which may limit consumer choice. Even content removal at the request of law enforcement agencies has been seen in the United States at times. The privacy of NGOs, companies, government agencies and individual users is threatened by a growing number of cyberattacks initiated by both domestic and international actors. Some of these even aimed to subvert the electoral process in the United States during 2016, which is a theme that wasn’t very prominent yet at the time the Freedom House report was compiled. There are suggestions that America’s NSA may have engaged in cyberattacks, including a project to develop malware targeting users of Tor, a tool that enables people to communicate anonymously online. The future of the right to strong encryption remains up in the air in the US, and has yet to be conclusively decided. Estonia continues to be one of the most digitally advanced countries in the world, and is often seen as a poster child of IT development. Estonia ranks up at the top of the Freedom House assessment of Internet Freedom, with a score of 6/100. But even “star pupils” can experience problems. For example: in June 2015, the European Court of Human Rights upheld an Estonian Supreme Court decision from 2009, stating that content hosts may be held legally liable for third- party comments made on their websites. Since then, major online media publications have removed the functionality for anonymous comments on their websites and continued active moderation to limit hate speech. On the one hand, these measures have had the result of eliminating provocative statements by hotheaded members of the public at large and also some postings that seem to have come from what are apparently government-sponsored circles abroad that are hostile to Estonia. Unfortunately, what has also happened as “collateral damage” is that a previously vibrant community of domestic commentators has now been nearly silenced. The number of commentaries from members of the public has dropped drastically, and a unique forum for discourse on the level of the street has been dramatically dampened. “Freedom on the Net” is a comprehensive study of Internet freedom in 65 countries around the globe, covering 88 percent of the world’s Internet users. It tracks improvements and declines in governments’ policies and practices each year. The countries included in the study are selected to Andrewprozes | http://www.andrewprozes.com

5. represent diverse geographical regions and types of polity. The Freedom House report referred to here, the seventh in its series, focuses primarily on developments that occurred between June 2015 and May 2016. More than 70 researchers, nearly all based in the countries they analyzed, contributed to the project by examining laws and practices relevant to the Internet, testing the accessibility of select websites, and interviewing a wide range of sources. Andrewprozes | http://www.andrewprozes.com