David Drummond (Google Chief Legal Officer) – Internet at Liberty, Central European University (Sep 2010)
Chapters
Abstract
Navigating the Complexities of Internet Freedom and Privacy: The Role of Tech Giants in Upholding Rights and Responsibilities
In an era where the internet plays a pivotal role in shaping public discourse and personal freedoms, tech giants like Google and Facebook find themselves at the forefront of a complex balancing act. This article delves into the intricacies of maintaining transparency and accountability, safeguarding privacy and freedom of expression, and the challenges posed by government regulations and cultural norms. We explore the multifaceted efforts of these companies in promoting user participation, adapting to diverse linguistic and cultural landscapes, and the critical role of collaboration in addressing the evolving landscape of internet freedom and privacy.
Transparency and Accountability in Tech Giants
Key players like Google and Facebook have implemented tools and initiatives like the Global Network Initiative (GNI) to promote transparency in government data requests and the responsible handling of user data. These steps signify a growing recognition of the need for external oversight in the technology sector.
Transparency Tools for Increased Accountability: Google’s transparency tool aims to increase accountability by shedding light on government requests for content removal or user information, encouraging users to hold Google accountable for its actions.
Collaboration with Multi-Stakeholder Organizations: Google’s involvement in initiatives like the Global Network Initiative (GNI) demonstrates its commitment to accountability, seeking advice and feedback from human rights groups, NGOs, and other stakeholders. Facebook is considering joining GNI, recognizing the value of multi-stakeholder collaboration in addressing complex issues related to freedom of expression and privacy.
Privacy as a Complementary Right: Mark Rotenberg from EPIC advocates for a generous view of liberty incorporating privacy and freedom of expression. He emphasizes that these rights can coexist and complement each other.
Balancing Rights vs. Generous View of Liberty: Rotenberg criticizes the tendency to focus on trade-offs between rights, advocating instead for a generous view of liberty that incorporates multiple rights.
Collaboration between Privacy and Freedom of Expression Advocates: Rotenberg expresses hope for future collaboration between privacy and freedom of expression advocates, drawing on their long-standing collaboration in the human rights field.
Balancing Privacy and Free Expression
Facebook, amidst internal debates and external feedback, strives to balance privacy with freedom of expression. The challenge lies in scalability – how to share content moderation decisions transparently without overwhelming users. The representation of diverse user interests, particularly in less democratic regions, remains a critical area of focus.
Internal Debates and Ongoing Refinements: Facebook engages in ongoing internal debates to address concerns raised by external commentators and organizations, continuously seeking input to refine its policies and practices. Balancing transparency with scalability and the need for context remains a challenge, as sharing detailed decisions about specific content can be complex and time-consuming.
Addressing Global Constituencies and Limited Representation: Companies like Google recognize the diverse backgrounds and needs of their global user base, including those in countries with limited democratic representation. Google is exploring ways to support and amplify the voices of users who may not have adequate representation in international governance bodies. Governments hold significant power in shaping internet policies and regulations, and addressing issues of internet freedom requires collective pressure on governments to promote democratic values and open access.
Internet Freedom and Privacy in China: Sharon Holm discusses the challenges of navigating the complex landscape of internet freedom and privacy in China.
The “Rock” and the “Hard Place”: Holm argues that the rock of censorship in China is not as monolithic as it may seem, and that water (symbolizing freedom of expression and privacy) can eventually wear down the rock.
Cross-Sectoral Collaboration: Holm emphasizes the need for cross-sectoral collaboration among different stakeholders to address the challenges of internet freedom and privacy.
Cisco’s Example: Holm uses Cisco as an example of a company that initially dismissed human rights concerns in China, only to later face challenges due to its in-country operations and the expanding state secrets law.
Green Dam as a Convergence of Interests: Holm highlights the Green Dam incident as an example of how a convergence of interests among various stakeholders can lead to pushback against government censorship.
Suggestions for Improvement
Both Google and Facebook are open to stakeholder recommendations to enhance support for users in restrictive regimes. Facebook is exploring a multi-stakeholder process to involve its user base in governance, acknowledging the complexity of user engagement on governance issues.
Multi-Stakeholder Engagement within Facebook: Facebook is considering developing a multi-stakeholder process within its user base to gather broader participation and input in shaping the evolution of its services. While there has been engagement in the governance process, Facebook acknowledges the need to balance the scale of user engagement with the complexity of issues being addressed.
Services in Multiple Languages and Reaching New Audiences
Google’s services are available in over 70 languages, promoting a multilingual internet. Mobile platforms and applications like Facebook are pivotal in bringing new users online, fostering information access, and political engagement.
Community Engagement: Smaller community actively engages in details of service terms, but the goal is to expand this community. Services like Google’s are available in more than 70 languages, promoting multilingual internet and broader participation. New platforms like mobile reach new audiences, bringing people online for the first time.
Challenges with Governments and Global Perspective
Tech giants face the difficult task of balancing global and local concerns. Governments may demand contradictory actions, such as data retention and deletion. Google advocates for global consideration in domestic lawmaking, highlighting the diverse impact of such laws on its services.
Challenges in Dealing with Governments: Google faces pressure from governments with contradictory demands, such as data retention and deletion. Governments represent geographically defined constituents, while Google has a global user base. This can lead to unintended consequences when local laws are applied globally.
Global vs. Local: Google’s core values include free speech as the default, aligning with the American First Amendment view. As the company expanded globally, it recognized different conceptions of free speech and government regulations. Balancing global services with local laws and political challenges is complex and requires careful consideration.
Top-Level Domains for Regulatory Compliance: Google utilizes top-level domains to comply with local laws while maintaining access to information and free speech. Country-specific domains adhere to local regulations, with restricted content still accessible globally.
Geo-Targeted Censorship and Free Speech: Google uses top-level domains to deliver country-specific search results, complying with local laws while preserving global access to information. This approach has been effective for search engines but is challenging for social media platforms with unitary sites.
Challenges in Social Media
Social media platforms grapple with applying country-specific regulations, often conflicting with their goal of fostering global conversations. They must strike a balance between complying with local laws and maintaining their core values.
Social Media’s Struggle: Facebook faces demands from governments to remove content for the entire world, creating a dilemma between preserving free speech and avoiding service disruptions. Blocking specific content is a difficult decision, balancing legal requirements with the platform’s values and users’ rights.
Case-by-Case Decisions: Platforms assess content legality and the impact of blocking on their service values. Decisions to block content, like Nazi content in Germany, are influenced by strong legal and societal norms.
Case-by-Case Decisions: Facebook’s approach involves assessing the legality of content in specific jurisdictions and weighing the impact of blocking actions on the platform’s values and aims. In some cases, entire countries block Facebook due to its inability to meet content removal demands.
The Rock and a Hard Place
Sharon Holm from Human Rights in China discusses the challenges companies face in balancing market access with human rights. She underscores the need for a comprehensive approach and cross-sectoral collaboration.
Green Dam: A Case Study
The Green Dam incident exemplifies successful opposition to government censorship through collaboration among diverse stakeholders, including bloggers, human rights advocates, and companies.
Additional Considerations
– Sensorware and Surveillanceware: Integrated in public facilities, raising privacy concerns.
– Mind Experiments: Different perspectives in examining issues.
– Intellectual Property Rights and Compulsory Licensing: The balance between IPR and public health needs.
– Best Practices in Data Mining: Examples from counterterrorism.
– Collaboration with Civil Society: An ongoing necessity.
GNI’s Role and Future
The GNI, with its framework for guiding companies on government requests and human rights risks, seeks to expand its influence and invites participation in promoting online freedom and privacy.
Reports and Account Closure on Facebook
Facebook’s system for handling account reports aims at fairness, though challenges remain, such as the closure of sensitive accounts and inconsistency in content regulation.
Challenges Faced by Iranian Activists on Facebook:
– Iranian government officials often report activist profiles, leading to automatic account closure due to a high number of reports.
– Difficulty contacting Facebook due to lack of live support and ineffective help sections.
Facebook’s Response to Automated Account Closure:
– Facebook systems do not work on an automated number of reports; reports are reviewed to prevent unwarranted account closures.
– The platform is sensitive to the potential misuse of reporting to suppress freedom of speech.
Issues with Sensitive Account Closure:
– Sensitive accounts, particularly those owning pages, may be closed, resulting in the removal of the associated page.
– Facebook acknowledges the urgency of addressing these issues and is working to improve its responsiveness.
Multiple Language Translations:
– Facebook offers its platform in over 70 languages, but its terms of service are available in only a limited number of languages.
– This poses a problem for users who may not understand the terms they are agreeing to, leading to potential issues if their account is deactivated or content is regulated.
Content Moderation Challenges
Facebook faces the delicate task of differentiating between activism and malicious content, striving for a balance between safety and free speech.
Addressing Language Barriers and Content Accessibility: Facebook is working on translating its terms of service and simplifying its privacy policy through visual aids to bridge language gaps.
Content Moderation Challenges: Facebook faces the challenge of navigating diverse legal and ethical landscapes across borders. They strive to balance compliance with local laws, respect for free speech, and the preservation of user access to information.
In conclusion, tech giants are navigating an increasingly complex web of privacy, free expression, and government regulations. While significant strides have been made in promoting transparency and user participation, challenges remain. The future hinges on collaborative efforts, adaptable policies, and a deep understanding of the global impact of localized decisions.
Notes by: MythicNeutron