Days after two British men were sentenced to four years in prison for using Facebook to incite disorder that never materialized, Glenn Greenwald writes fluently and concisely about the efforts of governments to maintain power and order by controlling the flow of information and communication online. —ARK
Glenn Greenwald at Salon:
The free flow of information and communications enabled by new technologies—as protest movements in the Middle East and a wave of serious leaks over the last year have demonstrated—is a uniquely potent weapon in challenging entrenched government power and other powerful factions. And that is precisely why those in power—those devoted to preservation of the prevailing social order—are so increasingly fixated on seizing control of it and snuffing out its potential for subverting that order: they are well aware of, and are petrified by, its power, and want to ensure that the ability to dictate how it is used, and toward what ends, remains exclusively in their hands.
The Western World has long righteously denounced China for its attempts to control the Internet as a means of maintaining social order. It even more vocally condemned Arab regimes such as the one in Egypt for shutting down Internet and cell phone service in order to disrupts protests.
But, in the wake of recent riots in London and throughout Britain—a serious upheaval to be sure, but far less disruptive than what happened in the Middle East this year, or what happens routinely in China—the instant reaction of Prime Minister David Cameron was a scheme to force telecoms to allow his government the power to limit the use of Internet and social networking sites. Earlier this week, when San Francisco residents gathered in the BART subway system to protest the shooting by BART police of a 45-year-old man, city officials shut down underground cell phone service entirely for hours; that, in turn, led to hacking reprisals against BART by the hacker collective known as “Anonymous.” As the San-Fransisco-based Electronic Frontier Foundation put it on its website: “BART officials are showing themselves to be of a mind with the former president of Egypt, Hosni Mubarak.” Those efforts in Britain and San Fransisco are obviously not yet on the same scale as those in other places, but it illustrates how authorities react to social disorder: with an instinctive desire to control communication technologies and the flow of information.
Read more
The IRS and the Real Scandal
Email 
Print
Share
Email to a friend
Newsletter 
Like Us
Follow Us
Get Our Feed
By Cliff Carson, August 21, 2011 at 7:32 pm Link to this comment
Something I wrote about this in 2007.
On December 11th, 2007, Kevin Martin plans to eliminate on December 11th, the FCC regulation that stops Conglomerate ownership of a Newspaper, a Radio Station, and/or a Television Station in the same City. This is a protection for the public from a Media that could be utilized, by those like Bush and his Cronies; to subject the area public with saturated 24/7 propaganda, spun news, and likely censorship. Imagine that if all the news and information you could get came from one source, could you ever be sure of just what exactly was going on? For an illustrative scenario read the book 1984 by George Orwell.
They are also after the Internet. See, the Bush appointee Kevin Martin(and his Big Business Corporate Friends) would have you believe that the Internet is going to crash and at that time you will lose your Internet and only if you give it away to them now, can it be saved.
The FCC underlying message is this: “By Internet Users taking control of their Internet, they are straining the net to its top limit. The only way to save the Internet from the coming “exaflood”, as Martin proposes (as reported to USA), is to pay usage money and Federal Dollars to the likes of AT&T and let them gut Net Neutrality protections so they can fix the problem. Ever wonder how the Internet got to its current level without Government control? Do you think the Net would be so successful if it had been managed by the Government all along? Ok, Ok, that was a dumb question.
Report thisJust what might be the real problem? Being an old retired Engineering type I recall problem solving being accomplished by the “Peel the Onion Exercise”.
Works like this: Peel the first layer of the onion and see what is revealed. I believe that if you peel off that first layer you will find who will benefit from the proposed FCC change. See what I’m saying? It ain’t you is it? Yep, there, laid bare, is the real winner- Corporate control of the Media. Agree?
Peel the next layer and see a developing incestuous relationship between Government and Corporate America. Let’s see, 1+1=Control +Power, Ok now we’re in trouble. Are we about to lose our Freedoms, maybe our Democracy? What is freedom of the press worth to you? I submit it is worth everything you ever had and everything you ever would have.
By joey1984, August 21, 2011 at 3:18 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Freedom of Speech.
Report thisFreedom of Assembly.
The right to privacy.
Many of our forefathers shed blood and gave their lives to protect not only our homeland but these fundamental rights. According to the founders of this country and its Constitution the bill of rights were God given - not privileges. We live in difficult times but we the people (Left-Right- Middle) must stand together to protect the things that are precious and make our country great.
By Michael Blincoe, August 21, 2011 at 12:08 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Just to point out, it was NOT city officials who shut down cell phone service in BART. BART did that on its own without consulting anybody, including emergency service personnel. In fact, some of those city officials are calling for legislative action to prevent such nonsense from happening in the future, while most are at least calling for an investigation into the situation, with the onus on BART to explain itself.
Report thisBy JMD, August 20, 2011 at 3:41 pm Link to this comment
Glenn Greenwald: 8/20/2011
Report this“And that is precisely why those in power -
those devoted to preservation of the prevailing social order - are so increasingly fixated on seizing control of it and snuffing out its potential for subverting that order:they are well aware of,and are petrified by,its power,and want to ensure that the ability to dictate how it is used,and toward what ends,remains exclusively in their hands.”
Uncanny,this could have been what was said
when documenting and Institutionalizing slavery.
Thanking you for this opportunity to comment-
James M. deLaurier