Toomey 1 Investigating the Impact of Social Media on Internet Regulation and Censorship Kathleen L.

Toomey University of Idaho Moscow, ID 83843 Toom4205@vandals.uidaho.edu Abstract Toomey investigates the role of the U.S. government in helping global netizens (Internet + citizen) use social media to circumvent offshore government regulation and censorship of the Internet. She questions the growing impact of social media on world politics by grass roots organizations and the impact this t questionable backlash U.S. offshore programs to help implement the growing prominence of social media use for more than information gathering Internet of information exposure to deliberate deployment of information meant to fuel Keywords Internet censorship; Internet regulation; Internet law; hacking; social media; human rights; national security; CISPA; Executive Order 2013 1. Introduction U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, in early 2010 presented her address Remarks on Internet Freedom leaving little doubt the United States intended to promote offshore cyber-activism. Clinton stated in her speech at the Newseum, museum of news, in Washington DC: We are also supporting the development of new tools that enable citizens to exercise their rights of free expression by circumventing politically motivated censorship. We are providing funds to groups around the world to make sure that those tools get to the people who need them in local languages, and with the training they need to access the internet safely. The United States has been assisting in these efforts for some time, with a focus on implementing these programs as efficiently and effectively as possible. [1]. Clinton indicated the State Department was already working with more than 40 countries helping these global netizens (internet + citizen) silenced by oppressive governments increase their understanding and use of the Internet for circumventing government regulation and censorship. She went on to confirm, Both the American people and nations that censor the internet should understand that our government is committed to helping promote internet freedom. [1]. Despite Clintons stated intentions; there has been a counter actions taking place in opposition to the accepted premise and implementation of her goals [2]. US Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano has been a proponent all along for increased federal protection on the Internet against the rise of Internet hackers. Napolitano started her campaign even before Clinton made her 2010 remarks and escalated her commitment in 2011 and 2012 with the push for a Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) [3]. Napolitano in January of 2013 made another attempt at scaring the public and reviving her push to have Congress pass legislation allowing the government greater control over the Internet.

Toomey 2 Napolitano issued the warning Thursday, claiming that inaction could result in a cyber 9/11 attack that could knock out water, electricity and gas, causing destruction similar to that left behind by Hurricane Sandy. [3]. Napolitanos warning has validity in that utility operations are vital U.S. infrastructure controlled by SCADA [4] systems but are not on isolated networks leaving these systems very vulnerable to possible internet hacker attack. SCADA is only one sector of the U.S. Internet security issue. In his 2013 State of the Union address President Barack Obama stated: We know hackers steal peoples identities and infiltrate private e-mails. We know foreign countries and companies swipe our corporate secrets. [5, 6]. He goes on to say: Now our enemies are also seeking the abilities to sabotage our power grid, our financial institutions, our air traffic control systems. [5, 6]. Ray Suarez of PBS Newshour in an interview with Dmitri Alperovitch, co-founder of CrowdStrike a security technology company focused on helping enterprises and governments protect their intellectual properties, gave the following information: Over the past six months the websites of American banks have repeatedly been attacked reportedly by Iran. In the last few weeks, major U.S. media companies, The New York Times Bloomberg News, The Wall Street Journal, and the Washington Post, have all said the Chinese are behind sustained hacking attempts on them. [6] Napolitano demonstrates good reason to hold her ground and insist an increased federal regulation of the Internet, and push for legislation of the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) [3]. Congress failure to pass the Cybersecurity legislation in 2012 prompted President Barrack Obama to begin drafting an Executive Order. That order was announced at the 2013 State of the Union Speech to issue an Executive Order -- Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity [7]. Opponents of the Executive Order argue the U.S. government already has considerable legal means for Internet regulation lending credence to congress reluctance to legislate such a measure [3]. Dmitri Alperovitch in conversation with Ray Suarez went on to exclaim the government is not going far enough saying: What we need is for the government to say, we're going to share information about attackers. That's good, but ultimately we're going to go after the attackers to stop them, because if we don't remove them from the battlefield, their techniques are going to get better, their capabilities will ultimately exceed your defenses, and they will ultimately penetrate you and do real damage. And that is what's not happening today, or at least a discussion about that is not happening. [7]. President Obamas Executive Order brings the U.S. into closer regulator alignment with other countries where authoritarian leaders are not politically accountable to their citizens in the same manner as a democratic form of government. The role of the U.S. government looks to be split and may even be getting some backlash from its earlier 2010 Clinton State Department program of helping offshore netizens circumvent their authoritarian governments.

Toomey 3 News releases in offshore authoritarian countries report social media gaining prominence as a means to instigate and promote civil disobedience in loosely held groups and finally escalating into full fledge revolts. Several prominent grass-roots revolts were brought about by the use of Internet social media sites. The first uprising garnering world attention using this phenomenon of extensive use of social media networks by a grass-roots front was the Arab Spring revolt in the spring of 2012. This revolutionary uprising illustrates over similar revolutionary occurrences supported by the Internet via the use of Social Media transmission going around government policy and censorship. Because the technology accessible by individuals is so far removed from the epicenter of the political and/or socio-economics of the situation and has such far reaching fingers of individualism the power of the governing forces are at a loss to control the empowerment of the individual netizen (internet + citizen). Toomey explores this global rebalancing effect by individuals at a grass roots level to circumvent the long held power of government control.

This will be a much truer test of the Internets power because there are no big tech companies lining up with the citizen grass-roots groups, said Daniel G. Newman, president of MapLight, a nonpartisan research organization in berleley that tracks the influence of [3]. ??? suggests a byproduct of the US government to initiate tighter Internet regulation will be further suppression of already at risk civil liberties. Though the executive order does not use the term social media it does imply such I propose in this paper to take a look at social media sites increase in popularity as a means to circumvent government regulation. This phenomenon of using social media is most noticeable in foreign countries with governmental regimes with far less interest [ ].

Why should we be concerned about SM or Can SM be control in the same way Why is hacking not a threat in Iran etc. but SM plays such a huge role in their seeking of civil liberties. How or does cybersecutity and SM have any connection

2. Method How I conducted my study I research the news files and other white papers on the historical such as Abrab Spring making note of the circumstances that caused these events to happen and the end result of these circumstances

Toomey 4 I intialy began my investigation into offshore cyber-activism will shed light on where we in the US might be headed. The initial process of investigation incorporated was to My overall method of attach for this paper has been to look at the big picture pertaining to the Internet flow of information or the lack thereof due to proposed government regulations. Due to the media conversations of late about reopening the 2011 my first inclination is to investigate internet regulation policies and how they are affecting the information flow on the World Wide Web. In the process of doing a peer reviewed search of articles pertaining to this topic I found myself focusing more on the issues of Internet censorship. that netizens were circumventing in order to establish a following. I did my secondary peer reviewed search aimed at the Social media usage of binding together dispersed followers of a movement

Upon 3. Results Raw data tables and charts and in literature review and incorporate research mentioned into

4. Analysis Take stuff in 5. Discussion Why does this matter For whom does it matter If they are hacking us are we in turn hacking into their systems? Are third world country SM by circumventing their government also circumventing ours too Are we as indivudals way behind the curve in making full use of the internet as our wrould wide counterparts are doing. a repercussion 5.1 Recommendations for future studies what to watch for i.e. google and FBI for example This study only compiles that Soicial Media is on the rise and becoming a more figurative player in the role of intigative change. I believe further study should be given to determine Because Sodia Media isA further study would be appropriate to further investigatedetermine I propose an extended study be implemented to track the long term engagement of the uprisings mentioned in my investigation such as the Abrab Uprising of 2012, the Isreal and Egapt revolte, and make note of new uprising that See if the revulotionary changes in the long run constitue real change in governmental powers shifting the balance of human rights and governmental control in the direction of the individual and if their really does happen to come along a true revolution that has real change in policy and governmental control.

Toomey 5 Further investigation into the repercussions of Hillary Clintons campaign to Clintons promotion of offshore cyber-activism . Just how much and where did Clinton destipbitue technology Also the revolts that have been taking place with SM did the US have any input the netizens involved.

5.2 Conclusions Use of Social Media sites to give empower individuals to promote their ideas and demands may give the look of a revolution but unless there is a permanent change a revolution it is not. The internet may facilitate social and political movement but A benchmark phoenomen, the interent allows for the most invasive, persuasive, mass media blizet the world has ever know, inherent anonymity of the internet and most specifically socialmedia sites Anonymity in conclusion social media on the Internet not only exposes us to a massive amount of personal information it also has the ability to systematically and deliberately deploy information of not only a personal but a political. Information meant to fuel a desired effect or give rise to action geared for a specific reaction. to reverse power of the many to the empowerment of the individual, when it comes to political and socio-economic change.

Appendix A: Grafts and charts Tables showing internet useage staticics.

http://www.statisticbrain.com/social-networking-statistics/

Toomey 6

Toomey 7

About the Survey

These findings come from a nationally representative survey of 2,253 adults ages 18 and older that was conducted between July 16 and August 7, 2012. The survey included 900 interviews on cell phones and was conducted in English and Spanish. Some 1,209 of the respondents use either a social networking site such as Facebook, LinkedIn or Google+ or use Twitter. Most of the results in this report are based on that sub-population of social media users. The margin of error on that sample is plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.

http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2012/Political-engagement/Summary-of-Findings.aspx

http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2012/Political-engagement/Additional-Analysis/Social-Mediaand-Political-Engagement.aspx

Toomey 8

Frederic Lardinois http://techcrunch.com/2013/04/08/report-46-of-social-login-users-still-choose-facebook-butgoogle-is-quickly-gaining-ground/

Toomey 9

Appendix B: Interview questions The following phone interview question where compiled for representatives of Google, Yahoo, Twitter, and Microsoft Bing. Who are you targeting as your audience? Example: Link-in targets professional individuals and associated companies, Facebook targets social connections between individuals not business, although businesses and entrepreneurs make use of Facebook. What do you visualize as your primary reader interest for your site? What areas of social interaction do you actually receive? Example: Twitter gets the most political and civil issue press vs. Facebook social sharing. Who do you see as your competitor(s)? How do you feel you compare to your competitor(s) for instigating: social change? Political change? How do you feel about your percentage of market share? Example Twitter (according to most recent poll by techcrunch.com only has 6% but garners a majority of press coverage. Why do you think this is happening? How do you see your site contributing to civil liberties: US / Globally? Example: In light of Arab Spring / Israel / China How are you protecting your users from censorship and discovery? Example: Google fighting FBI.

Toomey 10

Appendix C: Survey questions Questions compiled to ask individual users of social media sites via surveymonkey.com and individual local handout. How many social media sites have you joined? o 1 o 2 o 3 o 4 o More o Which Ones? ___________________________________________ Which two cites do you use the most? List in order of preference and state why? If you want a global presence which site do you use? ______________________ If you want news and political content which site do you use? _______________ How much do you depend of social media for your news? Scale 1 10 (10 daily) Do you use social media sites to convey your opinions? o No o Yes Area of content __________________________________________ How accurate is the information conveyed via social media on a scale of 1-10? (1 being inaccurate , 10 being accurate) Does Social Media drive political change? On a scale of 1 10. And how? Which site does the best job? Does Social Media drive cultural change? On a scale of 1 10. And how? Which site does the best job? Does Social Media change racial and social prejudice? On a scale of 1 10. And how? Which site does the best job? Have you ever used a Social Media site such as Facebook or Twitter to organize a function/party/get together? o No o Yes How many times approximately have you done such ____? What site _______________? How many people approximate each time _____? ______? _____ Have you ever changed your mind about an issue brought to your attention via a social media cite, specifically Twitter or Facebook? o No o Yes Which site ______________? What was the issue(s) ________________

Toomey 11

6. References [1] Clinton, H. (2010). Remarks on Internet Freedom. U.S. Department of State. Retrieved from http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2010/01/135519.htm [2] Joseph, S., (2012). Boston College International & Comparative Law Review Social Media, Political Change, and Human Rights 35 (1), 145-188. [3] Ratner, B. (21013). U.S. Homeland Securitys Napolitano invokes 9/11 push for CISPA 2.0. Reuters Live. Retrieved from http://rt.com/usa/napolitano-us-cyber-attack-761/. [4 ] Barr, D. & Fonash, P. (2004). Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) Systems. National Communications System. Technical Information Bulletin 04-1. Retrieved from http://www.ncs.gov/library/tech_bulletins/2004/tib_04-1.pdf. [5] Obama, President Barrack. (2013). Obamas 2013 State of the Union Address The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/13/us/politics/obamas2013-state-of-the-union-address.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 [6] Brown, J. (Producer), & Suarez, R. (Reporter). (2013). Examining Cyber Security With Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano [video & transcript]. PBS NEWSHOUR. Retrieved from http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/science/jan-june13/cybersecurity_0215.html [7] Obama, President Barrack. (2013). Executive Order -- Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity. The White House, Office of the Press Secretary. Retrieved from http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/02/12/executive-order-improvingcritical-infrastructure-cybersecurity

[6] Bambauer, D. (2012). Orwells Armchair. University of Chicago Law Review. 79 (3), 863944. [ ] Yoo, C. (2009). Free Speech and the Myth of the Internet as an Unintermediated Experience. Scholarship at Penn Law. Paper 289. Retreived from http://Isr.nellco.org/upenn_wps/289. .

Toomey 12 [3] Brien, C. (2013). Cyber security bill pits tech giants against privacy activists. Los Angeles Times. Retreived from http://articles.latimes.com/2013/apr/12/business/la-ficybersecurity-bill-20130413.

[1] Alterman, J., (2011). Washington Quarterly The Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted 34 (4), 103116. [3] Comunello, F., (2012). Islam & Christian-Muslim Relations Will the Revulution be Tweeted?: A Conceptual Framework for Understanding the Social media and the Arab Spring 23 (4), 453-470. [4] Deva, S., (2007). George Washington International Law Review Corporate Complicity in Internet Censorship in China: Who Cares for the Global Compact or the Global Online Freedom Act? 39, 255-319. [5] Dong, F. (2012). Controlling the Internet in China: The Real Story Convergence: The Journal of Research into New Media Technologies 18 (4), 403-425. [6] Fukuyama, F., (2012) The Right to Connect and Internet Censorship NPQ: New Perspectives Quarterly 29 (2), 18-23. [7] Gue, S., & Feng, G. (2012). Understanding Support for Internet Censorship in China: An Elaboration of the Theory of reasoned Action Chinese Journal of Political Science 17 (1), 33-52. [8] Huang, S. (2012). To Stay or Not to Stay, Thats Politics; Chinese Netizens Rhetorical Vision of Googles Leaving China China Media Research 8 (1), 40-47. [10] Keen, R. (2012). Untangling the Web: Exploring Internet Regulation Schemes in Western Democracies San Diego International Law Journal 1(2), 351-382. [11] Kirchick, J. (2012), Read Me if You Can, Censorship Today World Affairs 175 (1), 88-92. [12] Kulikova, K. & Perlmutter, D., (2007) Blogging Down the Dictator?: The Kyrgyz Revolution and Samizdat Websites The International Communication Gazette 69 (1), 29. [13] Maitland, C., Thomas III, H., Tchouakeu, L. (2012). Internet Censorship Circumvention Technology Use in Human Rights Organizations: an Exploratory Analysis Journal of Information Technology 27 (4), 285-300. [14] Nazemi, N (2012). Safe Harbor for Anonymity Networks Amid a Cyber-Democratic Storm: Lessons From The 2009 Iranian Uprising Northwestern University Law Review 106 (2), 855-892. [15] Pearce, K. & Kendzior, S., Networked Authoritarianism and Social Media in Azerbaijan Journal of Communication 62 (2), 283-298. [16] Wagner, Ben (2012) Push-button-autocracy in Tunisia: Analysing the Role of Internet Infrastructure, Institutions and International Markets in Creating a Tunisian censorship Regime Telecommunications Policy: The International Journal of ICT Economy, Governance and Society 36 (6), 484-489. Google Inc. Yahoo Mountain View, CA Sunnyvale, CA 650-253-0000 published nonworking # 408-349-3300 Corporate

Toomey 13 Facebook Menlo Park, CA Twitter San Francisco, CA Bing, Microsoft Redmond, WA Frederic Lardinois Oregon 650-543-4800 (pressfb.com) 510-220-2368 published nonworking # 425-882-8080 541-255-1511