Index relies entirely on the support of donors and readers to do its work.
Help us keep amplifying censored voices today.
Index, in partnership with the European Council on Foreign Relations, held a debate launching the latest issue of Index on Censorship magazine looking at the recent protests in Turkey, Russia and Brazil and what they tell us about public attitudes to freedom and rights.
The discussion explored the difficulties in protecting freedom of speech when political and social power is shifting across the globe. Panelists included Index CEO Kirsty Hughes, ECFR Senior Policy Fellow Anthony Dworkin, Keith Best, CEO of Freedom From Torture, and Turkish journalist and writer Ece Temelkuran.
The New World (Dis)Order event by @IndexEvents at @ecfr pic.twitter.com/EMsIg3JpGd
— Andrei Aliaksandrau (@aliaksandrau) July 18, 2013
Temelkuran, who has been a vocal critic of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, spoke about the decline in media freedom and credibility since the start of anti-government protests in the country:
#disorder @ETemelkuran 124 journalists have been harassed by opponents of the ongoing protests — Index Events (@IndexEvents) July 18, 2013
#disorder @ETemelkuran Turkish media has reached the apocalypse. Basics of journalism not performed in #turkey — Index Events (@IndexEvents) July 18, 2013
#disorder@ETemelkuran Turks have no faith in the mainstream media. It’s over for media. #Turkey — Index Events (@IndexEvents) July 18, 2013
Dworkin, meanwhile, spoke about anti-government protests, and how they play into the shift in power on the global stage, and also reflect a loss of faith in the democratic process:
#disorder @AnthonyDworkin The decline of the credibility of the US and EU states has made it hard to support protest movements — Index Events (@IndexEvents) July 18, 2013
#disorder @AnthonyDworkin The new battleground is a “closing space” by governments cracking down on expression — Index Events (@IndexEvents) July 18, 2013
#disorder @AnthonyDworkin Protests around the world are connected by a feeling being excluded from representative government — Index Events (@IndexEvents) July 18, 2013
#disorder@AnthonyDworkin When does popular mobilisation become popular rejection of the political process — Index Events (@IndexEvents) July 18, 2013
Index CEO Kirsty Hughes argued that democracies must work hard to protect free speech, especially when we’ve moved towards a multipolar world:
#disorder @Kirsty_Index We’ve seen a much more rapid move to a multipolar world than we would have expected. — Index Events (@IndexEvents) July 18, 2013
#disorder @Kirsty_Index Power is not just safe in the hands of the “good guys” post-#PRISM — Index Events (@IndexEvents) July 18, 2013
#disorder @Kirsty_Index How do you get countries like Brazil and India to challenge China, US, UK on digital freedom? — Index Events (@IndexEvents) July 18, 2013
#disorder @Kirsty_Index We’re in a very difficult place. If all of the democracies are disordered, #China and #Russia can exploit. — Index Events (@IndexEvents) July 18, 2013
Let’s not be naive about democracy: we must work hard to ensure free speech is protected in US & Europe says @Kirsty_Index #disorder — Natasha Schmidt (@tasheschmidt) July 18, 2013
Keith Best, from Freedom from Torture, argued that the undermined authority of western powers has also meant a rise in impunity for torture:
#disorder Keith Best @FreefromTorture The so-called war on terror has enabled the principal defender of human rights to become a pariah — Index Events (@IndexEvents) July 18, 2013
#disorder Keith Best @FreefromTorture Bush said that torture was an acceptable means of getting information
— Index Events (@IndexEvents) July 18, 2013
The panel also discussed the role of technology in shifting the balance of power globally, after an audience member asked whether or not “bottom up politics are weakening the institutions of the state.”:
#disorder @AnthonyDworkin Technology is a big part of what’s happening, but it’s only part. There’s a shift in power away from states
— Index Events (@IndexEvents) July 18, 2013
#disorder @AnthonyDworkin The distribution of power in the world system doesn’t take into account the changes that are happening — Index Events (@IndexEvents) July 18, 2013
#disorder @AnthonyDworkin These new forms of citizenship can weaken the state. The challenge is to maintain pluralism. — Index Events (@IndexEvents) July 18, 2013
#disorder @Kirsty_Index I don’t think the protesters are weakening the institutions. They are protesting about the weaknesses
— Index Events (@IndexEvents) July 18, 2013
#disorder @Kirsty_Index We shouldn’t be too pessimistic. People are demanding their rights.
— Index Events (@IndexEvents) July 18, 2013
#disorder @Kirsty_Index Perhaps the deep failings of the West in the last 10 years will encourage Brazil and India to step up — Index Events (@IndexEvents) July 18, 2013
#disorder @ETemelkuran People are lacking faith in power. They are looking for a new way of politics. — Index Events (@IndexEvents) July 18, 2013
#disorder @ETemelkuran They are looking to build a digital agora. They are giving a struggle to be visible.
— Index Events (@IndexEvents) July 18, 2013
#disorder@ETemelkuran Protesters are looking for a new citizenship.
— Index Events (@IndexEvents) July 18, 2013
For a range of in-depth reports and articles on journalism, freedom of speech, censorship and arts check out the latest issue of the magazine here. Be sure to follow @IndexEvents for more updates on our exciting events and discussions
Date: 18 July, 6:30-8pm at ECFR
Venue: European Council on Foreign Relations, London
Tickets: Free, but space is limited. Email [email protected] if you’d like to attend.
Index, in partnership with the European Council on Foreign Relations, is holding a timely debate on the shifting world order and its impact on rights and freedoms. The event will also launch the latest issue of Index on Censorship magazine, including a special report on the multipolar world.
The balance of economic, political and social power is shifting across the world; in this debate we will ask how this might affect individuals’ rights and freedoms. In the last two months we have seen protests across the world as citizens challenge their governments. Meanwhile news of US internet companies being tapped by the NSA continue to hit the headlines. Discussions of who is tapping whom continue to be uncovered. From nations to companies, who has the power now?
The expert panelists include: Index CEO Kirsty Hughes, ECFR Senior Policy Fellow Anthony Dworkin, and Turkish journalist and writer Ece Temelkuran.
(Photo: Andrei Aliaksandru/Index on Censorship)
Against a backdrop of ongoing revelations around the US Prism programme, mass surveillance dominated the discussion at the Index on Censorship event Caught in the web: How free are we online? Brian Pellot reports
Index on Censorship brought together a panel of experts at King’s Place in London last night. Investigative journalist Heather Brooke, author and digital rights activist Cory Doctorow, media lawyer Paul Tweed, Index CEO Kirsty Hughes and chair David Aaronovitch discussed the threats to freedom of expression online.
Brooke, warned that as we increase our online expression, we “create a handy one-stop shop for snooping officials”. She also cautioned that concentrated power in secretive states is a far greater danger to humanity than unbridled free speech.
(Brooke, author of The Revolution will be Digitised, kindly joined the panel at the last minute, replacing Guardian data editor James Ball, who is currently in the US covering the developing Prism scandal)
Doctorow, co-founder of the hugely influential Boing Boing blog, said while he was pessimistic about the “Orwellian control” that digital technologies provide governments, he remains optimistic that such technologies can enable us to cooperate, coordinate and collaborate in unprecedented ways to seek positive social change.
Doctorow questioned the efficacy of overcollection of data, characterised by PRISM, saying that as an intelligence technique is “like pointing at a pixel with a hotdog”.
Belfast-based libel lawyer Tweed said that anonymity online enables speech that constitutes dangerous harassment. He argued that freedom of expression must be protected, but that controls are needed to prevent the undermining of reputation and privacy. He recounted examples from his practice of clients that are harassed and attacked on the web with very little recourse against “internet goliaths”.
“There has to be a button to protect the man on the street”, Tweed said.
Hughes discussed the emerging geopolitics of digital freedom, noting that while EU countries and the US are lobbying for the preservation of a multistakeholder model of internet governance, Russia, China and others are pushing for top-down government control. Some of the greatest threats to online freedom of expression she discussed are censorship in the form of firewalls and filters, laws criminalising offence, the privatisation of censorship and, of course, surveillance.
Aaronovitch fielded questions from audience members who were focused on government surveillance and censorship.
Doctorow claimed that web filters are a blunt and inefficient instrument, giving the example of Denmark’s secret child abuse filters, which leaks showed had blocked a huge amount of material that was not related to sexual imagery of children.
“Everyone knows web filters don’t work, but once used, removing them would be political suicide,” he said.
Brooke acknowledged that current laws are not keeping pace with technology but does not think new laws are the solution. More important is that “our fundamental values be translated into the digital age”, she said.
“Nothing to hide, nothing to fear is an arrogant statement”, Brooke commented on UK foreign secretary William Hague’s response to questions on PRISM on Sunday.
Hughes elaborated on a statement she made earlier in the day essentially saying that mass surveillance is an invasion of our right to privacy and a direct chill on free speech.
Index on Censorship has released a joint statement with English PEN, Privacy International and Open Rights Group condemning the use of national security to justify mass surveillance.
Let us know your thoughts on the Prism scandal by commenting below
Related:
• Pod Academy coverage of this event
“Can we say that?” “Can we say that publicly?” Last night’s discussion at the Free Word Centre, marking 30 years of Channel 4, hinged on these questions. For the filmmakers, programmers, board members and legal department at Channel 4, these questions are also at the heart of their day-to-day operations.
Chief Executive David Abraham’s opening words sketched an outline of Channel 4’s trajectory as “an irritant and a challenger to vested interest”. Without shareholders, state funding or fear of its commercial advertisers’ feelings, its editorial autonomy has brought it the trust of its audiences, Abrahams said.
Channel 4’s legal team, led by Prash Naik, are motivated by a presumption to publish. Line by line, shows are vetted and cleared before airing. “Can we say that?” Can we say that publicly?” It may be a struggle, but the default final answer is, rightly, “yes”.
Following Abraham’s speech, English PEN’s Jo Glanville brought together filmmakers Peter Kosminksy and Brian Woods, and media law silk Adrienne Page QC, to join David Abraham on stage.
The extortionate costs of defending a libel charge causes Adrienne Page to worry that media organisations will run scared from airing controversial material. In Brian Woods’ experience it can take years to find a home for shows addressing subjects like sexual abuse by teachers, or documentaries critiquing Islam. Though Channel 4 sometimes gets it wrong, last night’s discussion showed that the intention to provoke, stimulate and inform is still firmly part of their remit. Shocking and offending some of your audience might even be considered part and parcel of good television making. The only caveat, as Abraham put, is, “If you are gong to shock and offend do it for a purpose”.
The trend towards making more content available online, in shorter formats, with high levels of commentary and user interaction around each show, means the challenges to free expression will proliferate. Channel 4 has its own battles to fight in keeping television an essential vehicle for finding and challenging boundaries.
Eve Jackson is events manager at Index