According
to Facebook, the website had 845 million monthly active users at the end of
December 2011. Combine that number with the 425 million Facebook mobile users
and the fact that Facebook is available in 70 different languages worldwide,
and you have a mega social networking giant.
While
changes in Facebook’s privacy policy have stirred up controversy in the past,
it was a recent announcement from law enforcement agencies that included new
plans to monitor Internet usage in Canada and the U.S. that caused much
discussion and controversy among citizens of both countries. Although
intentions of the Canadian government differ from those of the United States,
the hot topic of Internet privacy is now pushing buttons throughout North
America.
Although
the National Press Office of the FBI declined to answering questions regarding
this announcement, documents posted online indicate that the FBI hopes build an
application that will monitor social networking websites to “provide enhanced
real-time situational awareness regarding any open-source breaking event,
crisis, activity, or natural disaster that has occurred or in progress in the
US or globally”.
The
FBI also notes that they will not be monitoring these sites to target groups or
specific people, but rather to search for words relating to an event or crisis
such as “lockdown”, “bomb”, “suspicious package”, or “white powder”.
The
documents emphasized the words “publicly available, open source, non-private
data” while explaining what type of information the FBI is interested in
getting its hands on, indicating an awareness that privacy activists would be concerned
of the implications.
Open
source data in the social media context refers to the personal information you
post with the knowledge that anyone can view it; for instance, allowing your
name to be searchable through the Facebook search engine.
However,
despite the FBI’s reassurances, Jennifer Lynch of the Electronic Frontier
Foundation explained to the News Scientist that it may not be enough:
“Many people post to social media in the expectation that only their friends
and followers are reading, which gives them the sense of freedom to say what
they want without worrying too much about recourse, but these tools that mine open
source data and presumably store it for a very long time, do away with that
kind of privacy. I worry about the effect of that on free speech in the U.S.”
Concerns
about citizen’s online activities aren’t just restricted to the United States,
however. Recently, the Canadian government, led by the Conservative party,
tabled legislation which has aroused similar concerns about invasion of
privacy. The bill, entitled C-30, would require companies with an Internet
presence to store information about users for the police to access.
Ivor
Tossel, tech columnist for the Globe and Mail, writes, “Contrary to what
you might have heard, the new bill, C-30, doesn’t invite police to monitor your
every online move without a warrant. It does, however, require Internet
companies – loosely defined – to cough up your name, Internet protocol address
and a few other identifiers if the police ask for them, even without a warrant.
This means that the police could conceivably collect a pseudonym you’ve been
using to comment on websites, present it to the relevant company, and say, ‘Who
is this person?’”
“By
trading pseudonyms for IP addresses, then IP addresses for real names and
addresses, and repeating the process, police could get a pretty clear picture
of what you’ve been up to online. (The list of exactly which identifiers police
can present to Internet service providers in exchange for information has yet
to be nailed down),” he concludes.
Public
Safety Minister Vic Toews has publicly endorsed the bill, stating, “Over the
years, it became clear to me that Canada’s laws were falling far behind the
technology used by criminals.”
Toews’
public endorsement caused serious backlash on social networking sites with
public disagreement. Not only were personal threats made against Toews and his
family, but a Twitter account under the username “Vikileaks” was created,
publicizing all of the messy details of Toew’s divorce. Others took to the
website www.stopspying.com to sign the petition against this new bill, which is
currently at over 115,000 signatures.
Despite
the efforts of these government officials to banish misinformation about the
new powers this bill would bring, Canadian residents continue to be reluctant
of a bill diminishing any kind of personal rights. In a poll conducted by Angus
Reid published on Feb. 24 of this year, Canadians voiced their opinions
regarding this new bill. The online survey that consisted of a representative
sample of 1,011 Canadians showed that 53 per cent of us believe Bill C-30 is
too intrusive, and only a mere 27 per cent of us believe the new bill is
necessary because “criminal activity has evolved with technology and police
need broader tools to deal with these crimes.”
However,
due to the backlash against the bill, the Conservative government has taken the
bill off of the fast track to official legislation status by sending it to
committee, a procedure where MPs are able to make major amendments to proposed
legislation.
“The
government is open to having a thorough study of this at committee to make sure
the bill gets done the right way [and] so that we do make those changes that
will protect more people while at the same time not intruding on anyone’s
privacy,” explains Andrew McDougall, a staff member in the Prime Minister’s
Office.
With
technology becoming vital in people’s lives more recently, this is the first
major piece of legislation in Canada that has attempted to monitor Internet
usage. In the United States, the recently defeated SOPA and PIPA, attempts to
curb copyright infringement online, raised widespread protests, including from
major websites such as Google and Wikipedia. The Internet has given Canadians
access to more information and freedom of expression than any other form of
technology has in the past, but it is important to remember that new technology
has a tendency to coexist with new problems.
//Lindsay Howe, writer
//Graphics by Jason Jeon
//Lindsay Howe, writer
//Graphics by Jason Jeon
|
