Close Menu
TechCentralTechCentral

    Subscribe to the newsletter

    Get the best South African technology news and analysis delivered to your e-mail inbox every morning.

    Facebook X (Twitter) YouTube LinkedIn
    WhatsApp Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn YouTube
    TechCentralTechCentral
    • News

      The transatlantic race to create the first television

      20 June 2025

      Listed: All the MVNOs in South Africa – 2025 edition

      19 June 2025

      TCS | Tech, townships and tenacity: Spar’s plan to win with Spar2U

      19 June 2025

      WhatsApp founders hated ads – Meta is adding them anyway

      19 June 2025

      China’s car factories run cold as price war masks deep overcapacity

      19 June 2025
    • World

      Watch | Starship rocket explodes in setback to Musk’s Mars mission

      19 June 2025

      Trump Mobile dials into politics, profit and patriarchy

      17 June 2025

      Samsung plots health data hub to link users and doctors in real time

      17 June 2025

      Beijing’s chip champions blacklisted by Taiwan

      16 June 2025

      China is behind in AI chips – but for how much longer?

      13 June 2025
    • In-depth

      Meta bets $72-billion on AI – and investors love it

      17 June 2025

      MultiChoice may unbundle SuperSport from DStv

      12 June 2025

      Grok promised bias-free chat. Then came the edits

      2 June 2025

      Digital fortress: We go inside JB5, Teraco’s giant new AI-ready data centre

      30 May 2025

      Sam Altman and Jony Ive’s big bet to out-Apple Apple

      22 May 2025
    • TCS

      TCS+ | AfriGIS’s Helen Hulett on how tech can help resolve South Africa’s water crisis

      18 June 2025

      TechCentral Nexus S0E2: South Africa’s digital battlefield

      16 June 2025

      TechCentral Nexus S0E1: Starlink, BEE and a new leader at Vodacom

      8 June 2025

      TCS+ | The future of mobile money, with MTN’s Kagiso Mothibi

      6 June 2025

      TCS+ | AI is more than hype: Workday execs unpack real human impact

      4 June 2025
    • Opinion

      South Africa pioneered drone laws a decade ago – now it must catch up

      17 June 2025

      AI and the future of ICT distribution

      16 June 2025

      Singapore soared – why can’t we? Lessons South Africa refuses to learn

      13 June 2025

      Beyond the box: why IT distribution depends on real partnerships

      2 June 2025

      South Africa’s next crisis? Being offline in an AI-driven world

      2 June 2025
    • Company Hubs
      • Africa Data Centres
      • AfriGIS
      • Altron Digital Business
      • Altron Document Solutions
      • Altron Group
      • Arctic Wolf
      • AvertITD
      • Braintree
      • CallMiner
      • CYBER1 Solutions
      • Digicloud Africa
      • Digimune
      • Domains.co.za
      • ESET
      • Euphoria Telecom
      • Incredible Business
      • iONLINE
      • Iris Network Systems
      • LSD Open
      • NEC XON
      • Network Platforms
      • Next DLP
      • Ovations
      • Paracon
      • Paratus
      • Q-KON
      • SevenC
      • SkyWire
      • Solid8 Technologies
      • Telit Cinterion
      • Tenable
      • Vertiv
      • Videri Digital
      • Wipro
      • Workday
    • Sections
      • AI and machine learning
      • Banking
      • Broadcasting and Media
      • Cloud services
      • Contact centres and CX
      • Cryptocurrencies
      • Education and skills
      • Electronics and hardware
      • Energy and sustainability
      • Enterprise software
      • Fintech
      • Information security
      • Internet and connectivity
      • Internet of Things
      • Investment
      • IT services
      • Lifestyle
      • Motoring
      • Public sector
      • Retail and e-commerce
      • Science
      • SMEs and start-ups
      • Social media
      • Talent and leadership
      • Telecoms
    • Events
    • Advertise
    TechCentralTechCentral
    Home » In-depth » Internet consolidation opened the door to censorship

    Internet consolidation opened the door to censorship

    By Agency Staff11 April 2019
    Twitter LinkedIn Facebook WhatsApp Email Telegram Copy Link
    News Alerts
    WhatsApp

    The British government released proposals this week to hold online and social media platforms responsible for harmful content. A few decades ago, we might have scoffed at anyone who even thought they could regulate what people say on the Internet. No longer.

    Today, the centralisation of platforms and service providers makes enforcement surprisingly easy. It’s just a matter of picking which layer of the tech stack to hold accountable.

    If lawmakers want to prevent the dissemination of certain content on social media, they can cover most of the US population with a phone call to Facebook and Twitter. If governments want more comprehensive coverage, they can hit up the handful of cloud providers that serve up over half the Internet. Problematic websites effectively vanish if deleted from Google, which handles 90% of search activity, and apps can be rendered unfindable if Apple and Google simply remove them from their app stores.

    The centralisation of platforms and service providers makes enforcement surprisingly easy

    Service providers from infrastructure to social media platforms have, at various times, been pressured to remove users and content for offending our sensibilities. Enforcement is not even limited to the Internet: Airbnb, Uber and Lyft have taken it upon themselves to make travel plans more difficult for those who support racist things.

    As it stands, content moderation is mostly reactive, with tech companies taking action only in the wake of public controversy. If an online mob is unsuccessful at pressuring one service provider, it will harass another intermediary. There hasn’t been a consistent target for content removal because a service provider may be uncooperative, or located outside of a censor’s jurisdiction. In the aftermath of the Charlottesville protest and counterprotest, the neo-Nazi website Daily Stormer relocated to a Russian domain, but was ultimately kicked off the Internet by Cloudflare, a content delivery network.

    ‘Hate speech’

    Those who want to ban harmful content generally aren’t after the content itself. The artificial crime of “hate speech” had to be invented because more direct and traditional methods of enforcing certain goals yielded little result. The thing that we really want to get rid of is the fact that some people believe nutty things, sometimes people really don’t like each other, and some people have political views that are simply unacceptable to others.

    Censorship tends not to create a world of tolerance. In fact, the idea of restricting “hate speech” was originally championed by the Soviet Union in an effort to silence those who might agitate in favour of capitalism and liberal democracy.

    There is one place where regulation would help. Tech companies have nebulous content guidelines with seemingly arbitrary application. Alex Jones, for example, was peddling conspiracy theories on YouTube for over 20 years before the major platforms collectively booted him off. Proactive and specific terms of service would have prevented Jones from ever setting up a YouTube channel.

    Social media companies amassed billions of users by promising a platform for free expression. But in their effort to offend nobody, they’ve managed to anger everybody. Now that the population is dependent on a few key services, the platforms need to make difficult decisions but don’t want to take the blame.

    Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg’s proposal for third parties to set global standards governing harmful content will only further entrench existing conglomerates: if you don’t like Facebook’s content policies, you now have no alternative because everyone has to abide by the same rules!

    Being proactive about creating specific content rules would have limited the number of users who sign up for any given service. But it also would have encouraged competitors to create alternatives, and prevented truly harmful ideas from being amplified to the general public. In some ways, this creates individual filter bubbles, but I prefer the term safe space.

    The purpose of a decentralised Internet, and decentralisation in general, is to constrain the power of a single entity to regulate. As Internet pioneer John Gilmore once put it: “The Internet interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.” Lawmakers can work with major tech platforms to define a narrow range of acceptable content, but they should also allow alternatives to grow.  — Elaine Ou, (c) 2019 Bloomberg LP



    Apple CloudFlare Google Microsoft top
    Subscribe to TechCentral Subscribe to TechCentral
    Share. Facebook Twitter LinkedIn WhatsApp Telegram Email Copy Link
    Previous ArticleAfrican ‘unicorn’ Jumia, part-owned by MTN, readies market debut
    Next Article Google flips switch on its next big money maker: Maps

    Related Posts

    Stolen phone? Samsung now buys you an hour to lock it down

    18 June 2025

    Major rift opens between Microsoft and OpenAI

    17 June 2025

    Meta bets $72-billion on AI – and investors love it

    17 June 2025
    Company News

    Making IT happen: how Trade Link gears up to enable SA retail strategies

    20 June 2025

    Why parents choose CambriLearn for online education

    19 June 2025

    Disrupt first, ask questions later – the uncomfortable truth about incident response

    18 June 2025
    Opinion

    South Africa pioneered drone laws a decade ago – now it must catch up

    17 June 2025

    AI and the future of ICT distribution

    16 June 2025

    Singapore soared – why can’t we? Lessons South Africa refuses to learn

    13 June 2025

    Subscribe to Updates

    Get the best South African technology news and analysis delivered to your e-mail inbox every morning.

    © 2009 - 2025 NewsCentral Media

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.