[分享] How can the government’s use of social media harm people?
|
- UID
- 46897
- 帖子
- 40
- 精華
- 0
- 積分
- 400
- 金幣
- 400
- 威望
- 0
- 推廣
- 0
- 閱讀權限
- 10
- 在線時間
- 3 小時
- 註冊時間
- 2022-4-4
|
1樓
發表於 2022-5-27 12:01
| 只看該作者
[分享] How can the government’s use of social media harm people?
Govern ment monit or ing of social media can work to people's detri ment in at least four ways: (1) wrongly implic at ing an indi vidual or group in crim inal beha vior based on their activ ity on social media; (2) misin ter pret ing the mean ing of social media activity, some times with severe consequences; (3) suppress ing people's will ing ness to talk or connect openly online; and (4) invad ing indi vidu als' privacy. These are explained in further detail below.
Assumed crimin al ity: The govern ment may use inform ation from social media to label an indi vidual or group as a threat, includ ing char ac ter iz ing ordin ary activ ity (like wear ing a partic u lar sneaker brand or making common hand signs) or social media connections as evid ence of crim inal or threat en ing beha vior. This kind of assumption can have high-stakes consequences. For example, the NYPD wrongly arres ted 19-year-old Jelani Henry for attemp ted murder, after which he was denied bail and jailed for over a year and a half, in large part because prosec utors thought his “likes” and photos on social media proved he was a member of a viol ent gang. In another case of guilt by asso ci ation, DHS offi cials barred a Palestinian student arriv ing to study at Harvard from entering ing the coun try based on the content of his friends' social media posts. The student had neither writ ten nor engaged with the posts, which were crit ical of the U.S. govern ment. Black, Latino, an d Muslim people are espe cially vulner able to being falsely labeled threats based on social media activity ity, given that it is used to inform govern ment decisions that are often already tainted by bias such as gang determ in a tions and travel screen ing decisions.
Mistaken judg ments: It can be diffi cult to accur ately inter pret online activ ity, and the reper cus sions can be severe. In 2020, police in Wichita, Kansas arres ted a teen ager on suspi cion of incit ing a riot based on a mistaken inter pret ation of his Snapchat post, in which he was actu ally denoun cing viol ence. British trav el ers were inter rog ated at Los Angeles Inter na tional Airport and sent back to the U.K. due to a border agent's misin ter pret a tion of a joking tweet. And DHS and the FBI dissem in ated reports to a Maine-area intel li gence-shar ing hub warn ing of poten tial viol ence at anti-police brutality demon strations based on fake social media posts by right-wing provocateurs, which were distrib uted as a warning to local police.
Chilling effects: People are highly likely to censor them selves when they think they are being watched by the govern ment, and this under mines everything from political speech to creativ ity to other forms of self-expres sion. The Bren nan Center's lawsuit against the State Depart ment and DHS docu ments how the collection of social media iden ti fi ers on visa forms — which are then stored indef in itely and shared across the U.S. govern ment, and some times with state, local, and foreign govern ments — led a number of inter na tional film makers to stop talk ing about polit ics and promot ing their work on social media. They self-censored because they were concerned that what they said online would prevent them from getting a U.S. visa or be used to retali ate against them because it could be misin ter preted or reflect contro ver sial view points.
Loss of privacy: A person's social media presence — their posts, comments, photos, likes, group member ships, and so on — can collectively reveal their ethni city, political views, reli gious prac tices, gender iden tity, sexual orient a tion, person al ity traits, and vices. Further, social media can reveal more about a person than they intend. Plat forms' privacy settings frequently change and can be diffi cult to navig ate, and even when indi vidu als keep inform a tion private it can be disclosed through the activ ity or iden tity of their connections on social media. DHS at least has recog nized this risk, categor iz ing social media handles as “sens it ive person ally iden ti fi able inform a tion” that could “result in substan tial harm, embar rass ment , incon veni ence, or unfair ness to an indi vidual.” Yet the agency has failed to place robust safe guards on social media monit or ing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
