EDITORIAL: In yet another bid to put the digital space under a tighter leash, a national firewall is reportedly being installed to curb the ability of nefarious elements from using social media to spout harmful propaganda.
Local media reports have revealed that the firewall, which is along the lines of a similar Chinese system, will be utilised to pinpoint the locations from where propaganda material is disseminated, and then will be deployed to block the spread of such content.
The emphasis, according to government sources, will be on detecting material that could cause harm to national security, with social media websites ranging from Facebook to X and YouTube, all set to become objects of greater scrutiny.
There is no denying that over the past decade, Pakistani society has seen increased social unrest, political polarisation and division, with the impact of harmful propaganda, rumours and harassment on social media playing a considerable role in deepening societal discord, with the recent reprehensible online drive targeting members of the judiciary being a prime example of this phenomenon.
Disinformation campaigns, spouting of extremist content and hate speech often have immediate and widespread real world impact, causing significant harm to community cohesion, and can even trigger incidents of violence.
The world over – with Pakistan being no exception – the impact of social media algorithms has too often seen the creation of echo chambers, where individuals are exposed primarily to information that aligns with their existing beliefs, making it doubly difficult to counter falsehoods, leading to the forming of alternative realities that distort public perception and hinder constructive discourse.
And even more dangerously in the Pakistani context, given our precarious security situation, such an ecosystem could very well serve as a breeding ground for all manner of extremist groups, instigating grave national security implications as well.
Seen in the above context, there would be many within Pakistani officialdom who would feel justified in taking measures that rein in this toxic aspect of the online space.
While the government’s concerns pertaining to national security are understandable, one has to caution it about the dangers of going overboard in its quest to counter what it deems to be harmful speech, as any overreach can have far-reaching ramifications for fundamental rights, the economy and the lives of millions of people. The last thing we need is a surveillance state, where individual privacy is compromised and civil liberties are undermined.
Given past form, one can be forgiven for doubting both the competence and sincerity of the authorities in striking the right balance between curbing the spread of harmful content and upholding of constitutional rights related to free speech, access to information and privacy.
There are several recent examples where internet outages and blocking of websites were triggered due to ostensibly political reasons – as on election day – and with our long history of the state being very uncomfortable with dissent and independent thought, there is reason to fear that this latest measure will end up stifling lawful criticism of the powerful instead of solely focusing on preventing the spread of content that can lead to public harm or violence.
What is needed is a system of checks and balances that could restrain the authorities’ tendency to view each instance of criticism through a strictly national security lens? When a measure can have such sweeping implications for fundamental rights and the business environment, the state shouldn’t have a complete free hand in implementing it without any oversight whatsoever.
Furthermore, when one is operating in a democracy – even an imperfect one like ours – the least one can expect is that a move of such consequence will not be shrouded in secrecy. The authorities must allay justified public misgivings and ensure that the right balance is struck between addressing equally important concerns.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2024