ABOUT THE SPEAKER
Evgeny Morozov - Internet scientist
Evgeny Morozov wants to know how the Internet has changed the conduct of global affairs, because it certainly has ... but perhaps not in all the ways we think.

Why you should listen

Writer Evgeny Morozov studies the political and social aspects of the Internet. Right now, he's working on a book about the Internet's role in politics -- and especially how the Web influences civic engagement and regime stability in authoritarian, closed societies or in countries "in transition."

Morozov writes the much-quoted Foreign Policy blog Net.Effect, and is known for debunking -- with facts, figures and sound research -- myths and media-bandwagon assumptions about the impact of the Internet and mobile technologies on politics and society. We all want to be cyber-optimists, assuming that free societies necessarily follow from free data. Morozov is careful to say that it's not quite that simple: yes, social change can be empowered by new tech, but so can the policies of repressive regimes. Morozov attended TEDGlobal 2009 as one of 25 TEDGlobal Fellows.

Get the slide deck from his TEDGlobal talk >>

Read his essay in design mind >>

More profile about the speaker
Evgeny Morozov | Speaker | TED.com
TEDGlobal 2009

Evgeny Morozov: How the Net aids dictatorships

Filmed:
448,907 views

TED Fellow and journalist Evgeny Morozov punctures what he calls "iPod liberalism" -- the assumption that tech innovation always promotes freedom, democracy -- with chilling examples of ways the Internet helps oppressive regimes stifle dissent.
- Internet scientist
Evgeny Morozov wants to know how the Internet has changed the conduct of global affairs, because it certainly has ... but perhaps not in all the ways we think. Full bio

Double-click the English transcript below to play the video.

00:12
Good morning. I think, as a grumpy Eastern European,
0
0
5000
00:17
I was brought in to play the pessimist this morning. So bear with me.
1
5000
4000
00:21
Well, I come from the former Soviet Republic of Belarus,
2
9000
3000
00:24
which, as some of you may know,
3
12000
3000
00:27
is not exactly an oasis of liberal democracy.
4
15000
3000
00:30
So that's why I've always been fascinated
5
18000
4000
00:34
with how technology could actually reshape
6
22000
3000
00:37
and open up authoritarian societies like ours.
7
25000
3000
00:40
So, I'm graduating college
8
28000
2000
00:42
and, feeling very idealistic,
9
30000
2000
00:44
I decided to join the NGO
10
32000
2000
00:46
which actually was using new media
11
34000
2000
00:48
to promote democracy and media reform
12
36000
2000
00:50
in much of the former Soviet Union.
13
38000
3000
00:53
However, to my surprise,
14
41000
2000
00:55
I discovered that dictatorships
15
43000
2000
00:57
do not crumble so easily.
16
45000
2000
00:59
In fact, some of them actually
17
47000
3000
01:02
survived the Internet challenge,
18
50000
2000
01:04
and some got even more repressive.
19
52000
3000
01:07
So this is when I ran out of my idealism and
20
55000
3000
01:10
decided to quit my NGO job
21
58000
2000
01:12
and actually study how the Internet could impede democratization.
22
60000
5000
01:17
Now, I must tell you that this was never
23
65000
2000
01:19
a very popular argument,
24
67000
3000
01:22
and it's probably not very popular yet
25
70000
2000
01:24
with some of you sitting in this audience.
26
72000
2000
01:26
It was never popular with many political leaders,
27
74000
3000
01:29
especially those in the United States
28
77000
2000
01:31
who somehow thought that new media
29
79000
2000
01:33
would be able to do what missiles couldn't.
30
81000
4000
01:37
That is, promote democracy in difficult places
31
85000
3000
01:40
where everything else has already been tried and failed.
32
88000
4000
01:44
And I think by 2009,
33
92000
2000
01:46
this news has finally reached Britain,
34
94000
3000
01:49
so I should probably add Gordon Brown to this list as well.
35
97000
3000
01:52
However, there is an underlying argument about logistics,
36
100000
5000
01:57
which has driven so much of this debate. Right?
37
105000
3000
02:00
So if you look at it close enough,
38
108000
2000
02:02
you'll actually see that much of this
39
110000
2000
02:04
is about economics.
40
112000
3000
02:07
The cybertopians say, much like fax machines
41
115000
3000
02:10
and Xerox machines did in the '80s,
42
118000
3000
02:13
blogs and social networks
43
121000
2000
02:15
have radically transformed the economics of protest,
44
123000
3000
02:18
so people would inevitably rebel.
45
126000
3000
02:21
To put it very simply,
46
129000
2000
02:23
the assumption so far has been
47
131000
2000
02:25
that if you give people enough connectivity,
48
133000
3000
02:28
if you give them enough devices,
49
136000
3000
02:31
democracy will inevitably follow.
50
139000
2000
02:33
And to tell you the truth,
51
141000
2000
02:35
I never really bought into this argument,
52
143000
3000
02:38
in part because I never saw three American presidents
53
146000
3000
02:41
agree on anything else in the past.
54
149000
2000
02:43
(Laughter)
55
151000
4000
02:47
But, you know, even beyond that,
56
155000
2000
02:49
if you think about the logic underlying it,
57
157000
2000
02:51
is something I call iPod liberalism,
58
159000
3000
02:54
where we assume that every single Iranian or Chinese
59
162000
4000
02:58
who happens to have and love his iPod
60
166000
2000
03:00
will also love liberal democracy.
61
168000
4000
03:04
And again, I think this is kind of false.
62
172000
4000
03:08
But I think a much bigger problem with this
63
176000
2000
03:10
is that this logic --
64
178000
2000
03:12
that we should be dropping iPods not bombs --
65
180000
3000
03:15
I mean, it would make a fascinating title
66
183000
3000
03:18
for Thomas Friedman's new book.
67
186000
2000
03:20
(Laughter)
68
188000
1000
03:21
But this is rarely a good sign. Right?
69
189000
4000
03:25
So, the bigger problem with this logic
70
193000
4000
03:29
is that it confuses the intended
71
197000
2000
03:31
versus the actual uses of technology.
72
199000
4000
03:35
For those of you who think that
73
203000
2000
03:37
new media of the Internet
74
205000
2000
03:39
could somehow help us avert genocide,
75
207000
3000
03:42
should look no further than Rwanda,
76
210000
2000
03:44
where in the '90s it was actually two radio stations
77
212000
3000
03:47
which were responsible for fueling much of the ethnic hatred in the first place.
78
215000
4000
03:51
But even beyond that, coming back to the Internet,
79
219000
3000
03:54
what you can actually see
80
222000
2000
03:56
is that certain governments
81
224000
2000
03:58
have mastered the use of cyberspace
82
226000
3000
04:01
for propaganda purposes. Right?
83
229000
2000
04:03
And they are building what I call the Spinternet.
84
231000
2000
04:05
The combination of spin, on the one hand,
85
233000
3000
04:08
and the Internet on the other.
86
236000
2000
04:10
So governments from Russia to China to Iran
87
238000
3000
04:13
are actually hiring, training and paying bloggers
88
241000
3000
04:16
in order to leave ideological comments
89
244000
3000
04:19
and create a lot of ideological blog posts
90
247000
2000
04:21
to comment on sensitive political issues. Right?
91
249000
3000
04:24
So you may wonder, why on Earth are they doing it?
92
252000
4000
04:28
Why are they engaging with cyberspace?
93
256000
2000
04:30
Well my theory is that
94
258000
2000
04:32
it's happening because censorship actually
95
260000
3000
04:35
is less effective than you think it is in many of those places.
96
263000
3000
04:38
The moment you put something critical in a blog,
97
266000
4000
04:42
even if you manage to ban it immediately,
98
270000
3000
04:45
it will still spread around thousands and thousands of other blogs.
99
273000
4000
04:49
So the more you block it,
100
277000
2000
04:51
the more it emboldens people to actually avoid the censorship
101
279000
3000
04:54
and thus win in this cat-and-mouse game.
102
282000
3000
04:57
So the only way to control this message
103
285000
4000
05:01
is actually to try to spin it
104
289000
2000
05:03
and accuse anyone who has written something critical
105
291000
3000
05:06
of being, for example, a CIA agent.
106
294000
2000
05:08
And, again, this is happening quite often.
107
296000
3000
05:11
Just to give you an example of how it works in China, for example.
108
299000
4000
05:15
There was a big case in February 2009
109
303000
4000
05:19
called "Elude the Cat."
110
307000
2000
05:21
And for those of you who didn't know, I'll just give a little summary.
111
309000
4000
05:25
So what happened is that a 24-year-old man,
112
313000
3000
05:28
a Chinese man, died in prison custody.
113
316000
3000
05:31
And police said that it happened
114
319000
3000
05:34
because he was playing hide and seek,
115
322000
2000
05:36
which is "elude the cat" in Chinese slang,
116
324000
3000
05:39
with other inmates and hit his head
117
327000
2000
05:41
against the wall,
118
329000
2000
05:43
which was not an explanation which sat well with many Chinese bloggers.
119
331000
7000
05:50
So they immediately began posting a lot of critical comments.
120
338000
4000
05:54
In fact, QQ.com, which is a popular Chinese website,
121
342000
4000
05:58
had 35,000 comments
122
346000
2000
06:00
on this issue within hours.
123
348000
2000
06:02
But then authorities did something very smart.
124
350000
3000
06:05
Instead of trying to purge these comments,
125
353000
3000
06:08
they instead went and reached out to the bloggers.
126
356000
3000
06:11
And they basically said, "Look guys. We'd like you to become netizen investigators."
127
359000
5000
06:16
So 500 people applied,
128
364000
3000
06:19
and four were selected to actually go and tour the facility in question,
129
367000
4000
06:23
and thus inspect it and then blog about it.
130
371000
4000
06:27
Within days the entire incident was forgotten,
131
375000
3000
06:30
which would have never happened if they simply tried to block the content.
132
378000
3000
06:33
People would keep talking about it for weeks.
133
381000
3000
06:36
And this actually fits with another interesting theory
134
384000
4000
06:40
about what's happening in authoritarian states
135
388000
3000
06:43
and in their cyberspace.
136
391000
2000
06:45
This is what political scientists call authoritarian deliberation,
137
393000
3000
06:48
and it happens when governments are actually reaching out to their critics
138
396000
5000
06:53
and letting them engage with each other online.
139
401000
2000
06:55
We tend to think
140
403000
2000
06:57
that somehow this is going to harm these dictatorships,
141
405000
3000
07:00
but in many cases it only strengthens them.
142
408000
3000
07:03
And you may wonder why.
143
411000
2000
07:05
I'll just give you a very short list of reasons
144
413000
2000
07:07
why authoritarian deliberation
145
415000
3000
07:10
may actually help the dictators.
146
418000
2000
07:12
And first it's quite simple.
147
420000
2000
07:14
Most of them operate in a complete information vacuum.
148
422000
3000
07:17
They don't really have the data they need
149
425000
3000
07:20
in order to identify emerging threats facing the regime.
150
428000
3000
07:23
So encouraging people to actually go online
151
431000
3000
07:26
and share information and data
152
434000
2000
07:28
on blogs and wikis is great
153
436000
2000
07:30
because otherwise, low level apparatchiks and bureaucrats
154
438000
3000
07:33
will continue concealing what's actually happening in the country, right?
155
441000
4000
07:37
So from this perspective, having blogs and wikis
156
445000
2000
07:39
produce knowledge has been great.
157
447000
2000
07:41
Secondly, involving public in any decision making
158
449000
3000
07:44
is also great
159
452000
2000
07:46
because it helps you to share the blame
160
454000
2000
07:48
for the policies which eventually fail.
161
456000
2000
07:50
Because they say, "Well look, we asked you,
162
458000
2000
07:52
we consulted you, you voted on it.
163
460000
2000
07:54
You put it on the front page of your blog.
164
462000
2000
07:56
Well, great. You are the one who is to blame."
165
464000
3000
07:59
And finally, the purpose of
166
467000
3000
08:02
any authoritarian deliberation efforts
167
470000
2000
08:04
is usually to increase the legitimacy of the regimes, both at home and abroad.
168
472000
3000
08:07
So inviting people to all sorts of public forums,
169
475000
4000
08:11
having them participate in decision making,
170
479000
2000
08:13
it's actually great.
171
481000
2000
08:15
Because what happens is that then
172
483000
2000
08:17
you can actually point to this initiative and say,
173
485000
2000
08:19
"Well, we are having a democracy. We are having a forum."
174
487000
3000
08:22
Just to give you an example,
175
490000
2000
08:24
one of the Russian regions, for example,
176
492000
2000
08:26
now involves its citizens
177
494000
2000
08:28
in planning its strategy up until year 2020.
178
496000
4000
08:32
Right? So they can go online
179
500000
2000
08:34
and contribute ideas on what that region would look like by the year 2020.
180
502000
4000
08:38
I mean, anyone who has been to Russia would know
181
506000
2000
08:40
that there was no planning in Russia for the next month.
182
508000
3000
08:43
So having people involved in planning for 2020
183
511000
3000
08:46
is not necessarily going to change anything,
184
514000
2000
08:48
because the dictators are still the ones who control the agenda.
185
516000
4000
08:52
Just to give you an example from Iran,
186
520000
2000
08:54
we all heard about the Twitter revolution
187
522000
2000
08:56
that happened there,
188
524000
2000
08:58
but if you look close enough, you'll actually see
189
526000
2000
09:00
that many of the networks and blogs
190
528000
2000
09:02
and Twitter and Facebook were actually operational.
191
530000
3000
09:05
They may have become slower,
192
533000
2000
09:07
but the activists could still access it
193
535000
2000
09:09
and actually argue that having access to them
194
537000
2000
09:11
is actually great for many authoritarian states.
195
539000
3000
09:14
And it's great simply because
196
542000
3000
09:17
they can gather open source intelligence.
197
545000
4000
09:21
In the past it would take you weeks, if not months,
198
549000
3000
09:24
to identify how Iranian activists connect to each other.
199
552000
3000
09:27
Now you actually know how they connect to each other
200
555000
2000
09:29
by looking at their Facebook page.
201
557000
2000
09:31
I mean KGB, and not just KGB,
202
559000
2000
09:33
used to torture in order to actually get this data.
203
561000
3000
09:36
Now it's all available online.
204
564000
2000
09:38
(Laughter)
205
566000
2000
09:40
But I think the biggest conceptual pitfall
206
568000
2000
09:42
that cybertopians made
207
570000
2000
09:44
is when it comes to digital natives, people who have grown up online.
208
572000
3000
09:47
We often hear about cyber activism,
209
575000
3000
09:50
how people are getting more active because of the Internet.
210
578000
3000
09:53
Rarely hear about cyber hedonism, for example,
211
581000
2000
09:55
how people are becoming passive.
212
583000
2000
09:57
Why? Because they somehow assume that the Internet
213
585000
2000
09:59
is going to be the catalyst of change
214
587000
2000
10:01
that will push young people into the streets,
215
589000
2000
10:03
while in fact it may actually be the new opium for the masses
216
591000
3000
10:06
which will keep the same people in their rooms downloading pornography.
217
594000
3000
10:09
That's not an option being considered too strongly.
218
597000
4000
10:13
So for every digital renegade that is revolting in the streets of Tehran,
219
601000
3000
10:16
there may as well be two digital captives
220
604000
2000
10:18
who are actually rebelling only in the World of Warcraft.
221
606000
3000
10:21
And this is realistic. And there is nothing wrong about it
222
609000
2000
10:23
because the Internet has greatly empowered many of these young people
223
611000
4000
10:27
and it plays a completely different social role for them.
224
615000
2000
10:29
If you look at some of the surveys
225
617000
2000
10:31
on how the young people actually benefit from the Internet,
226
619000
3000
10:34
you'll see that the number of teenagers in China, for example,
227
622000
3000
10:37
for whom the Internet actually broadens their sex life,
228
625000
3000
10:40
is three times more than in the United States.
229
628000
3000
10:43
So it does play a social role,
230
631000
2000
10:45
however it may not necessarily lead to political engagement.
231
633000
3000
10:48
So the way I tend to think of it
232
636000
2000
10:50
is like a hierarchy of cyber-needs in space,
233
638000
2000
10:52
a total rip-off from Abraham Maslow.
234
640000
2000
10:54
But the point here is that
235
642000
2000
10:56
when we get the remote Russian village online,
236
644000
3000
10:59
what will get people to the Internet
237
647000
2000
11:01
is not going to be the reports from Human Rights Watch.
238
649000
2000
11:03
It's going to be pornography, "Sex and the City,"
239
651000
3000
11:06
or maybe watching funny videos of cats.
240
654000
3000
11:09
So this is something you have to recognize.
241
657000
2000
11:11
So what should we do about it?
242
659000
2000
11:13
Well I say we have to stop thinking
243
661000
2000
11:15
about the number of iPods per capita
244
663000
3000
11:18
and start thinking about ways in which
245
666000
2000
11:20
we can empower intellectuals,
246
668000
3000
11:23
dissidents, NGOs and then the members of civil society.
247
671000
3000
11:26
Because even what has been happening up 'til now
248
674000
3000
11:29
with the Spinternet and authoritarian deliberation,
249
677000
2000
11:31
there is a great chance that those voices will not be heard.
250
679000
3000
11:34
So I think we should shatter some of our utopian assumptions
251
682000
3000
11:37
and actually start doing something about it.
252
685000
2000
11:39
Thank you.
253
687000
2000
11:41
(Applause)
254
689000
3000

▲Back to top

ABOUT THE SPEAKER
Evgeny Morozov - Internet scientist
Evgeny Morozov wants to know how the Internet has changed the conduct of global affairs, because it certainly has ... but perhaps not in all the ways we think.

Why you should listen

Writer Evgeny Morozov studies the political and social aspects of the Internet. Right now, he's working on a book about the Internet's role in politics -- and especially how the Web influences civic engagement and regime stability in authoritarian, closed societies or in countries "in transition."

Morozov writes the much-quoted Foreign Policy blog Net.Effect, and is known for debunking -- with facts, figures and sound research -- myths and media-bandwagon assumptions about the impact of the Internet and mobile technologies on politics and society. We all want to be cyber-optimists, assuming that free societies necessarily follow from free data. Morozov is careful to say that it's not quite that simple: yes, social change can be empowered by new tech, but so can the policies of repressive regimes. Morozov attended TEDGlobal 2009 as one of 25 TEDGlobal Fellows.

Get the slide deck from his TEDGlobal talk >>

Read his essay in design mind >>

More profile about the speaker
Evgeny Morozov | Speaker | TED.com