Beyond censorship by online editors of comments posted to news and opinion items in the West, firewalls, and blockage of sites are common in despotic/autocratic regimes, with Russia, North Korea and China being the biggest offenders in this category. Some even argue that the concept of freedom online is just an ideal principle that is bandied about.
And then there is Google, who knows where you have been, and sells that information, without your permission, to those who may benefit from that data. Never mind government cyber-snooping, resulting in, for example, the transfer of travel particulars of citizens from one nation's government to another. Where is the freedom here? Who is protecting our right to privacy? Big Brother just loves the internet.
Nevertheless, it is a given, that computers and smartphones are used mostly for internet usage, and that practice will not go away soon, like it or not. Not with the Facebook generation addicted to personal internet postings for the world to peruse. (Why?) Yet even Luddites can see the advantage of a quick internet search for information.
Transitions Online (TOL), a web publication that concentrates on post-Soviet countries in Central and Eastern Europe, including, obviously, the Baltics, posted a detailed summary of the Freedom House report online on December 5th. Some of what follows has been gleaned from that article, paraphrased and summarized. This as the Freedom House report is lengthy reading; condensed versions such as TOL's enable the internet user to separate the wheat from the chaff with less effort.
Freedom House emphasized in their introduction to the report that what they call internet freedom has been declining internationally for the past four years, with “some of the biggest deterioration” noted in Russia and Ukraine. Hardly a newsflash, but it needs to be stressed.
The watchdogs ranked the 65 countries surveyed on a scale of 0-100: free (0-30 points), partly free (31-60 points), or not free (61-100 points). TOL noted that Russia's 60 points was the “worst possible score” in their group, and also that the ranking meant an increase of 11 points since 2009. Freedom House underlines that among other concerns “surveillance and detentions of online activists have increased” in Russia. The creation by Putin of a proscribed register of sites has resulted in “politically motivated prosecutions,” spurred by, for instance, bloggers reporting on the widespread corruption and bribery that is rife in Russia, which of course is a no-no. Even if the Emperor has no clothes, it simply should not be pointed out in Russia, although the truth is known to all. Indeed, TOL underscores this by noting “Putin [has] signed a law creating a blacklist of sites that contain ‘extremist' content or call for unsanctioned public protests.”
TOL crunches the numbers in its area of focus, and interest, as follows: Kyrgyzstan (34), Azerbaijan (55), and Kazakhstan (60) were labeled “partly free,” and Belarus (62) and Uzbekistan (79) were judged “not free,” despite a slight improvement in Belarus due to “generally fewer attempts to limit content,” according to the Freedom House report.
TOL notes that scores worsened over the past year for 36 of the 65 countries surveyed. And the web publication also emphasizes that four nations – Estonia (8), Hungary (24), Georgia (26), and Armenia (28) – were deemed “free.”
Say what you will in this age of Twitter and self-centered social media practices, such reports are an indicator of a society's approach to its citizens as a whole. Freedom House and TOL have done a valuable service by noting how even on the cusp of 2015 many people who post their opinions online are either hassled, harangued or even convicted, sent to jail, solely due to political motives.
Tõnu Naelapea
