Comments on: For Authoritarian Regimes, Turning Off the Internet is a Fatal Mistake, Study Says

By: realta fuar

realta fuar — Mon, 12 Sep 2011 03:54:23 +0000

Brian Too above has it right: it’s WHEN and HOW you cut access that are the important criteria.
For example, had the Met Police in London been smart enough to employ localized jamming of wifi and mobile phones, the hooligans would have been put at a disadvantage as they wouldn’t have known as easily where to assemble or where a police presence was weak, or, as was often the case, non-existent. Don’t be fooled: facebook and mobile phone companies obey the laws of the countries they operate in and if the governments wants your email or your IM chats, they ALWAYS hand them over. So, if you start a revolution, you’d better have the guts , organization, and material to finish it….Most of the time, you’re NOT going to be saved by an outside force like NATO has done in Libya.
In SOME countries the citizens have a constitutional (or otherwise protected) right to some sort of freedom of the press; in NO country does such a right exist for your mobile phone or internet access . Mobile phones only work in BART underground stations because the company has paid to put in repeaters for the convenience of their customers; they clearly don’t have to do this or to continue to provide this service.

By: Albert Yang

Albert Yang — Wed, 07 Sep 2011 02:18:03 +0000

Actually, Mubarak made things worse-
1). He violated human rights and freedom, and
2). he mostly set off an early bomb.
By attempting to delay the riots people can now interact with each
other face-to-face, thus developing the bonds that hold the
protestors together.

By: Magoonski

Magoonski — Fri, 02 Sep 2011 20:24:29 +0000

Government turning off internet and other media services is like a person running from the cops, it automatically insinuates guilt.
Government is supposed to protect people’s individual rights and freedoms, if government turns off services than it is no longer protecting those freedoms just the interest of the power hungry idiots we elected.
Even though I’m a very lazy person, if the government turns off my internet, I will take to the streets in protest solely for that, no other political reason or injustice required.

By: Eric Gonzalez

Eric Gonzalez — Fri, 02 Sep 2011 04:12:55 +0000

The Philippines’ People Power Revolution started (?) with a radio broadcast plea from Manila Cardinal Sin for the people to amass and protect close associates of former President Marcos who instigated a failed military coup against the latter. At the time (1986), cellphones and the internet were not yet available but people were tuned-in to radio and tv broadcasts, both government and private, and especially a shadowy radio station called Radio Bandido hastily set-up during the critical period. The people gathered in two military camps where the coup plotters were holed-up and ensuing events led to Marcos fleeing the country.

While correctly not a controlled study (how do you set up one?), the event can be a subset of a larger study, this one having continuous – discontinuous stream of information and misinformation.

By: Frank Sellers

Frank Sellers — Fri, 02 Sep 2011 03:22:24 +0000

http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=202954196435420&notif_t=event_invite

By: Frank Sellers

Frank Sellers — Fri, 02 Sep 2011 03:16:14 +0000

Surprise! Surprise! Republicans are introducing a bill to do the exact same thing here! The House of Representatives is introducing an Internet Blacklist Bill (S.968, formally called the PROTECT IP Act ).

If this bill became law e Department of Justice could force search engines and service providers to block users’ access to websites, and scrub the American Internet clean of any trace of their existence.

But you know what Republicans say: Democracy! Schmemocracy!

By: Tyler Killgore

Tyler Killgore — Thu, 01 Sep 2011 12:45:44 +0000

Well it shows that even when people have little freedoms they still fight to keep the few ones they have. A smarter idea would be to dwindle the access slowly. Kind of like the U.S. and its new soda plan. But it also shows that humans are social animals and will do almost anything to keep that aspect of them.

By: John Lerch

John Lerch — Wed, 31 Aug 2011 13:55:52 +0000

The BART example doesn’t seem to have elements of the dynamic. The dynamic seems to be the forcing of people into the open. Shutting down service in an area where people already are congregated seems to be totally different.

By: Brian Too

Brian Too — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 23:36:10 +0000

My hypothesis is that social media are needed in order to achieve a critical mass of awareness and common cause. Once that critical mass is achieved then cutting off access to communications becomes pointless.

In the early days of of the Egyptian uprising, everyone would be asking “Is there going to be a protest today?” Then add in all the ancilliary questions, like Where, What time, are You going, and so forth.

Once the critical mass is achieved this coordination and recruitment becomes unnecessary. Of course there is a protest today! There is a protest every day, unless something changes. It can be found in the same place it has been going on all along.

The protest movement itself becomes normal and routine, as much as these things can be so.

By: AG

AG — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 19:48:34 +0000

Turning off media or internet itself might not stop protest. But it might be needed for govement crackdown hard with a lot of arrest or killing. So outside world would not know what happens during the action. Let people find truth 50 years later.