Interacting with information in the digital age : an evaluation of human rights protecting information access, expression, and democracy

(1)

An Evaluation of Human Rights Protecting Information Access, Expression,

and Democracy

Name Roelof Bout (5688256)

E-mail address Roelof.Bout@student.uva.nl

Program Political Science: International Relations

Course MSc Thesis Research Project: Global Justice

Supervisor Dr. Enzo Rossi

Second Reader Dr. Annelien De Dijn

Date 2016-06-24

Number of words 21856 University of Amsterdam

(2)

1

Since the start of the computer and internet revolution our society has become increasingly digitalized, and today less than 2% of all the information created by humanity is stored non-digitally, compared with about 75% in 2000 (Floridi 2014: 3). Furthermore, the rate at which we create digital data is constantly increasing, and by 2015 we were creating just under three terabytes of data per day and the data stored had grown four times faster than the world economy (VCloudnews.com 2015a). The development of the computer and internet revolution has drastically changed the way we create, store, and interact with information. These new Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) have made it possible to turn more and more parts of our world into digital information or data, as well as making it possible to gather and mine ever more information. This transformation of the quantity, as well as the quantity, of stored information is fundamentally changing the way in which societies and individuals are processing information. Furthermore, it has meant that information plays a role in people’s lives in a new and revolutionary way; how they interact with it, what is known about them, and what they are able to know about the world through the information that is available to them via the Internet.

The changes brought about by these modern digital ICTs can be both good and bad, and they have a significant impact on society, changing it into what some call the information or informational society (Webster 2006: 3). Within such a society, as is the case for many societies in the developed world, much more information is available to a member of such a society than has ever been available to them at any time before (Floridi 2014: 13). However this does come with a condition, which is that such a person must have access to, and know how to use, digital ICTs. This already shows the first downside of the development and usage of digital ICTs; one

(4)

3 needs access to them and knowledge of how to use them in order for their benefits to take effect. As a result of this, those who have such access and know how to use them can take full advantage of their benefits, while those who do not are left trailing behind. The divide this causes is called the digital divide, and it can occur within societies as well as between societies, especially between the developed and less developed world (Idem: 48). While this divide is still bridgeable, it can pose a serious threat to equality and global justice if developments keep progressing as they are; the divide could become a chasm if nothing is done about it. Furthermore, as societies become more information-dependent, more and more parts of our lives become digitalized, and as our lives are increasingly online we become ever more dependent on digital ICTs. This poses a danger as individuals and society are much more dependent on governments and companies for their information, because they control the infrastructure and backend ICTs necessary to use personal ICTs.

As a result of this, information is also much more under the control of both companies and governments, meaning that they can heavily influence the information available to members of society as well as what is actively presented to us. For example, two of the most important information-providing websites and the companies that own them, namely Facebook and Google (or Alphabet, which is how it is registered at the stock exchange), have huge influence over which information is presented to its users and how. The results of search queries made with Google’s search engine are influenced by its search algorithms. as well as Google’s need to insert advertisements, since this is the way it makes money. In the case of Facebook, advertisements also play an important role in what is shown on someone’s news feed, as well as being influenced by one’s likes, one’s friends’ likes, and what Facebook knows about one’s surfing behavior (NRC 2016b). Privacy issues aside, these examples show that these important information-giving

(5)

4 media heavily influence the free flow of information. This does not have to be a bad thing in principle; it does, however, need to be taken into consideration as a potential threat to the free access to information. Furthermore, we learn from this that these companies track our activities, and probably know more things about us than we can imagine or would like to admit.

When looking at another important player in the information game, namely governments, a similar pattern can be observed – albeit in some cases far more disconcerting. One example is the closing off of some parts of the internet, such as access to Google services, by the Chinese government in an attempt to regulate access to information it deems dangerous for its own survival and which it thus makes unavailable to its populace. So, governments have the opportunity to deny their citizens access to certain websites and/or parts of the internet. Furthermore, the NSA leaks provided by Edward Snowden have shown that digital ICTs can also be used by governmental agencies to track all our digital activities. What makes this case even more disconcerting than the Chinese case is that it is done by a governmental agency in a democratic country. Moreover, these examples show that governments, like companies, have the ability to track what we do as well as to control what information we can access, and so they can both influence our active (accessing information) and passive (privacy) interaction with digital ICTs.

Digital information and how citizens need to be protected when they are online is one of the liveliest policy preoccupations, both nationally and internationally. This is exemplified by the privacy debates, Freedom of Information (FOI) requests, and discussions about net neutrality (Duff 2012). Of these, the debates on privacy are by far the liveliest in both media and politics. This is a very relevant topic, certainly when looking at the amount of personal information corporations like Facebook and Google have access to and what they know about us based on our

(6)

5 online activities. Likewise, by showing how governmental agencies intrude on privacy, the NSA leaks show that this topic is relevant and needs to be addressed. These privacy debates do not discuss the usage of a new medium in the form of digital ICTs and how they have changed our interaction with information; they mostly only address the fact that privacy has to be protected (Winter 2013: 27). However, with the advent of digital ICTs it seems that access to information and privacy are linked more than they have ever been before. Furthermore, the nature of information, and the role it plays in society and individual lives, has dramatically changed with the advent of modern digital ICTs.

With all the radical changes brought about by these new digital ICTs to the ways in which we produce, store and consume information, it becomes necessary to take a look at our present conception of information access as a human right, and if this conception still resembles the importance that it has in our current society. Access to information, or the right to information as it is known in the legal United Nations (UN) context, has been a part of human rights law since the late 1940s and is considered to be a vital part of good governance and the democratic process (Donders 2015: 89). However, a lot has changed since then in how we consume, produce and store information with the development of digital ICTs, and these developments give rise to a number of questions. Humans who go online not only have a physical presence; they also have a digital one. Do the developments in the technology of digital ICTs, and the role information plays within our society, require us to view access to data in a new light? If this is the case, how should we view access to information in order to do justice to the ethical concerns that have arisen with the development of new ICTs and the information society? How does this relate to our democratic human rights?; are these still properly protected at this moment? Should access to

(7)

6 digital information be considered a basic human right, in order to create a more globally just world? With these points in mind, the following research question will be addressed.

 What is the impact of digital ICTs on the human rights laws protecting information access, expression and democracy, are these rights still properly protected or is a re-evaluation warranted and why should this be the case?

In order to answer the main question, this thesis is divided into four chapters in which different aspects of the subject are further explored. In these chapters I will argue that the current human rights laws protecting informational access, expression and democracy do not properly deal with the changes brought about by digital ICTs in human interaction with information. Thus are unable to properly protect these human rights and need to re-evaluated in such a matter that they do take these changes in consideration. In the first chapter, the development of the information revolution and the role of ICTs within this revolution, as well as within the information society, will be further explored; this will set the context, and reveal its importance to our current society and lives. The second chapter will further expand on this by looking at the role of ICTs and the ethical concerns related to their use. It will show how they can influence the way in which we consume information, how they can be used to influence our day-to-day lives, and how they can be used to collect data about us. Here we will see that the concerns which stand out relating to their use are that modern ICTs can easily be used to influence the information we have control over and access to. Combined with the importance of information in our lives, shown in the first chapter, it could be argued that the relation between information, its users and society has changed considerably. The third chapter will expand on the discussion of basic human rights and the role they have in the information society. I will show that the current conception of information, and the ways in which humans interact with it as described at the moment, is not a

(8)

7 good reflection of the current and future situation. Using the second and third chapter as my main basis I will further expand on my main argument. I will do this in the fourth chapter and her I will show why our changed relationship with information and its role in our current society warrants a revision of the current human rights laws protecting informational access and expression need to be re-evaluated.

(9)

8

1 Information, ICTs and the Information Society

Introduction

This chapter outlines the context of this thesis, in order to gain a better understanding of the role which information, especially digital information, plays in our society and personal lives. This will enable us to gain a better understanding in what way digital ICTs have changed our relationship with information and why our view in relation to informational human rights needs to be re-valuated. In order to achieve this, I will start by explaining how the importance of information within our society has changed drastically over the last 30 years, and how it has become the single most important tool in our society. I will illustrate this by looking at the latest developments in ICTs and how they affect our interaction with digital information. I will also further explain what kinds of digital information are of importance here, as not all digital information is of interest to interaction with users or by nature is not accessible in this way, and thus is of little relevance to this research. By doing this I set the stage for the development of the argument that not only our interaction with the state need protection from human rights laws, and that these laws need to be re-evaluated.

1.1 The Coming of the Current Information Age

The production, storage and communication of information is one of the most defining features of human societies and human history. So much so that we even define our past into periods of history and pre-history, which is demarcated by whether historians are able to decipher written sources from the past of a certain civilization. Thus, in order for a past society to become part of history, they need to have left behind a written record we can understand. Without the availability of this information we would not have a history as we know it today. Since humans developed forms of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs), which started with the invention

(10)

9 of writing in the early bronze age in certain parts of the world, those civilizations which developed a written language have had a form of ‘information society’ as opposed to the societies which did not use written language as a form of ICT. ICTs have developed from being mainly record-keeping systems in the early period, into systems that are also used to communicate as well as to store information. This development of ICTs is one of the most important factors in the development of the current highly advanced societies, as well as being one of the most defining feature of these societies. Such societies are also highly dependent on information-based assets, information-oriented public sectors and information-intensive services to keep them running smoothly. These societies are mostly Western developed countries, for example, Germany, Canada, and the United States. These societies are considered to be ‘information societies’ because more than 70 percent of their GDP depends on intangible information-related goods (Floridi 2014: 4).

Although most of humanity has been part of an informational society in one way or another, there are significant differences to be observed over time between the different information technologies, and which ones were dominant within a certain society. This is mostly due to the different levels of economic and technological development of a specific society. For example, both the United States (US) and Morocco have an informational society, but US society would probably grind to a halt without the use of modern ICTs such as the internet, while most parts of Moroccan society would keep working without many problems if the country were to lose its access to modern ICTs. However, most members of American society have much more access to all the information that is available through the use of modern ICTs compared with most members of Moroccan society, and thus the latter have a definite disadvantage compared with their American counterparts. This example is one that is taking place in the here and now; it

(11)

10 shows that development is not evenly distributed across the globe, and that big differences are present between different societies. The difference shown is comparable with the difference between how American society was organized approximately thirty years ago compared with its present day organization, in terms of informational dependence and availability (Castells 2010: 6-7). This shows that, even though both societies are information societies, the American one has different dominant ICTs and seems to be much more reliant on them in order to keep functioning. The changing of dominant ICTs within a society has been happening ever since our first use of ICTs; it can be even observed in classical Greek culture and has almost always been accompanied by some form of controversy or resistance. In Greek culture this came about in the person of Socrates, during the period when this classical culture was moving from its oral tradition towards putting information into writing, which became increasingly dominant during this period (Sullins 2014a: Introduction). Since then several changes to dominant ICTs have taken place. The most important came from the printing press, the tele- and radio devices, and more recently the internet. All of these changes have faced their own opposition, had their own effect on society, and sparked their own debates on their morality and impact on societies. This kind of discussions are also observable in relation to digital ICTs, these occur primarily in relation to the information society and equality in such a society. However, the influence of digital ICTs on democratic human rights are hardly discussed. This is rather disconcerting, why this is will become clear after reading the second and third chapter.

Generally, the best way to define ICTs at their most basic level are technologies that record, communicate, synthesize or organize information, and this is what they have in common with each other. Within this context we can understand information as any meaningful message, useful data or instructional content. The lifecycle of this information normally consists of the

(12)

11 following phases: occurrence (creation), recording, transmission, processing (validating, organizing, modifying, etc.), and usage (modelling, analyzing, etc.) (Floridi 2014: 6). After this cycle is complete the information can be either stored, reused, or discarded, depended on what its user/creator intends to do with it, and this happens through the use of ICTs. One of the current, and perhaps largest, problem with digital ICTs is how to regulate them, because the developments of technologies are occurring so fast. As a consequence, the slow and deliberative process of policy-making in relation to these technologies is playing catch-up, and more often than not is implemented at a time when the technology has already become obsolete (Sullins 2014a: Chapter 1). This makes some of these technologies, for example file sharing technologies, become extralegal or lawless, and the crimes that they facilitate, such as copyright infringements, stay unpunished.

1.2 The Current State of Digital ICTs

As the previous section shows, the technological development of ICTs has been relatively slow over time until the invention of the computer and subsequently the Internet, and with them the inception of digital ICTs. These have revolutionized how we create, store, and process information. They also constantly change how we do this, and new technologies are constantly on the rise. These changes do not stay confined to information alone, but have an impact on society as a whole, and human informational interaction in particular.

The impact of this rise, and how digital ICTs have changed our information out- and input, is perhaps best illustrated by numbers. In 2003, researchers at the Berkley School of Information estimated that the total amount of data humanity had accumulated up until the

(13)

12 introduction of computers amounted to approximately 12 exabytes1 of data. However, by 2006 this number had already reached 180 exabytes, and between 2006 and 2011 the total had grown beyond the zettabyte2 by increasing to over 1,600 exabytes. Based on research done by the International Data Cooperation (IDC), it is expected that this figure will grow by a factor of four every three years, so by 2015 humankind had produced approximately 8 zettabytes, and by 2018 this will be near the 28 zettabyte mark (Floridi 2014: 13). This should make it clear that ICTs, the technology behind them and the data we produce through them is developing at a blistering pace. The amount of data produced and accessed is larger than ever before; the amount of data stored is greater than it has ever been; the ownership of and access to this information is more widespread than at any other moment in history. Furthermore, the technology of the ICTs that facilitate these capabilities is becoming ever more omnipresent and keeps advancing at a very high pace. In addition, the quality of the data and the type of data that can be recorded is ever more intimate and complete.

These seem like enormous numbers, and rightly so; however, this does not mean that all data created through digital ICTs is useful as digital information and ready for use by humans. For this thesis, it is useful to further define what kinds of data are created through digital ICTs, in what way they are created and used, and how they are useful to humans and how we interact with them. This is of importance as it shows how complicated informational interaction has become with the advent of digital ICTs. Moreover, it shows that much of the data created and used by digital ICTs is not necessarily useful to humans, at least not directly, but are nonetheless essential to the workings of digital ICTs. The main example here is metadata. At its simplest, metadata can

1

An exabyte is roughly the same as 10-18 bytes, about 50,000 hours of video in DVD quality.

(14)

13 be described as information about information (Forbes.com 2013a). A more complete description is given by the US National Information Standards Organization (NISO) which describes it as follows: ‘[…] structured information that describes, explains, locates, or otherwise makes it easier to retrieve, use or manage an information source.’ (NISO 2004a: 1). The NISO also divides metadata into three distinct subtypes; administrative metadata, which provides information for managing a resource; descriptive metadata, which describes a resource for purposes such as identification and discovery; structural metadata, which indicates how compound objects are put together. These properties can be used to track certain digital activities made by users of digital ICTs, as has been demonstrated by the NSA leaks’ demonstration of how the NSA uses phone metadata to carry out surveillance on US citizens (The Guardian 2015a). Metadata can be useful in organizing electronic resources, easily searching and discovering resources, providing digital identification, facilitating interoperability and supporting the archiving of data (NISO 2004a: 1). Furthermore, if all digital information is to be preserved for future generations and accessible to them, metadata is indispensable in providing the necessary framework. The importance of this will become clear in the second chapter, as we discuss the opportunities and threats that can occur when using digital ICTs.

Although metadata is of huge importance in using digital ICTs, and makes the data it contains and communicates useful as information, it does not contain any useful information in day-to-day use for the common user, and thus does not help us further the concept of information and what it means here. In order to conceptualize this we need to look at the ‘real’ data, meaning the bits and bytes that actually contain information. For the purpose of this thesis, this data is divided into two categories. What is understood here as ‘normal’ data is data that can be easily converted into information or is already available as information through digital ICTs and is

(15)

14 ready to be used by humans, for example articles on websites, MP3 files, eBooks etc. The second category is the category called ‘big’ data; this is a widely, yet ill-defined concept that remains quite vague (Floridi 2014: 14). With this in mind I will now further expand on what the concept of big data will mean within the confines of this thesis, after which I will further expand on ‘normal’ data.

The concept of big data is not a synonym for a conglomeration of a large sum of data. However, there is currently no simple, clear-cut definition of the concept. It can be used as a term for the huge amounts of data information and their appearance since the advent of digital ICTs, as I described above. However, this means that it would entail all data, since the purpose here is to further define it. Something more useful on the subject can be found in the work of Luciano Floridi. In his 2014 book The 4th Revolution he describes big data as being hard to define. He also

describes how the term is closely related to the huge amounts of data we produce through digital ICTs; this, however, does not further our understanding of the concept. As a concept big data cannot be described as being simply an aggregation of large amounts of data, its essence lies in the fact that these large amounts of data can be analyzed and processed in order to detect patterns (Idem: 16). With modern digital ICTs this can be done very cheaply, quickly and on virtually any digital device. Through this process companies, researchers and governments are able to spot patterns in their immense databases, which they can exploit for the advancement of knowledge, the creation of profit, and the improvement of human lives (Idem).

Cukier and Mayer-Schönberger propose a similar description of the concept. They see big data as the capacity to search, cross-reference and aggregate large datasets, within the confines of the new data ecosystem brought about by digital ICTs. (Cukier & Mayer-Schönberger 2013a: 10-11). The use of digital ICTs has not only brought about significant quantitative change in data

(16)

15 amounts; it has also led to a qualitative change. It is no longer necessary to use samples in order to make predictions; with digital ICTs it is possible to make use of entire, and often huge, datasets in order to see patterns and make predictions. Analyses based on big data will often show us patterns, and make connections that we were not aware of. However, more often than not they will show that something is happening without showing why it is happening (Idem 12-13). This focus on using data analysis through digital ICTs is also observable in a piece written by Boyd and Crawford in 2012 where they define it as a ‘[…] cultural, technological and scholarly phenomenon […]’ wherein the analysis and cross reference of large datasets is the defining factor (Boyd & Crawford 2012: 663).

Although the abovementioned authors differ slightly on what the concept of big data exactly entails, one thing is clear. Big data is about using digitalized information and databases to create new information and knowledge that can be useful across a whole range of fields. It is exactly this digitalization, or ‘datafication’, of human existence and everything that happens in it that plays a key role according to them. This datafication happens through the use of digital ICTs, and is neither inherently good nor bad. However, it can be used in ways that can help further society, but also raise some concerns, like privacy issues, and commodification of information (Mai 2016: 198). In the second chapter I will make clear how these issues form a concern for human interaction with information, as will their relation with big data be further clarified. Furthermore, datafication is closely related to, and partly depends upon, the behavior of humans when interacting with digital ICT and uses them to access ‘normal’ data.

The concept of ‘normal’ data is a bit more straightforward than that of big data, at least from a user perspective, and within the confines of this thesis the following will be part of the concept of normal data. As I stated above, ‘normal’ data is the data that is ready for human

(17)

16 consumption as information, or very close to this state. It also consists of the data generated by these users through their interaction with digital ICTs, such as giving their personal information to websites, sending emails, sending in their taxes, or posting a photo on Instagram, to name just a few examples. These are all examples of day-to-day usage of digital ICTs which generate data that is directly accessible for others also using these ICTs, and which are usable in generating new information and knowledge through the techniques that fall within the confines of the big data concept.

1.3 The Informational Society

The information or informational society is an idea that first appeared during the late 1970s, and has been evolving since then. It has been used in several different kinds of scientific research to indicate the growing importance of information within society in one way or another. However, the exact meaning of the concept depends heavily on the scientific field in which it is explored. Some of these will be explored further in the following section, in which the concept of informational society as it is used in this thesis will be defined. This overview also shows how closely related the concept of information society is to the emergence of digital ICTs and the growing importance of information in societies where their use is widespread.

One of the first and most influential ideas on the information society came from the book

The Coming of the Post-Industrial Society: A Venture in Social Forecasting, first published in

1973 by the American sociologist D. Bell. According to Bell, one of the main features of the postindustrial period is the decreasing role of goods production and the development of service industries, in other words, the production of information (Bell 1973; Karavaev 2014: 128). This idea is further expanded upon by the American Toffler who describes how, in an information society, information becomes the main resource and replaces a huge amount of other material

(18)

17 resources used by society (Toffler 1980: 26). Another researcher who expanded on the postindustrial society idea posed by Bell is Y. Masuda. He believes that in an information society it is not the possession of material wealth, but rather the possession of information which is the driving force behind the society’s development and transformation. This idea of the great importance of information within society is a widely-held opinion by scientists active in this field (Karavaev 2014: 128). However, from the definition given by these authors, we cannot distill what an information society looks like, as they only point to the fact that information plays a much bigger role within such a society. They all, however, subscribe to the notion of an information society.

Nevertheless, there is also a large group of authors who do not necessarily agree with the concept of an informational society as it is posited by the abovementioned authors. In order to get a more complete sense of the discussion and to further expand on the concept of the information society, I have turned to some more recent authors. I have made use of the distinctions made by Frank Webster in his book Theories of the information society (Webster 2006). When it comes to the idea of the information society, Webster distinguishes two types of authors in his book. The first group consists of those who subscribe to the notion of an information society. They claim, like those mentioned above, that a new sort of society has emerged, and that this new society is marked by its differences from existing societies. The second group emphasizes continuity and claims that only an informatisation of pre-existing relationships has taken place. Even though these authors do not deny that information has a unique significance in modern society, they argue that the form and function that information has does not prevail over long-established practices and principles (Idem: 6-7). Webster’s own standpoint is more ambiguous than those of the groups he describes; he acknowledges that, with the advent of digital ICTs, there has been an

(19)

18 informatisation of life through the high influx of information in society. However, he has doubts about the validity of the claims made by those who support the idea of an information society (Idem: 31). But despite his critical disposition towards the concept of the information society, he does identify five main criteria on the basis of which an information society can be defined (Idem: 8-9). Furthermore, he recognizes the insights given by Manual Castells, who is one of the most influential proponents of the information society concept, in his Informational Age trilogy. On this subject, Webster states that this trilogy shows how information flows, and that the networks which use these are central to how society works today (Idem: 98).

Castells claims that at the end of the twentieth century, several major economic, technological, cultural and social transformations came together to form a new sort of society, which Castells calls the network society (Castells 2010: XVII). According to Castells, the last century has been an important interval in history that was characterized by a transformation of the material culture. He states that this transformation comes to light through the emergence of a new technological paradigm organized around information technologies (Idem: 28-29). The definition he uses for these technologies closely resembles the definition given by Floridi and the one used here in defining digital ICTs, with the most important being the computer and internet technologies. Castell calls the current revolution of information technology a historical event, with an impact similar to that of the industrial revolution, which induces a pattern of discontinuity in the material basis of culture, economy and society. Furthermore, he describes information as important in every technological revolution, including this one. However, the current revolution does not essentially depend on new knowledge and information; rather it depends on the transformation of the technology used to communicate and process information; this lies at its core (Idem: 29). So it is through the application of information and knowledge in

(20)

19 digital ICTs that this revolution is taking place. It is the use of these ICTs that promotes further development of innovations, based on these technologies that have been connecting the world for the last twenty years, which have changed society and how humans interact with information and each other. These developments have had an enormous impact on how we interact with information, and they present a number of opportunities and threats that can strongly affect democracy and informational freedom.

While the abovementioned authors all try to prove or disprove the existence of the information society, there is also a number of authors according to whom the information society is already upon us, and who discuss the implications this has for our society. Notable among these is Alistair Duff who, in his book Information Society Studies published in 2000, explores key thinkers and issues in the development of the information society thesis. He concludes that we live in an information society. In his 2012 book, Ethics and Information Technology, he further works on this premise and makes a normative exploration of how such a society should be organized (Duff 2012). The observations made by Duff, though very interesting and promising, seem to miss certain elements of the importance of digital ICTs in our lives, and thus the story he tells us is incomplete. In the eyes of this author, this is because he fails to consider how privacy and information issues have become intertwined in the information society, and how this can affect the very fabric upon which informational human rights are build. However, I will further expand on this in the third chapter. The important issue here is that I also believe the information society to be real, and that the changes it has brought need to addressed.

Conclusion

As I have clearly outlined in this chapter, information and the use of ICTs have played an important role in human life ever since the dawn of human civilization. However, with the advent

(21)

20 of digital ICTs, our relationship with information has drastically changed. Since the advent of digital ICTs the amount of information we produce, store, and access has increased by an almost inexpressible amount. With the changes brought about by the use of digital ICTs, information has taken a more central role in our lives and society than ever before. I have described which kinds of data should be considered and what they entail, which sets the stage for the next chapter in which I will further expand on the concerns and opportunities they create for society and its citizens. In the last section I clearly pointed out that, based on the importance of information in developed society and the development of digital ICTs, the information society is upon us – at least in large parts of the developed world. Besides this, the development of digital ICTs and societies in the developed world seems to indicate that the information society is the future, and that the postindustrial information society is economically superior to the industrial society. The arrival of the information society should make it clear that the role of information has changed, and that its economic importance has increased to an enormous extent. This increased importance, combined with the changed nature of ICTs with the introduction of digital technology, has changed the ways in which humans interact with ICTs. With this change, a number of opportunities and threats have arisen that warrant could affect the working of current informational and democratic human rights laws. In order to know why this re-evaluation is warranted, we should first know what these opportunities and threats are. I will address this in the next chapter.

(22)

21

2 Information Opportunities and Threats

Introduction

In the previous chapter, I have shown how the current information age has developed into its current state. Moreover, I have shown how the development of this state was caused by the use of digital ICTs, and that through the use of these ICTs information has had a growing importance in our society and lives. A number of societies in the developed world have become so intertwined with the information they use and produce, and become so dependent upon it, that they can be called information societies. However, the previous chapter has also left some questions open that I need to answer in order to further my argument. This chapter therefore defines and explains what should be understood when talking about digital ICTs, the forms they can take, the forms which information can take and in what way this all plays a role in our personal lives and society. Here, datafication of human existence and information becomes more defined than in the previous chapter, and the whole idea of the information society should become clear. From this chapter the interplay between ‘normal’ data, metadata and big data will also become clear. After this has been achieved I explain what the opportunities, threats and ethical concerns are when using digital ICTs and what changes they have brought about in society. This is done by focusing attention on the most important players in the information society, namely citizens, the state, and companies. Based on the discussions made in this chapter, and the discrepancies that arise between the opportunities and threats I have detected in this chapter, and how informational human rights currently deal with digital ICTs the argument I present in the third and fourth chapter is set up.

(23)

22 2.1 Defining Digital ICTs

In the previous chapter, a short description of digital Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) is given. They are the technologies that we use to store, consume and communicate information digitally. This distinction is significant, as their digital nature puts them in a group apart from other ‘old’ ICTs, such as newspapers, radio, books, or clay tablets, to name just a few. Digital ICTs can perform the same basic functions as the ‘old’ ICTs, however, they do this through an electrical, digitized or computerized system. With the advent of the internet their ability to communicate with each other has also increased significantly and is still on the rise. Digital ICTs can be divided into three different sorts of systems that operate on different levels; however, it should be noted that one ICT device can operate on different levels, depending on what kind of function it is performing at a certain moment in time. To get an idea of how many connected devices there are, according to a CISCO report in 2015 approximately 25 billion devices have been connected to the Internet, and they expect that this number will have doubled by 2020 (Evans 2011: 3).

The first type of digital ICTs systems I would like to discuss are the systems with which humans directly interact, such as: mobile phones/smartphones; televisions (smart); home media centers; home computers and laptops; e-readers; tablets; iPods and other digital audio players; smart home products, such as dishwashers, refrigerators and vacuum cleaners (these do not directly interact with the user – this often happens through the use of an app on a smartphone or tablet) (Floridi 2014: 33). Most people in the developed world own at least one of these devices and probably two or more, mostly some sort of personal computer and a smartphone, and is connected to the internet through this device (Internetlivestats.com 2016a). These devices, like most interface devices to make use of other digital ICTs, use the Internet infrastructure and

(24)

23 access the information that they contain from, or upload information about themselves to, another device or system.

The second type of system is one that interacts with other digital ICTs in order to share data or information with each other. To name a few examples that purely perform such tasks; RFID tags/chips, sensors of any kind for measuring things like temperature, weight, humidity, power consumption, and others. However, most of the ICTs that fall under the first type of system also perform functions that are part of the second type of system. Our telephones can share our GPS location with all sorts of other devices and online services, and in many cases these interactions are necessary in order for the ICT we interface with to properly perform its functions. Much of the data that is exchanged in these interactions is the exchange of metadata, such as the exchange of information between a mobile phone and a cell tower needed to keep the phone connected to the network (Floridi 2014: 34). Location data can also be used in other ways, such as the way that Google uses it. A user of Google services can instruct his or her phone to constantly update Google servers about their location, look back in their location history, and even use the Google Now app to alert them to convenient information such as when their last public transport option is about to leave. Other examples are sensors for measuring the temperature of smart home appliances, and devices that track the Wi-Fi and/or Bluetooth signals of devices that enter a store. The important thing that these type of systems do is that they send and receive data on a regular basis without the interaction of a human with the device, whether to ensure that the ICT does its job correctly, as a human interface device, or to gather data that can be used as information on some other device or to store in a database to be analyzed later.

The third type of system of importance, and the digital ICTs that make them up, are the systems that form the backend part of the digital ICTs system as a whole. These are part of the

(25)

24 internet and/or network systems too, just like those used to collect, store and analyze data delivered through the other systems. These systems are necessary in order to make full use of the potential of all the digital ICTs that exist. It is also in these systems where most power lies, at least in relation to raw computing power, and it is these ICTs that are used in order to make big data analyses. The ICTs in this group include servers, server parks, datacenters, supercomputers, internet hubs, the physical lines over which signals are sent, mobile phone networks and other devices that make up the infrastructure of the Internet (Idem; Holvast 2008: 21). These examples show that only a small portion of the devices we see in day-to-day use are necessary to the proper working of digital ICTs, and only a small portion can be owned by private citizens. Most of these ICTs are so big and expensive that they are owned by either the government, governmental agencies, or large private companies such as ISPs, telephone companies, cable companies, and companies like Amazon, who own huge server parks and rent out space on these. Moreover, one could also think of companies such as Facebook, Google and Microsoft whose servers contain important websites. Furthermore, important services are provided through these servers that make the use of consumer grade ICTs possible, while other companies host other companies’ websites so they are accessible through the Internet. ISPs, and other companies that provide the infrastructure for internet use, control the data flows of all other digital ICTs (PEW 2014: 22). Thus it can be surmised that ICTs that are part of this type are the most important digital ICTs used, and yet they are the least known and seen by the public. They provide the largest part of the storage, and analysis capacity, which is one of the strong points of digital ICTs compared with older ICTs regarding their information provision and analyzing capacity. Furthermore, the interconnectedness that defines digital ICTs, and is one of the most important instigators of innovation and information creation, comes from this type of digital ICTs and is provided by a relatively small number of companies and governments.

(26)

25 2.2 Threats and Ethical Concerns Related to the use of Digital ICTs

As I described above, one of the defining features of digital ICTs is their interconnectedness; many even need to be connected to others in order to function properly. This interconnectedness, combined with their computing power, is the biggest advantage of digital ICTs over previously-used ICTs and this is what has brought the most of the new complexities in relation to human informational interaction. These characteristics create opportunities and threats in the day-to-day lives of citizens when they use digital ICTs; moreover, there are several threats and opportunities related to human civilization as a whole. In the following section, I discuss threats and their ethical concerns; in the last section of this chapter I further expand on the opportunities created by the use of digital ICTs. This sets the stage for the next chapter and how well informational human rights deal with these issues. When discussing the threats I am not discussing all potential threats, as one could write whole books on this. This section shows only the most important examples of threats to users and society, and those that exemplify how interlinked these threats are with each other and with the use of digital ICTs. These examples are further explained and explored by giving examples from real life, so as to better understand what possible consequences they may have for users and society.

Some of the biggest threats in relation to the use of digital ICTs come from those posed by the use of big data, and how these are used to analyze our behavior. Most are therefore related to privacy issues. However, some other very important threats are related to with what sorts of information users are presented when using digital ICTs and how this occurs. The threats that can arise when using digital ICTs are almost all related to the datafication of all parts of human existence (Cukier & Mayer-Schönberger 2013a: 78). The threats that arise can be seen as twofold, and are two sides of the same coin. In order to show this I have set out two lines with a

(27)

26 starting point of the datafication of our lives and digitalization of human knowledge and information. From there, we progress to the threats that the use of digital ICTs can pose to privacy, and from there to the problems it poses to our information access and with what users are actually presented when they access information through digital ICTs. Furthermore, these threats show that most of the concerns raised stem from the differences between what is good for the public and individual users on one side, and what is good for companies and/or governments on the other.

In order to properly look at the threats I will shortly recap what datafication and digitalization means. Datafication is the quantification of phenomena in a data format, presented so that it can be analyzed. The digitalization of this data, all non-datafied phenomena, and other information into a digital format (a format understandable for computers and other digital ICTs) is what is understood as digitalization. It is because of this datafication and digitalization, combined with the enormous computing power of modern digital ICTs, that big data analyses are made possible.

One of the core concerns with big data is the threat it poses to the privacy of individuals from either companies or governments. Through the use of big data, personal information and the behavior of a user when he is interacting with digital ICTs are becoming commodified and increasingly useful, as the use of digital ICTs creates even more information about the users interests, preferences and behavior. Through the datafication of human existence, big data can be used to analyze almost all personal data and used to survey users and the whole of society (Holvast 2009: 38). This may be the case with either governments or companies, and can be interpreted as a huge threat to privacy issues. To show how this can work in the real world, and how the use of big data analytics can be interpreted as an infringement of privacy, an example

(28)

27 comes from the United States. In 2012 a father went to Target to complain that his daughter had received coupons for maternity clothing. When Target explained why they had sent the coupons, it turned out that the company knew before anyone else that the daughter was pregnant. The company had collected data about her purchase history and, based on big data analysis, the company had concluded that the daughter’s data produced a ‘pregnancy prediction’ score and that is why they had sent coupons (Mai 2016: 192). Although this is a rather benign example, one can imagine how the same principles applied elsewhere can be used for much more sinister applications. This could lead to a person feeling watched and controlled; these are real threats that can occur in our daily life in the information society.

Other potential threats arise from the infrastructure that digital ICTs use to work, which is the infrastructure of the Internet. The threat rises from the fact that those providing the infrastructure, whether business or government, can control which information flows over the Internet, and control how freely this information flows (DeNardis 2012: 720-721). In this way, those controlling the infrastructure can use it to control the flow of information to the public, or promote certain services in an effort to create more revenue. In either case it hampers the free flow of information to the public which is very easy to accomplish for those who control the infrastructure. China is a good example of a government using their power to impede the free flow of information, as the country censors search results and makes the use of Google services almost impossible (Cukier & Mayer-Schönberger 2013b: 29). This not only inhibits the free flow of information, but at same time hampers commerce and revenue for companies. Another example comes from the Netherlands, where a mobile Internet Service Provider (ISP) tried to use its power over the network to increase revenue, and through this effort tried to impede free use of their internet connection and the free flow of information. The company tried to achieve this by

(29)

28 billing its customers extra for the data used by chat applications that had cost them considerable revenue, as these apps were the cause of a significant drop in revenue from SMS texting. However, the Dutch government stopped them from implementing this new levy and, a few years later, implemented a law guaranteeing that no online service can be favored or impeded compared with others in terms of bandwidth, or be subject to levies, and that ISPs have to handle all data equally (Tweakers.net 2011a; Tweakers.net 2015a).

Related to this problem of the free flow of information is how information is presented to users. Here, two potential threats arise with their own ethical considerations. These threats stem from the fact that companies who own certain websites, such as Facebook.com and Google.com, try to cater to the wishes and preferences of their users, while at the same time collecting information about them. They then sell opportunities to promote goods and services, based on these preferences and their online behavior, to these same users, thus commodifying the information they are gathering by selling it to third parties. For example, Google analyzes your searches and the kind of websites you visit and, based on that information, presents its search results combined with advertisements, or shows you Google Now cards based on the same information, enhanced by some extra preferences the user can indicate so as to make the experience more personalized. Google tries to make this process more personal by using machine learning to better understand its users and their preferences, so as to better cater to their needs. Similar developments can be observed at Facebook.com, where recent research has discovered that peoples’ timelines only show things related to their own likes, preferences and surfing behavior (NRC 2016b; Niemanlab.org 2016a; Tweakers.net 2016a).

Both Google and Facebook control the information with which users are presented, ensuring that this is tailored to their own interests, and thus users are shown a more limited view

(30)

29 of the world that could pose a threat to the democratic process. This also constricts the free flow of information on the web, this restriction poses a significant threat for informational human rights. Yet this issue not addressed in the laws protecting these rights, as we will see in the next chapter. The second problem that arises from this editing of information is that a large number of companies which provide services via digital ICTs, such as Facebook and Google, create revenue by selling information about their users to companies for advertisement. This creates two additional problems. Firstly, at least part of the information with which a user is presented is advertisement. Secondly, information about the users’ behavior and preferences when interacting with digital ICTs are commodified and sold to the highest bidder. Private interests come much more to the foreground in the free flow of information when information provision occurs through digital ICTs, as these channels are controlled by companies who need to make money from the fact that they are providing this information to the public. It could even be suggested that through this process some sort of censorship or propaganda is created. This may be a bad thing for the democratic process, as people are confirmed in their own worldview without any form of debate and can radicalize their ideas as a result.

However, privacy threats do not only stem from the threats posed by big data or misuse of our online activities, but also from poor protection of our information by companies, users themselves, and state authorities. This happens if one of these actors uses weak passwords or has otherwise easily hackable systems. As a result, hackers can obtain personal and financial information. The information they obtain through this process can be misused to steal the identity of the victim and use it for online criminal activities. Examples of security leaks and vulnerabilities at companies are legion; these pose a serious problem, especially when bigger companies are involved, such as banks. Evidence seems to suggest that a great number of

(31)

30 companies do not take the security of their customers’ information seriously enough (Techtarget.com 2014a). However, it seems that some bigger companies, especially those that make money through the information of their users such as Facebook and Google are taking security more seriously (Techtarget.com 2015a). Important government branches, on the other hand, seem to be taking this problem less seriously, in terms of both securing information they hold on citizens as well as their own security, which makes personal data easily accessible to others such as criminals who could steal the identity of a person (NRC: 20160602).

Beyond these threats, a threat is posed by ability, or lack thereof, to use digital ICTs. This is a threat that has already appeared and is called the digital divide. This divide has already been an important discussion point in literature on distributive justice since the early 2000s (Duff 2012: 72-73). In short, the threat posed by the digital divide comes from the fact that those who are not able to use or buy digital ICTs will be at a significant disadvantage to those who can. This creates a divide between the information-rich and information-poor, and will create or widen generational, socio-economic, geographic, and cultural divides (Floridi 2014: 48-49). It should also be understood that this divide does not only pose a threat to equality between developed and less developed societies, but also within societies. It creates new problems for global justice and equality by creating a new form of inequality for participating in human society. How this subject exactly fits in with human rights and is part of this discussion is further explored in the third chapter, where it is used to exemplify the idea that access to information and digital ICTs should be made part of human rights in order to create a more just and equal world.

The concerns raised by the digital divide and security issues become even more apparent when looking at governmental use of digital ICTs. Governments increasingly want to use digital ICTs in their dealings with their citizens, especially in the developed world. For example, the

(32)

31 Dutch tax office is planning to make the Dutch tax declaration a totally digital experience, without offering any real alternative for those who are unable to use a digital ICT for their taxes (Radar 2015a). The Dutch tax office is also responsible for paying several allowances, such as healthcare and rent, and in order to apply for these one needs a so-called DigiD3.

There is one potential problem that is more a concern for the future, but it could nonetheless damage human society and history as a whole, which is the loss of information and knowledge through the fast development of new digital ICTs and subsequent loss of access to old information (NISO 2004a: 1). It is much easier to delete or ‘lose’ digital information than it is to delete all copies of a certain book, or other physical information carriers, such as a newspaper. However, these problems are also relatively easy to overcome with digital ICTs, under the condition that a good metadata system is built, because duplication of digital data does not cost anything (Floridi 2014: 40).

2.3 Opportunities Created by the use of Digital ICTs

As I have shown in the previous section, some of the biggest threats and ethical concerns regarding the use of digital ICTs are related to big data analytics. However, some of the most important opportunities also relate to big data and the datafication of human life. In short, they create opportunities for creating wealth, information and knowledge, for both society as a whole and individual users. Furthermore, they create many potential opportunities for citizens’ being well informed and empowered in a democratic society. Digital ICTs also provide opportunities in relation to global justice, the digital divide, and the promotion and protection of informational

3 _{DigiD is a digital ID that is used to identify Dutch citizens when they are dealing with the Dutch}

government and making use of the services provided by the central and local governments, as well as several government agencies.

(33)

32 human rights. In the following, I first set out the opportunities provided by the use of big data analytics, after which I show the other opportunities created by the use of digital ICTs.

With the use of digital ICTs, the sharing of information and data becomes almost frictionless so information flows very easily from the sender to the receiver. As a consequence, it becomes much harder for someone living in an information society to ignore information, and less credible to claim that the person did not know about hardly ignorable facts or easily predictable events. Closely related to this is that the use of digital ICTs creates the opportunity of exponentially increasing common knowledge, because it is so easy to access and share new information through their use (Floridi 2014: 42). The impact of the opportunities described above is increased by a substantial factor because of the datafication of human existence and the use of big data analytics.

As I described in the previous section, the datafication of human life and the use of big data analytics poses some big potential threats; however, it also presents some of the biggest opportunities. In our current information society, this datafication has grown significantly since it has been digitalized and we are able to measure almost anything, which is further helped by the significantly reduced cost of datafication (Cukier & Mayer-Schönberger 2013a: 87). In addition, with digital ICTs we are able to datafy parts of human existence that that we were never able to datafy before, such as moods, coupled with their location, thoughts and their interactions with others. A perfect example of this is Facebook, which datafies these subjects for over one billion members. This data can be used to analyze human behavior and, in some cases, even predict it. As I stated above, this can pose a threat to a single individual, however it creates great opportunities for businesses and governments. Businesses can use it to better predict whether a service or product they want to sell will be a success, while governments can use it to predict

(34)

33 whether certain policy changes they are contemplating will be accepted by the public and what their effect will be on society (Idem 94).

However, this is not where the opportunities related to the use of big data analytics stop; the opportunities are seemingly limitless. Big data can be used to offer information about people living in city slums in developing countries, and can help quantify crime waves or predict food shortages (Tene & Polonetsky 2013: 245). Furthermore, through the use of a so-called ‘smart grid’, electrical companies and users can control and monitor use of electricity, which can improve sustainability and is good for the environment (Idem: 248). Big data can be used to improve public health by analyzing drug use and genome factors, and in turn doctors will be better able to predict how a patient is going to react to a certain drug or combination of drugs, thus knowing better what kind of drugs a certain patient needs in order to get better or lead a normal healthy life (Chow 2015: 190). The use of big data can also help in fighting traffic congestion. Systems that are kept up to date with live data can help road users by automatically updating their navigation systems and presenting an alternative route for the driver, making their lives easier and lessening traffic congestions which is good for the environment and the economy (Tene & Polonetsky 2013: 249),. Location data can help infrastructure planners to better predict where to improve the infrastructure and choose the best times to do so, for example work on roads, so these operations create the least possible problems for traffic (Idem: 248).

These are just a few examples of the potential profits the use of big data can bring, yet they show that big data use, combined with digital ICTs, has enormous potential to improve human life and societies. The use of digital ICTs also presents other opportunities. These are related to the empowerment of common citizens, as they can create new inclusion in the decision-making process, as opposed to discrimination, exclusion, or marginalization. This empowerment

(35)

34 also comes in the form of an improvement in the quality and quantity of the choices available to people (Floridi 2014: 113-114). A good example of how digital ICTs can provide empowerment is the recent referendum in the Netherlands on the EU treaty with the Ukraine. The signatures that were needed to force the government to hold the referendum were almost exclusively brought in via the use of digital ICTs (NRC 2016a). This shows the power of digital ICTs in reaching citizens and enabling them use the internet to let their voice be heard by the government in a way that they could not ignore.

Another empowering opportunity that the use of digital ICTs creates is the fact that their use makes it much easier for common citizens to expose mishaps, by either governments or companies, to the rest of the world. This is great significance for a democratic society, as it reduces the chance of corruption and mishaps. In developed societies this helps by giving ordinary citizens more power, because it is much easier to share something with the world through digital ICTs, especially via social networks like Twitter and Facebook. In the case of companies, this can give them bad publicity which could damage profits, and thus they are more inclined to solve the problems they have caused their customer. In the case of the government, it will ensure that politicians are more inclined to listen to their constituencies because bad publicity could lead to a loss of votes. Digital ICTs make it much easier to get things done in general, as one only needs to post something online for it to be noticed, rather than contacting a consumer organization and trying to get help from them. In addition, in less-than-democratic societies digital ICTs make it much easier to share human rights issues with the rest of the world, and thus create support from around the globe in getting these issues addressed in their own country.

Interacting with information in the digital age : an evaluation of human rights protecting information access, expression, and democracy

An Evaluation of Human Rights Protecting Information Access, Expression,

and Democracy

Contents

Introduction

1

Information, ICTs and the Information Society

2

Information Opportunities and Threats