The Net Delusion: How Not to Liberate The World [Paperback]

I think the most worrying aspect of this book is that it needed to be written at all. Over a course of some 320 pages, in "The Net Delusion: How Not to Liberate the World" Evgeny Morozov reviews all of the bad ways in which the internet (and most particularly social networking and blogging on it) can be used to counter and contain the spread of democracy and personal freedoms while we happily delude ourselves that it is being used to achieve the exact opposite.

Because the internet goes largely unpoliced, at least in the Western world, we tend to regard it as a playground in which we are all free to say and do very much as we wish. It is a forum devoid of censorship and authoritarian intervention. For some bizarre reason, we then equate this "freedom" with democracy. What is more, we assume it to be a good thing; a "liberating" thing. We forget, however, that it is only those of us who already live in free and democratic societies who are at liberty to do this; our freedom does not stem from our use of the internet but rather our freedom to use the internet more or less as we choose and without harmful consequence (to ourselves) stems from the democratic society in which we live. And while access to the internet may give the illusion of freedom to those living in less democratic societies, in reality such access (or at least carelessly free or thoughtless use of it) may well play into the hands of the leaders of authoritarian regimes, providing them with an extremely powerful tool for the suppression of democratic progress, as well as the policing of their own oppressive states.

The underlying message of this book is undoubtedly correct; the fact that the western democratic world does nothing to limit or control the use of the internet makes it a perfect tool for bending to the use of anyone who might benefit from access to an almost limitless outpouring of information about people's thoughts and actions, while at the same time providing them with a tool for the dissemination and promulgation of any amount of misinformation masquerading as the democratising voice of the people. Where it falls down, for me at least, is not what it says so much as the interminable length at which it says it. Many may find Evgeny Morozov's treatise thoroughly researched; it certainly does not want for full and detailed referencing of source material and can be regarded as pretty much authoritative in what it covers. As a general read, however, the leaden prose combined with a propensity to completely do to death all of the arguments presented, makes for a heavyweight read that is anything but easy work. For someone looking for an academic text, the book may be fine; anyone wanting anything lighter should look elsewhere.

Growing up in Belarus and then living in the US, Mr Morozov has had opportunities to view the Internet from 'both sides'. He has seen at first hand both authoritarian attempts at controlling the spread of the Internet and libertarian attempts at maintaining the Internet's growth throughout the world.

This experience has allowed him to develop some useful views. He contrasts attitudes to the Internet basically between 'cyber-utopians' and 'cyber-cons'. The former he defines as those who have:

'...a quasi-religious belief in the power of the Internet to do supernatural things, from eradicating illiteracy in Africa to organizing all of the world's information...Opening up closed societies and flushing them with democracy juice until they shed off their authoritarian skin is just one of the expectations placed on the Internet these days.' (P19)

On the other hand, there are the 'cyber-cons' (an on-line version of neo-conservatives) who still view the world from an essentially Cold War perspective. Thus, they are bound by cold-war metaphors. But, as he points out:

'Breaching a powerful firewall is in no way similar to the breaching of the Berlin Wall or the lifting of passport controls at Checkpoint Charlie...[T]he cyber-wall metaphor falsely suggests that once digital barriers are removed, new and completely different barriers won't spring up in their place' (P44-45)

Between these two extremes, which overlap and inform each other, he analyses the effects of Twitter, Facebook, mobile telephony and the growing belief that all dissidents have to do is set up a Facebook page and the revolution will miraculously occur. He points out, in some detail, just how false these beliefs are and clearly shows that authoritarian regimes are hardly likely to stand back and watch in horror, but are themselves active participants. In fact, organizing demonstrations and the like by mobile phone or Twitter can actually deliver the dissidents into the hands of the authorities.

As stated, China is not going to sit back and simply let lots of people create anti-Chinese Communist Party (CCP) blogs, web-sites and Facebook pages. They can mobilise their own supporters to create the same Internet facilities to actively support the regime (this is neatly confirmed in 'The Party' by Richard McGregor). In many countries, this has been a growing phenomenon with or without active government support. The number of web-sites and blogs promoting Russian nationalism, for example, provide a significant counter to any 'democratising movement'.

Morozov makes some pointed historical comparisons - in the past, it was believed that the telegraph would bring about World Peace, then it was the aeroplane, next radio (remember the BBC's motto 'Nation Shall Speak Peace Unto Nation'), then television. As we can see, none of these previous technologies appear to have enhanced the opportunities for greater international understanding, instead often bringing about a 'tribalism' as groups retreat from the huge volume of information into self-reinforcing cliques - an idea also explored by Jodi Dean in her book 'Democracy and Other Neoliberal Fantasies'. Think here of US talk radio and Fox News.

Morozov challenges the notion that all these disaffected people in authoritarian states are hungry for news from the 'outside', from the liberated West. He's right, of course. As he puts it in a chapter entitled 'Orwell's Favourite lolcat' the vast majority of people are far more interested in funny videos on YouTube and pornography.

He creates a further contrast between Orwellian and Huxleyan visions of the future - 'The Orwell-Huxley Sandwich Has Expired' (P75) and suggests that we are far closer to the Huxley end of this spectrum than the Orwellian. Personally, I'm not convinced. As he says himself, the trouble with metaphor is that it is easy to go from saying that something is 'like' something else to saying it is 'exactly like' and so, to my mind, what we have, what is developing, owes much to both Orwell and Huxley - from 'celeb TV' and 'lolcats' to ubiquitous CCTV and monitored mobile phones (or the two together, in the case of the News of the World).

This is a highly detailed examination of the Internet as it has developed over the last twenty years but, to be honest, it does get rather repetitive. The final chapter attempts to put forward some pointers and some suggestions for maintaining the openness of the Internet. But these are rather rushed and not given nearly as much detail as the exposition of the problems currently faced by the technology.

Still, it is very informative, if not particularly optimistic. Given developments since he wrote the book (the US government's continued attacks on WikiLeaks and, by extension, Twitter, the formation of Facebook groups such as the Gaza Youth Movement, where you can simply link to the page to show your (virtual) support) I think we are seeing the slow end of the 'Adam Smithian' free-range Internet and what develops to take it's place will not be so inspirational.

I am a web developer. Last year, I was tasked with looking at using Facebook in advertising. I worked out a way that allows any online advert to access the user's Facebook profile as if the user had logged into their account themselves. I used the Facebook API (a set of routines that lets any external web code access Facebook) to surreptitiously login. The only mistake the user has to make to allow me in is to have the `remember me' button on their login screen checked (and which regular Facebook user doesn't?). Once my ad is in your account (about 3-5 seconds on a good broadband connection), I can then access and retransmit all your data, including (depending on what you have on your profile) your name, address, phone numbers, friends, and your uploaded pictures. It isn't even difficult to work out; anyone with a good knowledge of JavaScript (or AS3) and a bit of HTML iframe magic can work it out in a couple of hours.

Why is this allowed to happen? Because Facebook trusts everyone; it assumes I am not evil by default. So does Wikipedia and Twitter. In fact, any social/collaborative web application has to trust me because that is what `social' means in web programming terms.

And that chimes totally with the view of this book; the web is apolitical and trusting, and although that makes it a useful tool to help democracy to take root in authoritarian states, it also makes it very easy for that authoritarian state to reduce personal freedom and spread its own propaganda in return.

If the internet ceased to exist, it would be Al-Qaida that would be worse off. The US Army loses an unsecure communications channel they don't use for frontline operations (and WikiLeaks becomes a thing of the past). Al-Quaida lose the ability to distribute sermons by radical clerics, newsgroups that ferment extremism in countries like the UK, and lose the ability to spread information via the `guerrilla news channel' that the web can become. Operationally, they lose anonymous communication and an easy money transfer system.

The problem is that Western policy makers think the internet can only be a good thing for democracy (because it spreads information freely, and free = freedom = democracy, right?). This is the Net Delusion.

Although I note other reviewers find this dark view of the web hard to swallow, as a web developer I find again and again practical experience that tells me that the social web is built on a democratic world view that assumes peer trust as the default; all those aging hippies are alive and well in Silicon Valley. Normally cool, but as soon as a totalitarian government with time on their hands wants to find you the web user, the web gives them all the tools to identify you and your friends and come knocking to spread their own version of free love.

And no, before you ask, I didn't use the Facebook hack in the end; I decided I am not that evil. But then again, I'm not North Korea.

And if that doesn't pique your interest in this book, nothing will!

***Update Feb 2012***
Facebook have fixed my security exploit some time ago, so you can stop searching for it!