scholarly journals Empowering activists or autocrats? The Internet in authoritarian regimes

2015 ◽  
Vol 52 (3) ◽  
pp. 338-351 ◽  
Author(s):  
Espen Geelmuyden Rød ◽  
Nils B Weidmann
Author(s):  
Rasoul Namazi

This chapter studies the influence of the Internet and new Web 2.0 technologies on the process of democratization in authoritarian regimes. The objective is to show that the new information technologies are not necessarily helpful to dissident movements and have even some negative impacts on the process of democratization. The author questions the capacity of Internet to transmit political information discusses how the new technologies contribute to the depoliticization of societies by creating passive citizens in authoritarian regimes. This chapter also shows how authoritarian regimes use new information technologies as instruments of control and repression and questions the effectiveness of the new cyber-activism by explaining the structure of the Internet and discussing the capacity of the new technologies in creating political community.


2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (28) ◽  
pp. 15 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Jacky

<p>The study of the relationship between the Internet and democracy has produced two main debates. Some studies have said that the Internet has significantly contributed to democracy while others disagree. This study challenged the thesis of Habermas (2006) about the relationship between the Internet and Deliberative Democracy. This study was built on the following propositions: that the Internet causes bloggers to become parasitic, fragmented, and isolated; that it is effective in breaking down authoritarian regimes to create an egalitarian relationship, but it fails as a deliberative medium. This study used the concept of the public sphere and Habermas’ Deliberative Democracy (2006). It also explored the use of 2.0 qualitative methods with a hacking analysis perspective. Moreover, it gained data from the Internet by using the latest version of 2.0 Web and a virtual community. It focused on both discursive and non-discursive construction. The results of this study support only one of Habermas’ three propositions: that the Internet creates egalitarianism. Thus, this study rejects Habermas’ thesis apart from this one proposition. Furthermore, this study recommends that further research be done using the same propositions but on Twitter instead of the Internet.</p>


2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 42-55
Author(s):  
Mergen Dyussenov

The paper reviews existing literature on the role of the internet in addressing corruption by breaking it down into instrumental, important, and critical roles, across two types of political regimes – (semi-)authoritarian and democracies. It analyzes the key resources and strategies utilized by governments and activists across these regimes, and looks into the common themes that emerge as a result of analyzing literature sources, i.e. the notion of crisis, lack of a single accepted definition of corruption across nations, factors found to positively correlate with reduced corruption, and the evolving nature of the internet. The paper finds that neither regime can be perfectly immune against mass-scale protests caused by dissatisfaction with worsening corruption. However, the regimes differ in the nature of protests, with semi-authoritarian regimes witnessing more violent and aggressive uprisings fueled by long-accumulated social disappointment with previous repressive regimes than across much of democracies.


Author(s):  
Zubair Nabi

The Internet has become the new battle ground between authoritarian regimes and ordinary individuals who want unimpeded access to information. The immense popularity of online activism and citizen journalism enabled by social media has instigated state level players to partially or completely block access to the Internet. In return, individuals and organizations have been employing various anti-censorship tools to circumvent these restrictions. In this paper, we claim that censorship is futile as not only has it been ineffective in restricting access, it has also had the side effect of popularising blocked content. Using data from Alexa Web rankings, Google Trends, and YouTube Statistics, we quantify the ineffectiveness of state level censorship in Pakistan and Turkey and highlight the emergence of the Streisand Effect. We hope that our findings will, a) prove to governments and other players the futility of their actions, and b) aid citizens around the world in using legal measures to counteract censorship by showing its ineffectiveness.


Author(s):  
Sadia Jamil ◽  

Digital authoritarianism poses increasing challenges within both autocratic and democratic regimes. The evolving mechanisms of digital authoritarianism surpass national boundaries. Over the past decade they have advanced the interests of authoritarian states to undermine the freedoms of media and the Internet. In competitive authoritarian regimes, like Pakistan, digital authoritarianism has paved its way under democratic disguise. Reporters Without Borders’ World Press Freedom Index 2020 indicates that the country ranks at 145 out of total 178 countries. Moreover, Freedom House’s Freedom on the Net 2020 survey reveals Pakistan among the worst ten countries in terms of Internet and digital media freedoms. Considering these facts, hence this study examines digital authoritarianism in the journalistic context. It explores evolving threats to media and internet freedoms due to the increasing authoritarian practices of Pakistan’s state authorities in digital realm. This is significant so as to unpack how the country’s authorities restrain media and Internet freedoms in the digital age. To achieve this aim, this study uses the qualitative method of online interviews and presents findings thematically.


2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-50 ◽  
Author(s):  
Walid Al-Saqaf

Studies have shown that authoritarian regimes tend to censor the media to limit potential threats to the status quo. While such censorship practices were traditionally aimed at broadcast and print media, the emergence of the Internet and social media in particular, prompted some authoritarian regimes, such as the Assad regime in Syria, to try and exert a similar level of censorship on the Internet as well. During the Arab Spring, the Syrian regime blocked hundreds of websites that provided social networking, news, and other services. Taking Syria as a case study, this paper examines whether Internet censorship succeeded in preventing Internet users from reaching censored online content during 2010−2012. By analyzing the use of Alkasir, a censorship circumvention tool created by the author, the paper provides empirical evidence demonstrating that users were in fact able to bypass censorship and access blocked websites. The findings demonstrate that censorship circumvention tools constituted a threat to the information control systems of authoritarian regimes, highlighting the potential of such tools to promote online freedom of expression in countries where Internet censorship is prevalent.


2021 ◽  
pp. 189-204
Author(s):  
MARTA MITROVIĆ ◽  
TATJANA VULIĆ

The Internet is a space that, contrary to its primary efforts, has not managed to escape regulation. Also, the question Can the Internet be controlled? has been replaced by the question In what way is the Internet governed?, because the possibility of control has already been confirmed. Contrary to popular belief that only authoritarian regimes use control mechanisms, even the restrictive ones, liberal countries also have the same possibilities of control and often apply them, although in a more sophisticated way. The aim of this paper is to compare internet governance in Russia, as the representative of the authoritarian regime, to the United States of America, as the representative of the liberal system, and answer the question: What are the differences in internet governance between authoritarian and liberal regimes?


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document