Censored

1. Porous censorship: The surprising power of small information barriers

Even though it is possible to access most information, as normal citizens get lost in the cacophony of information available to them, their consumption of information is highly influenced by the costs of obtaining it.

Information overload: In the digital age, the sheer volume of information overwhelms users, making them susceptible to small barriers in accessing specific content. This phenomenon allows governments to employ porous censorship strategies that are surprisingly effective.

Circumventable but impactful: Porous censorship methods, such as content filtering and website blocking, can often be bypassed with some effort. However, for the majority of citizens who are less interested in politics or lack the technical skills, these small obstacles significantly influence their information consumption patterns.

Key elements of porous censorship:

• Easy to circumvent but requires time and effort
• Often unnoticed by average users
• Exploits people's tendency to choose convenience over effort
• More effective and less likely to cause backlash than complete bans

2. Fear-based censorship backfires in the digital age

Although many would see the fact that a minority of capable citizens can route around censorship as detrimental to the regime's censorship efforts, I argue that circumventible censorship can be useful to authoritarian regimes precisely because it has different effects on different segments of the population.

Credibility challenge: Traditional fear-based censorship methods, which rely on threats and punishments, become less effective as the number of internet users grows. Governments struggle to credibly threaten millions of online participants simultaneously.

Backfire effect: When censorship is obvious, it can create a "Streisand effect," drawing more attention to the censored information and potentially causing backlash against the government. This awareness can undermine the regime's legitimacy and increase interest in sensitive topics.

Drawbacks of fear-based censorship:

• Signals importance of censored information
• Can inspire curiosity and defiance
• Limits government's ability to gather public opinion
• May create economic inefficiencies

3. Friction: How small inconveniences shape information access

I argue that there are massively different implications for the spread of political information of having certain information completely free and easy to obtain as compared to being available but slightly more difficult to access.

Subtle barriers: Friction-based censorship methods impose small costs in time or effort to access certain information. These can include slow loading times, search result manipulation, or requiring extra steps to view content.

Exploiting impatience: In the digital age, users have become accustomed to instant access. Even minor delays or inconveniences can significantly reduce the likelihood of accessing specific information, especially for those not highly motivated to seek it out.

Examples of friction-based censorship:

• Throttling website loading speeds
• Pushing sensitive content lower in search results
• Requiring additional clicks or logins to access certain sites
• Temporary blocks during sensitive periods

4. Flooding: Distraction as a potent censorship tool

By creating a multiplier effect in the news media and online, information flooding if successful can be worth the investment even though it is porous and cannot require readers to pay attention.

Coordinated distractions: Flooding involves the mass production and dissemination of information designed to compete with or distract from content the government wants to suppress. This can include positive news, entertainment, or alternative narratives.

Drowning out dissent: By overwhelming users with a high volume of government-approved content, flooding makes it more difficult for citizens to find and focus on sensitive or critical information. This method is particularly effective during crises or sensitive political events.

Flooding tactics:

• Coordinated posting of positive news across multiple platforms
• Promotion of patriotic or feel-good content
• Use of paid commentators ("50 Cent Army" in China)
• Amplification of trivial news to overshadow significant events

5. The Great Firewall: Separating elites from the masses

The Great Firewall, therefore, separates the political discussion of the political elite from the rest of the public, strangling the potential for collective action by decreasing the following of those in the elite who are skeptical of the government.

Selective barrier: China's Great Firewall blocks access to many foreign websites and services, creating a divide between those who can and cannot circumvent it. This separation effectively isolates potential dissidents from the broader public.

Elite-mass disconnect: Those who regularly bypass the Great Firewall tend to be more educated, wealthier, and more politically engaged. By keeping this group separate from the general population, the government reduces the risk of widespread dissent or organized opposition.

Characteristics of Great Firewall users:

• Higher education levels
• Greater technological literacy
• More international connections
• Higher political engagement and skepticism

6. Crises and habits: When porous censorship falters

Moments when enough citizens are motivated enough to learn how to outsmart government media control are those when the information management strategy comes under the most pressure.

Crisis vulnerability: During significant events or crises, citizens become more motivated to seek out information, potentially overcoming the small barriers imposed by porous censorship. This increased demand for information can challenge the government's control over the narrative.

Habit disruption: When censorship suddenly interferes with established habits or popular services, users are more likely to seek out ways to circumvent it. This can lead to unintended consequences, such as exposing users to previously blocked information sources.

Factors that challenge porous censorship:

• Natural disasters or public safety concerns
• Political scandals or unrest
• Sudden blocks of popular websites or apps
• Economic crises or significant policy changes

7. Implications for democracies and the future of free speech

If the prioritization of information for political purposes has the impact of censorship, as this book suggests, then in democracies we have to rethink how we can protect free speech in a world of information overload.

Beyond authoritarianism: The principles of porous censorship are not limited to authoritarian regimes. Democratic societies face similar challenges in the digital age, where information control can take subtle forms.

Redefining free speech: As the contest over free speech shifts from who can speak to whose voice is amplified, democracies must grapple with new challenges to ensure diverse viewpoints are accessible. This may require rethinking regulations around search algorithms, social media, and data transparency.

Considerations for protecting free speech in democracies:

• Transparency in search and social media algorithms
• Regulations to ensure competition among information providers
• Standardization of government data transparency
• Addressing the impact of targeted advertising and content recommendation systems on information consumption

Last updated: November 20, 2024