Blog: Technology and human rights at Amnesty
Blog: Technology and human rights at Amnesty
Monday, 22, Feb 2010 08:58
Relive live updates from Amnesty International's #aitech event from east London on whether technology is a blessing or a curse for protecting human rights.
By Matthew Champion.
Amnesty International UK hosted a panel discussion at its Human Rights Action Centre on Monday evening asking "Is technology really good for human rights".
Comments and questions were streamed on Twitterfall with the hashtag #aitech, but you can re-read our live blog on the panel discussion below:
- - - - - - - - -
20:52: RCJ draws debate to a close. First thoughts? Don't feel the question was addressed. But the interactivity of the event means that's just as much my fault as the panel's. More thoughts in fuller blog post later.
20:49: SP says transparency on censorship can be a powerful tool as well. That's essentially the Google line.
20:45: Questioner from the audience points out the internet's failure in Sri Lanka. "People on the beach between the army and the LTTE do not have time for Twitter."
20:38: KA on refuseniks and technology. RCJ asks whether Amnesty should be fighting for internet access to farmers in Cumbria. Also asks a representative from Amnesty whether the internet has made it more or less difficult to help released prisoners of conscience.
20:31: SP says 'we're human too' after gentle criticism of Google's mission statement (don't be evil) and its policy on sharing information with retailers.
20:25: RCJ asks KA whether too much of internet discourse is negative rather than positive. KA says his online experience is overwhelmingly positive despite untrustworthy news sites. I hope he doesn't mean us.
20:19: AS coins her own version of slacktivism - mousey solidarity. RCJ meanwhile says that the Twitterverse's attention span appears to be very short - China one week, Iran the next.
20:13: BBC Tehran correspondent Jon Leyne (currently barred from Iran) is first to the microphone in the Q&A. Learned start to the discussion. He says the question isn't 'is tech force for good?' but 'how can we make it so'.
20:10: KA discusses his term the 'slacktivist' at bit more. They are the outwardly pro-human rights supporters who think turning their Twitter avatar green or joining a Facebook group are enough to make a difference.
20:08: It's getting a bit surreal. Tweets with the #aitech hash tag being displayed on a big screen behind the panellists.
20:02: We're on to the debate section now. RCJ asks SP whether human rights concerns are conflicting with Google's capitalist business model. She says Google has unique user-focused model. Ultimately Google decided consider a pull out of Google because it was no longer prepared to submit itself to self-censorship on its google.cn site.
19:56: KA repeats point that digital technologies just as available to anti-democracy forces as pro-.
19:52: Kevin Anderson (KA), editor of Guardian blogs, described as one of UK's most astute technological commentators, gets his turn. He says that increasing access to technology is not the only way to improve the rights of oppressed peoples.
19:50: AS shows screen-shot of sites hacked by Iranian Cyber Army. Apparently Iranians under-30 are among the most cyber-savvy demographic in the world. And apparently it just doesn't apply to anti-government protesters. The Iranian Cyber Army brought down Twitter don't forget.
19:45: AS moves on to Facebook. "It's not just Twitter... Facebook was really important [in last year's protests in Iran]."
19:38: Soas professor Annabelle Sreberny (AS) gets up to give her pre-debate presentation. She wants to ground us with images. AS says communication technologies have been good for human rights throughout history. She points out that even before Ahmadinejad came to power in Iran the press were being restricted... moving to the internet as a result.
19:34 AK argues that the situation in Iran is arguably worse than a year ago despite the Twitter Revolution that followed the re-election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
19:30: Eloquence from the iPhone (otherwise known as Andrew Keen) so far. Most important point of the evening so far: Web tools used by human rights bloggers can just as easily be used by the regimes they are critiquing.
19:25: RCJ stalls while trying to set up mobile phone video link to the "antichrist of Silicon Valley". Sounds ominous. It is of course Andrew Keen. He's a web cynic. And he's speaking from an iPhone being held up to a microphone. How very lo-tech (but secretly quite good).
19:23: SP says question should be how to make the internet a better tool to protect human rights. End operations in China seems to be the (unspoken) answer.
19:18: Google's Susan Pointer (SP) will be up first. Internet's potential to underpinning human rights: "I am a glass half full person... and not a naive one." The internet is a "useful tool" for protecting human rights. Sounds like a lot of leeway for arguing that tool could be misused...
19:16: Rory Cellan-Jones (RCJ) gets us underway in a packed auditorium at the Human Rights Action Centre. Must be careful not to spill the red wine.
- - - - - - - -
Confirmed panellists include Google director of public policy and government relations Susan Pointer; Guardian blogs editor Kevin Anderson; Cult of the Amateur: How the internet is killing our culture author Andrew Keen; and professor of global media and communication at the School of Oriental and African Studies Annabelle Sreberny. BBC technology correspondent Rory Cellan-Jones is chairing.