Freedom of Expression and Alternatives for Internet Governance: Prospects and Pitfalls

Emma Ricknell

doi:10.17645/mac.v8i4.3299

Abstract

This article dives into the ongoing debate on how to address concerns of personal safety and respect online, as well as consequences for exposure to polarizing and in various ways harmful information, while at the same time safeguarding the democratic essentials of freedom of expression and participation. It does so by examining the issue from a less common angle, namely who governs the Internet and the platforms where much of the toxic material appears. By applying a model of free speech regulation conceptualized by legal scholar Jack Balkin (2018a, 2018b), the article explores different theoretical future scenarios of Internet governance involving three main players, namely governments, private companies, and speakers. The analysis finds that depending on which player is at the forefront, the outcomes from the standpoint of participation and freedom of speech may be drastically different. While there is potential for transformation that can enable more ownership, transparency, and agency for citizens and news media, some potential paths will place ever-increasing control over the interests of users.

Highlights

For those who remember the dawn of the modern Internet, the sense of unlimited possibilities may be reminiscent
The Internet via social media platforms grew into an important new tool in citizen struggles for freedom and democracy (Chadwick & Howard, 2009), such as during the Arab Spring in 2011 (Allagui, 2014)
Based upon the idea of not overlooking the aspect of control over content when it comes our ability to partake in a future social Internet, with all its conflicting features of incredible freedom to engage in democratic discourse on the one hand, and restrictions, bans, and surveillance on the other, this article has explored three possible scenarios for Internet governance

Summary

Introduction

For those who remember the dawn of the modern Internet, the sense of unlimited possibilities may be reminiscent. With the Internet decentralizing communication, putting new forms of speech and cultural expressions into the hands of participants, a radical enhancement of democracy was seen as a possibility (Poster, 1997). The Internet via social media platforms grew into an important new tool in citizen struggles for freedom and democracy (Chadwick & Howard, 2009), such as during the Arab Spring in 2011 (Allagui, 2014). Our modern Internet features aspects that fit poorly with the idea of participation in a furtherance of democracy on equal grounds. Online arenas where users can remain anonymous have been highlighted, as they can provide breeding ground for extreme forms of online communication and sharing of very offensive information (Blumler, 2015)

Objectives

Discussion

Conclusion