Be a whistleblower for peace BR #7

It seems outrageous to me that a person posing no physical threat to the US would create such an uprising and would influence a whole countries trade relations to other nations. With the growing importance of transparency due to information technology, corporations are required to be upfront and honest, it would seem obvious that the government should follow suit. Not only in the Wikileaks documentary on Snowden, but also on the video of the shooting in Iraq presented earlier in class, it seems that being truthful would appear a lot less convicting on the part of the government. If only the government were able to openly interact with the public when the public demand information regarding the sharing of personal information, then there would be a lot less distrust. The main separation and frustration occurring between the government and the population is the lack of clarity and honesty. The government must recognize that they are in control of the quality of life of millions, and risking a peaceful relationship with other countries in an attempt to save face is inexcusable. 

Another whistleblower that seems to have paved the way for introducing matters of public security is Russ Tice. In 2005 Tice revealed that NSA and the DIA were engaging in illegal wire taps on American citizens during the reign of George Bush. He was previously employed as an intelligence analyst for the US Air Force, the Office of Naval Intelligence and Defence Intelligence Agency. He is said to be the original whistleblower for NSA. After his involvement with media outlets such as the New York Times, he was ordered by a NSA security officer to report for a “psychological evaluation”. He was then suspended and released which also revoked a previous medal he had earned during the war in Iraq.

Thomas Drake was also a whistleblower for NSA in challenging their Trailblazer Project. Drake was a formed executive of NSA and a veteran of both the United States Air Force and the United States Navy. The Trailblazer project was then being developed to track communication patterns on networks like the internet. Drake believed that this initiative went against Americans constitutional right to privacy and thus made public statements against it. Following his actions he was charged on ten counts of various security breaches and was forced to resign from NSA. Due to the indictment he was forced from his job at Strayer University and resorted to working at Apple. 

I believe in both of these whistle blowing cases they were justified in sharing confidential information. In a democratic society it is necessary that the public be made aware of the actions of their elected government as a right. Regardless of the information shared it is imperative that the government remain transparent with the population. It appears in all four cases of whistleblowing that the government has proved to present such hostility towards those speaking the truth that American citizens should be the ones to get involved. The lengths individuals have to go to in order to present the truth should prove how important these circumstances are to begin with. 

the modern pirate BR #5

Although the documentary provides a chilling realization of the seer ability some people have with technology, I am almost willing to say they may in fact be doing some good for the community. Their hacking forces the companies that are in possession of hundreds of thousands of peoples personal information to increase their security. A company must continually be challenged in order to continually improve. These hackers in particular appear to be not so cynical as to intentionally hurt a person using their personal information, then I think their hacking seems somewhat harmless. 

The problem with hackers is you have no idea who they could be. The anonymity associated with those who are protected through not only a physical screen but a convoluted encrypted code adds such uncertainty which thus results in fear. I have little to no ability when it comes to technological skill and my reliance is on social media and the ability to navigate simple websites. Due to the relatively recent introduction of internet technology, there is still so much to be discovered, and there are still so many people unaware of the extent to which the internet can be manipulated. This uncertainty leads to a general unease with will resinate with the majority of the population. The media plays off this and thus produces a sort of villain out of hackers. When I picture the depiction of these villains I imagine a white male that lives in his parents basement, either extremely skinny or very large, with little to no friends. These images may not have any accuracy at all, I doubt a who community of hacker will look the same and it is likely that the majority of them are not in fact caucasian, but of varying race. 

Do we trust the ability of hackers to balance out the good and the harm that may result from their disclosures? 

The term ethical hacker seems entirely contradictory. A hacker is someone who invades the privacy of someone else. If this individual claims to be ethical they cannot, at the same time, be considered a hacker. That being said, those who are clearly doing something wrong on the internet to began with should have some form of justice system to govern them. It seems a perfect solution to implement a justice system of ethical hackers to protect those who are not computer savvy from being taken advantage of. But who is to say that the ‘ethical’ hackers should be allowed to decide what is ethical and what is not if they themselves seem unethical? 

Are hackers pushing individuals, corporations, and governments to become more virtuous users of the Internet—or are they mostly tearing down what others have built, and ultimately limiting the usefulness of the Internet?

Hackers cannot be so easily categorized into such a generalized category as all bad or all good. There is no ‘mostly’ in terms of hackers and their interactions with individuals, corporations or government. I believe there are hackers that look to make a positive change and there are hackers that look to make a negative change, and more than ever there are those that do not have such a direct focus, and their choices to do good or bad are likely often changing. The anonymity that these people posses allows them to not feel any pressure whatsoever to continue on one path or another, after all, it is likely that none they know with every find out what they do.

Is there any information that should really be kept secret? How do we balance the need for transparency with the need to protect ourselves, for example, from groups who do not believe in transparency and other democratic values?

When it comes to the internet I don’t believe there is anything that can be considered private or secret. The sheer number of loopholes that exist in this form of communication means that one can trust that their information will be protected. There will always be bad people in the world, and the internet is another communication method where people can lie and cheat. The balance between personal security and digital transparency lies between personal shopping and social media stupidity. Social media is a forum to share a carefully selected version of yourself, if you make the choice to put online yourself doing incriminating things or at the very least unprofessional things then it is your fault if that information is leaked or used against you. On the flip side if you are looking to purchase a rare faberge egg that is unavailable in Canada and must be purchased through an online platform your credit card information should be protected. Your financial situation should not be threatened because of greedy hackers, but if you choose to put negative qualitative information about yourself online then there is none else to blame but yourself.

BP #5

The 2011 uprising in London was not so widespread that it reached me or any of my connections across my social media platforms. The riots were in response to the shooting of a young black man in London by police. The young people who responded to this killing communicated mainly through Blackberry Messenger. According to reports around one third of the protesters were using Blackberry devices and the interface was relatively secure when it came to the ability of authorities to access it. Mark Duggan, the victim of this apparent hate crime, was commemorated by the protesters and youth community through a Facebook page that communicated his friends and acquaintances of posting parting messages and updates on the legal standing of the case against the police. The Facebook page does not in fact encourage rioting or violence of any kind, but instead pushes people to use their words to spread awareness and seek justice to prevent the event from occurring again. The social media platform of BBM aided mobilization and action/reaction and the Facebook group spread awareness as it is accessible by the public. Their choice of media interface did prove successful as their mode of communication was cheap, as people already had the device, quick, widespread and secure against authority. In terms of the development of the trial itself, the riots gained media coverage and public attention but I don’t believe it swayed a judge one way or another to discipline the police involved, but then again this inference is based on what I could not find reports on.

This social uprising presents the barrier encountered through communication. Although they were able to use BBM to ensure security, that two thirds of the population that did not own a Blackberry device was excluded from the updates regarding the riots. If the communication method chosen were Facebook then there would be no security but it would reach more people. There are drawbacks to both methods. This uprising brings attention to the abuse of power that apparently remains rampant within authority figures such as police officers. Just because someone holds a position of power does not mean that that power should not be questioned. 

This protest holds a cultural significance in that it proves that the youth community of London does not take abuse and their community is strong enough to fight back. Socially it proves that London teens have the means of communication to come together and switch from conversation in an imagined community to action in the real world. 

Social media has definitely enhanced the advocacy and activism community and I believe that is more important than the occasional dark side of this immediate communication in it’s use for negative purposes. People who use a public forum for communication should know the consequences as the law does extend past verbal and physical violations. A message of intent can be just as powerful as the act itself. Those who choose to use social media and ICT’s need to recognize this and realize there are other modes of communication and other ways to convey an idea to a large group of people. That being said I don’t believe governments should constantly be monitoring media platforms as there needs to be some kind of freedom of speech. It is a tricky line that the government can play between allowing enough privacy and enforcing a safe environment for the general public. Ultimately I believe that if the government could monitor only the most viewed or the groups with the most members because it is them that really have the ability to make an impact on society. This monitoring system should not be to stop marches or protests but to prevent the unnecessary harming of the public. 

Social media is undoubtably a tool for change. Social media is the way people in modern times educate themselves on all topics including movements, charities and advocacy groups. Discounting it as a tool would be like thinking that a shovel is unnecessary for gardening, I mean we have hands right? Without social media, people lose a major communicative network, but what is important to look at is how do we take a step past the social media? The communication between people is only half the battle, then what comes of all the funds raised, and what impact has it had on political or social order. 

One share two shares good shares bad shares BR #4

Social media may have been the best thing to ever happen to the world of advocacy and activism. Regardless of how I may bring forth the problem of inaction that is all so common these days, social media binds people together in such an instantaneous way that any other form of communication falls short. Being able to reach thousands of people with the click of a button has built a global imagined community unrivaled by any other form of communication. Any advocacy group, like Lovebot, can create pages on multiple platforms of social media including YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and Instagram in order to connect with the most people possible. Those persons interested in interacting with Lovebot have the option to do so on any social media interface, and they have pages and people posting about them on all four of the above mentioned websites as well as their own website featuring an interactive map and blog. Community building occurs when a number of people are brought together. Before the internet there was the restriction of location, but in modern times there is only the restriction of access, and with the introduction of internet cafes, that can hardly be considered a barrier. The imagined communities formed on the internet are the enablers of awareness which in turn allows the communication to mobilize, the ability to form reaction in favour of causes, and the collection of donations. Communities among the internet are interconnected through mutual friends and shared message boards, one good message can “go viral” in minutes, from one share to 10 shares to 100, in the web of connections. Youtube has a section for top views which crosses the boundaries set by Facebook through privacy friend groups. Instagram and Twitter are similar to this, where they have trending pages that are public and relatively unrestricted.

In addition to Instagram, Cosmopolitan website and the Onion both provide interactive media platforms that raise awareness about various causes and current movements. Now before you count out Cosmopolitan, yes it’s women's magazine that is not strictly focused on activism, but it has the ability to reach an extremely wide spread community. People that visit Cosmopolitan are not strictly looking to keep up to date on anything more than some good ab exercises or the newest cocktail, but this is precisely why this website is so effective. The people that visit this website do not regularly hear about activism and thus the website has the ability to reach a demographic not normally accessed. Especially due to their popularity, people may be more likely to take the time to read an article about the pro choice rallies in the US. 

Another website that is the Canadian Cancer society. I have a friend that I met on the Brock rugby team and in my first year playing with her I learned she was diagnosed with a brain tumour. She has since raised a considerable amount of money and shown how dedicated she was to our team and worked through the pain associated with such a detrimental illness. She has recently started a fundraiser that raises money for cancer research. Her goal was $1000 and once she reached it she would shave her head (http://convio.cancer.ca/site/TR/Thirdpartyevent/IFE_ON_CommunityPartnerships_?team_id=303178&pg=team&fr_id=15142#.UvES9VvYcaX). She has since

reached her goal and on Wednesday February 5th she will allow the highest bidder to shave her head. The Canadian Cancer society has allowed her a spot on their website to offer a secure donation system and the chance to gain funds from those just visiting the website and not directly associated with her. This website thus fundraises and enables her to spread awareness.

I have chosen to do my essay on the riots of Ukraine so I will use the #ukraine as the common hashtag is in Ukranian and none of my followers speak that language. The common hashtag is #євромайдан and roughly translates into ‘European Square’. This hashtag is used for members of the riots to communicate with one another and to spread word of certain activities occurring in the square. This hashtag is fulfilling community building, awareness, mobilization and action/ reaction. Other commonly used hashtags are #ukrainolution and #euromaiden. Twitter has mobilized celebrities from Ukraine to reach more people than would originally have been. Ukraine has not gotten nearly enough media coverage as people like Justin Beiber has consumed the media with insignificant news.