“UG (unity government) we can now crown you the most dictatorial government we have ever had. Syabas!” - Ambiga Sreenevasan
You can be sure of two things when it comes to the social media licence that the Madani state plans to introduce.
The first is that these big tech companies are going to come to some sort of agreement with the Madani regime because any form of licence or so-called regulations is not going to cost them a thing. It will be business as usual.
The second is that beyond fines (there is no reason to believe that the Madani regime will jail anyone from these social media companies because it would be economically catastrophic), there is really nothing much the Madani regime can do beyond stomping its feet angrily and call social media companies names like how Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim did when he called the behaviour of Meta “biadab”.
If the state thinks that it can bully social media companies like how they did with the print media back in the day - such as when they shut down The Star in Ops Lalang - they are in for a big surprise and they know this.
Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi in the press arrogantly proclaimed - “Closed… that’s the power of the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC).”
Let’s not kid ourselves
Are you sure about that? Sure, the MCMC can use its bully tactics on local enterprises. Just last year, a group of veteran media professionals issued a statement calling for the MCMC to stop acting like big brother and block news sites.
“The current government is chosen on the basis of its promise to enable the free flow of information and to guarantee freedom of the press. Complaints from media practitioners that their websites are being blocked are on the rise; this is an unhealthy trend that must be stopped immediately.”
What would happen if the state decides to shut down social media platforms that government agencies rely on to transmit information to citizens?
What would happen to local businesses that rely on these platforms to generate business and communicate with their customers?
What would happen to state security services that rely on these platforms to warn citizens of possible danger or state rescue services that rely on these platforms to communicate with citizens in danger relief areas?
Facebook and WhatsApp go off for a couple of hours and the whole country is plunged into some sort of existential crisis, and the government really thinks that it could shut down these platforms and there would be no blowback from the citizenry, but more importantly, how it would affect essential services from healthcare to security?
All about control
What the government hopes to do with this licensing scheme is to attempt to regulate the flow of information in this country. Why? Because the state understands that the opposition has a far better grasp of social media tactics than it does.
What PN has demonstrated, for instance, with its use of social media influencers and viral memes mocking the government is that they can sway voters, especially young voters.
The Straits Times under the headline “Social media censorship in Malaysia surges during PM Anwar’s first year in power” highlighted this exact issue.
“Political content on TikTok is dominated by the opposition alliance Perikatan Nasional and critics have accused the government of silencing dissent by targeting content on the popular video-sharing platform.
“PN’s success on TikTok was widely credited for the unexpected gains it made at the 2022 general election, with both PAS and Bersatu more than doubling their seat haul from four years earlier.”
Let me be very clear. Social media companies are not the victims here. Indeed, revelations by Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen argued that Facebook prioritises profits over safety.
Her opening remarks before the US Senate are a good indication of how social media platforms operate.
“I’m here today because I believe Facebook’s products harm children, stoke division and weaken our democracy.
“These problems are solvable. A safer, free-speech-respecting, more enjoyable social media is possible. But there is one thing that I hope everyone takes away from these disclosures, it is that Facebook can change but is clearly not going to do so on its own.”
However, this is a separate issue from what is going on here. If Malaysia really wants to have a discussion with Facebook about its algorithms and how hate speech and elements detrimental to a secular democracy are in danger because of the corporate practices of Meta, then, by all means, have that discussion with Mark Zuckerberg.
But this is really not about defending secular democracy, is it?
Licensing won’t curb cybercrimes
Deputy Communications Minister Teo Nie Ching as reported in the press said: “…that the measure is essential to curb the rising cases of cybercrimes, particularly sexual crimes against children and online fraud in Malaysia, which have become increasingly alarming.”
I submit there are more than enough laws and personnel to handle such issues if (and this is a big if) these laws and personnel were not used by the government to clamp down on every person or organisation which it views as a threat to their political survival.
As reported in the Straits Times piece above, “According to sources involved in social media in the public and private sector, these demands for restrictions are continuing to grow in 2024, with the authorities dedicating personnel to trawl platforms for offensive content. ‘A vast majority are political in nature. Over 90 percent possibly,’ said a person involved in the content restriction process.”
Furthermore, when it comes to the issues highlighted, there is no evidence that any such licence would reduce such activities
What reduces such activities is good, old-fashioned police tradecraft, which means laws and personnel have to work diligently with these social media platforms to curb activities and this involves a sustained working relationship with these platforms.
It also means engagement with the public but, more importantly, training personnel in the latest methods to curb such criminal activities, which would mean of course close relationships with state security personnel from other countries and learning from them how they deal with such activities.
Ultimately, what the Madani regime is doing is building more dictatorial foundations for the theocratic state to further build on.
To be honest, I don’t think even PN would have come up with such a gambit because they understand that there are enough dictatorial tools in the box to handle dissent.
This is another way the Madani state shoots itself in the foot. - Mkini
S THAYAPARAN is Commander (Rtd) of the Royal Malaysian Navy. Fīat jūstitia ruat cælum - “Let justice be done though the heavens fall.”
The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.