The Chilling Effect Of Mass Surveillance Quantified
from the be-good...-or-be-watched dept
There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment. How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork. It was even conceivable that they watched everybody all the time. but at any rate they could plug in your wire whenever they wanted to. You have to live - did live, from habit that became instinct - in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized.There has been much talk about the chilling effect of mass surveillance. The problem isn't that anyone is actively watching everyone. The problem is that algorithms and search tools are doing the watching, meaning everything eventually receives some level of scrutiny if it's deemed suspicious by the filters.
George Orwell, 1984
It's been mostly talk, though. Anecdotal evidence passed on by journalists, security researchers and others whose interests might clash with what the US government has deemed acceptable. Now, there's data. A study by Jonathon W. Penney shows searches for certain subject matter have declined in response to the NSA leaks. Penney cites earlier studies of Google traffic that showed a statistically significant decline of 5% in searches involving terms people might believe would be flagged as suspicious by mass surveillance software. He also notes that the dip was short-lived, corresponding roughly to the initial Snowden leaks before resuming at their normal pace after a few months.
Penney instead focuses on Wikipedia, a site a large percentage of the population uses for research. It also offers far more comprehensive data to researchers than an examination of Google Trends provides.
There are also methodological reasons for this case study’s focus on Wikipedia. First, unlike Google Trends, Wikimedia Foundation provides a wealth of data on key elements of its site, including article traffic data, which can provide a more accurate picture as to any impact or chilling effects identified. Second, Wikipedia, a “unique, online, collaborative encyclopedia,” has over 500 million visitors per month, and its collaborative and peer-produced content is growing at a rate of 17,800 articles per day (as of May 2014, English Wikipedia content includes over 4.6 million articles). In other words, Wikipedia is both a massively popular medium, but one that is also growing in content and scope. As such, any observed chilling effect would implicate a large number of Internet users (accessing Wikipedia) doing something wholly legal—accessing information and knowledge in an encyclopedia—and, arguably, such chilled or reduced use would run counter to these Wikipedia use and content trends.Using the DHS's own keyword list for terrorism-related terms, Penney examined Wikipedia's data. Using a 32-month period surrounding the first Snowden leak (June 2013), Penney compared the number of visits to "terrorist-related" Wikipedia pages and found a significant drop post-Snowden.
The difference in mean values is notable—a reduction of 526,614 in the average monthly views for the article after June 2013, which represents approximately a 19.5% drop in article view counts. This is more than mean differences found in the Google search terms study before and after June 2013.Those are Penney's non-empirical findings, something he notes could track with an overall decline in Wikipedia traffic. (Not that Penney actually examined all Wikipedia traffic during that same period and found a decline, but rather providing a non-chilling effect theory for the drop off.)
The empirical findings, however, back up the non-empirical.
The shifting trend of the data, which in this case is a sudden and immediate drop, is particularly consistent with a chilling effect arising from June 2013 revelations. If the outlier data relating to Hamas view counts is excluded, the decline in page views is less sudden (e.g. 20% immediate drop off if the Hamas data are excluded compared to the 30% drop off in the Hamas data remains in the study). However, regardless of whether the Hamas data is included, there is still a substantial and statistically significant decrease.The numbers appear to back up the claims of many journalists and researchers in the wake of the Snowden leaks. Glenn Greenwald, writing for The Intercept, adds the anecdotal evidence back into the mix.
The fear that causes self-censorship is well beyond the realm of theory. Ample evidence demonstrates that it’s real – and rational. A study from PEN America writers found that 1 in 6 writers had curbed their content out of fear of surveillance and showed that writers are “not only overwhelmingly worried about government surveillance, but are engaging in self-censorship as a result.” Scholars in Europe have been accused of being terrorist supporters by virtue of possessing research materials on extremist groups, while British libraries refuse to house any material on the Taliban for fear of being prosecuted for material support for terrorism.Some journalists and researchers can assert definitively there's a chilling effect. Many of those associated with the Snowden leaks have experienced everything from constant security harassment (and detainment) at airports to the government actually stopping by the office and destroying computers.
For others, it's a gloom that never encroaches past the horizon, but also never fully dissipates. The feeling that something may trigger a detainment at an airport or an unseen investigation is always there. Even in my work for Techdirt, I've second-guessed Google searches that have resulted in warnings about illegal activity (related to posts about various child porn defendants) or accusations I'm a robot (searches for specific document types containing certain wording). I don't feel I'm actively on anyone's radar, but it wouldn't take much for someone to assemble my internet history and use it to build a case against me. Even if it fell apart immediately, I would still have to deal with an arrest, searches/seizures of my electronics, and the possibility of losing my other job.
And what I research isn't that all uncommon, considering the subject matter we cover here. There are plenty of writers, researchers and journalists out there treading into even murkier waters -- some of whom have been second-guessing their own efforts since the Snowden leaks, if not earlier.
It's no longer a case of peering out the blinds and seeing a van sitting at the end of the street, one that's never been there before. The surveillance is largely passive. The NSA gathers a ton of data and sifts through it, ensuring as many people as possible are caught in its nets, even if most of them are released after an algorithmic examination. The FBI and other DOJ agencies partake in this data haul and local law enforcement agencies are increasing their own use of passive, keyword-oriented internet surveillance.
The problem goes much deeper than the NSA and its bulk surveillance. We've seen the FBI build terrorism cases out of nothing and cops raid houses because someone purchased something from a gardening supply store. We've seen people's lives destroyed by bogus espionage cases built on nothing any rational person would consider "evidence" -- except that all rational thought is immediately thrown out the window the moment someone says "national security." It's no surprise that some of those in these fields have just said "fuck it" and wandered off into safer areas. Why roll the dice on your own lives/livelihoods? The odds of the government dragging you down may be low, but they're far from nonexistent.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: chilling effects, jonathon penney, nsa, surveillance
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
The "Chilling Effect..."
The people traveling down this route know exactly what they are doing, it is not a mystery and I cannot fathom why people think that ignorance is even a viable excuse for these politicians. These guys craft some exceptionally dodgy legislation because they have entire teams think-tanking and writing this bullshit out so that all the dominoes fall in the right places.
No matter how frustrated those politicians ACT on the news with these things, know that they are well pleased with their accomplishments.
Chilling Effects are just exactly what the Doctor Ordered!
If you see something, say something! Because as you know, everyone... EVERYONE is a suspect!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: The "Chilling Effect..."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Never fear!
To reassure everyone else, the CIA, NSA, etc. will be merging into a new "Ministry of Love."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: The "Chilling Effect..."
Same for the US government... all the people for this shit have more connections with each other than they would have you believe, and pretty much in every case, the revolutionaries are often disenfranchised former participants of that very process.
There is a reason why this shit self perpetuates! America is truly an anomaly in World History!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: The "Chilling Effect..."
First and foremost, what was and what was not happened before and after those dates. Not Snowden, but other issues, such as terrorist activities. Was one month more active than others?
It's also very possible to draw the conclusion that is the Snowden leaks were the cause, then perhaps some of the drop is people who feel they might have been outed being more careful. With all of the pages, all of the names, all of the people involved, it's quite likely that Snowden's leaks may have run them to ground for a while.
A true chilling effect would have been perhaps 50% drop off. 5% seems more like certain people being more cautious because they don't want to draw any more attention to themselves at that key moment.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
It's not a bug, it's a feature
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: The "Chilling Effect..."
The "Chilling Effect" has to do with people not doing anything just to avoid any attention at all, including perfectly legal things like posting their opinions online!
Has nothing to fucking do with government ops stopping functions to prevent discovery. Additionally, stopping is just as noticeable as starting. When under suspicion you don't stop you just hold pattern unless you want to call undue attention to yourself!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: The "Chilling Effect..."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mass Spying Is Always Aimed at Crushing Dissent
No matter which government conducts mass surveillance, they also do it to crush dissent, and then give a false rationale for why they’re doing it.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/01/government-spying-citizens-always-focuses-crushing-dissent -keeping-us-safe.html
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The Snowden revelations damaged my trust in the Internet. I'm scared to explore. I find the Internet is a much smaller place than it used to be even in the 90's. At least then there was intellectual privacy.
Fuck the NSA and fuck Snowden. The past several years has been pure and utter hell on my mental health. I grew up on the Internet and now I'm afraid to use it.
I hope all the officials responsible for these programs and who support them in addition to Snowden rot in hell.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
The government can simply issue a national security letter to obtain statistics from Wikipedia as well as compel Wikipedia to give users information on people searching for 'terrorist terms'
[ link to this | view in thread ]
What Orwell Missed
Perhaps the better fictional narrative is Isaac Asimov's "The Dead Past" where a scientist develops a machine that can view the past like a television. He was just building something that could solve a controversial history problem - "did Carthaginians really burn babies alive in the name of religion?" He only realizes later that "the past" includes "a second ago" and having dispersed the plans all over the world, nobody will ever again have any privacy - including anything they've done up to that point; and his wife sinks into an obsessive state using the device to watch their daughter over and over again, up to the point where she died in a hose fire ten years ago.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: The "Chilling Effect..."
So, unless you're saying that performing said searches on Wikipedia should be illegal, then that is the exact definition of a chilling effect.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: The "Chilling Effect..."
To which I say: CITATION NEEDED
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: The "Chilling Effect..."
"When under suspicion you don't stop you just hold pattern unless you want to call undue attention to yourself!"
So that is what you did. Perhaps others decides to go to ground.
The point is that the report doesn't point out "The Chilling Effect Of Mass Surveillance Quantified" as much as it points out that informed criminals perhaps choose not to be so obvious.
It cuts both ways, and proves absolutely nothing, except that perhaps the Techdirt staff is a bit gullible.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: The "Chilling Effect..."
Moreover, the drop in searches could be related to many other things. The report author used a very short period of time and a very small drop to try to prove something that isn't easily provable. Did Kim Kardashian release something that week? Did a major celeb die? Was there a major sporting event, election, earthquake, or a million other things that might have happened?
It's a 5% drop, not suddenly the whole world avoiding a subject.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: The "Chilling Effect..."
I'm not saying that there might not be other explanations for this particular drop in searches. There may be other reasons for it. (Though the fact that you're initially prejudiced against the accuracy of the data, despite supporting anecdotal evidence, is telling.) However, it is irrelevant to the point at hand, which is that your own words described a scenario which is the exact definition of a chilling effect, yet you claim it is not a chilling effect.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
HIPPA
About 6 years ago I ammended the document patients sign to include a section on using email for communication between my office and the patient. It pointed out that email communications are not private and no expectation of privacy should be expected using email. If the patient still found that acceptable, they could sign that they would like to use email to communicate with my office.
Prior to Snowden's initial revelations, over 90% of patients signed that sections. Rather casually.
In the 6 months after that, almost 100% did not sign the email section. Since then, it is unusual for patients to sign it, probably less than 10%.
Thank you Mr. Snowden.
Well, yes, email is time consuming and I prefer not to use it. But mostly for making people aware there is even an issue to be aware of.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Other numbers,
I find it odd that people attribute so much to Snowden. Psychologically invasive marketing techniques are now so obvious that you would have to be in a coma not to know your being surveilled for commercial purposes.
I don't care about the NSA. I want the CARRIERS who are doing this shit brought up on charges.
[ link to this | view in thread ]