Most Americans are aware the government monitors and archives their online behavior. But knowing they’re being watch has subliminally stopped some from voicing their opinions about certain issues, according to a new study.
Researchers found that people will hold back for ‘fear of isolation from authority or government’ and others believe online surveillance is necessary for national security – no matter the cost.
‘Since Edward Snowden exposed the National Security Agency’s use of controversial online surveillance programs in 2013, there has been widespread speculation about the potentially deleterious effects of online government monitoring,’ reads the study published in Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly.
‘This study explores how perceptions and justification of surveillance practices may create a chilling effect on democratic discourse by stifling the expression of minority political views.’
Researchers from Wayne State University surveyed 255 people, who were selected to mimic basic demographic distributions across the US population.
They were asked to answer questions about media use, political attitudes and personality traits.
Next, all participants were given a fictional Facebook post about US airstrikes against ISIS and told to imagine the post was on their own news feed.
The post aimed to create either hostile or friendly comments among participants.
Each subject was asked if they’d be willing to publicly express their opinion about the topic, how other Americans might feel about it and their views on online surveillance.
Researchers used something known as a regression model to test how well a person’s decision to voice their opinion could be predicted based on the nature of their opinion, their perceptions of prevailing viewpoints and if they oppose or support surveillance.
The model found that 35 percent of the variance in an individuals’ willingness to self-censor could be explained by their perceptions about online surveillance.
A majority of the participants noted they are aware of the government snooping in the background, which stops them from ‘speaking out in hostile opinion climates’.
But what baffled researchers was that people know their ‘online activities are subject to government interception and believe these surveillance practices are necessary for national security play important roles in influencing conformist behavior,’ reads the paper.
Those who believed monitoring and archiving was justified changed their actions to align with the governments way of thinking and volunteered personal information at their request.
Researchers believe that those who are accepted as the ‘dominate position’ and know they are under surveillance, may refrain from expressing minority views.
‘So many people I’ve talked with say they don’t care about online surveillance because they don’t break any laws and don’t have anything to hide,’Elizabeth Stoycheff, lead researcher of the study and assistant professor at Wayne State University, told The Washington Post.
‘And I find these rationales deeply troubling.’
She explained that individuals who expressed the ‘nothing to hide belief’, also were the ones on board with online surveillance.
‘The fact that the ‘nothing to hide’ individuals experience a significant chilling effect speaks to how online privacy is much bigger than the mere lawfulness of one’s actions,’ she said.
‘It’s about a fundamental human right to have control over one’s self-presentation and image, in private, and now, in search histories and metadata.’
While some will argue it is essential to maintain national security, no matter the cost, this study shows it can contribute to the silencing of minority views that provide the bedrock of democratic disclosure, said researchers.
This study falls in line with Snowden’s comments this month, during a live video conference addressing other whistleblowers.
‘It’s the minorities who are most at risk’ from the impact of mass surveillance, Snowden said.
‘Without privacy there is only society, only the collective, which makes them all be and think alike.’
‘You can’t have anything yourself, you can’t have your own opinions, unless you have a space that belongs only to you.’
WHAT DID RESEARCHERS FIND?
Researchers found that people will hold back for ‘fear of isolation from authority or government’ and others believe online surveillance is necessary for national security.
A majority of the participants noted they are aware of the government snooping in the background, which stops them from ‘speaking out in hostile opinion climates’.
But what baffled researchers was that people know their ‘online activities are subject to government interception and believe these surveillance practices are necessary for national security play important roles in influencing conformist behavior,’ reads the paper.
Those who believed monitoring and archiving was justified changed their actions to align with the governments way of thinking and volunteered personal information at their request.
Researchers believe that those who are accepted as the ‘dominate position’ and know they are under surveillance, may refrain from expressing minority views.
— source dailymail.co.uk By Stacy Liberatore