Today The New York Times has an article which explores the intersection of freedom and technology and which raises a fundamental question: are companies responsible to individuals or governments? It is being reported that as Apple introduced its 3G iPhone in Egypt it quietly disabled the handset’s global positioning system at the request of the Egyptian government. Egypt argued that GPS is a military prerogative that should not be extended to the citizenry.
This decision has added to an already ongoing international debate over the role and responsibilities of companies doing business around the globe (e.g., Yahoo in China). In the course of their business dealings are they suppose to safeguard an individual’s freedom or the sovereignty of a state? As the author, Noam Cohen, points out:
As much as any country, however, Egypt illustrates the push-me-pull-you nature of technology under an oppressive government. Young people flock to Facebook, in a way I never could have imagined. For the largest Arab country in the world, it was a way for the educated elite to reach out to one another and to those who had left the country for an even more elite education.
As more and more companies offer their goods and services globally they will be confronted with this question. An important question to answer, however, there is another underlying question in this article which should be explored as well; how do you resolve freedoms or rights that come into conflict with each other as a result of using technology? As noted:
It is easy to get swept up in the utopianism embedded in new technologies. That we will be more politically engaged because of the organizing and fund-raising tools of social networking; that we will think greater thoughts now that anyone can have access to nearly everything ever written; that our tribal hatreds will melt away as the world recognizes that we genuinely are all connected.
Even those like Mr. Ganesan, who see technology abused, are cautiously hopeful. “Technologies do not hold people accountable. They give people the tools to hold people accountable.” But he added: “We believe as a human rights group that the Internet can have an opening and transforming effect.”
Technologies do not hold people accountable, nor is technology necessarily held accountable either. It can be abused. Technology is inherently neutral. It is neither good nor evil, however, it may be used to accomplish both. Yes, technologies such as social networks and their ability to organize and fund-raise are transforming our world, but it does so in a manner impartial to the community or cause it is being used to promote.
Whether it is a social network supporting Barack Obama for president or a video game promoting the ethnic cleansing of America by white supremacists the technology doesn’t care. Again, technology is inherently neutral. We see social networks used to connect and inform, but they are also used for surveillance and misinformation. So while it can be rightly argued that GPS is a conduit to the freedom of information, the duality of the technology must be recognized as well.
As GPS illuminates the world around us it also locates us in that world. The iPhone may lead a person turn-by-turn to a restaurant in downtown Manhattan or Mumbai, but it is also capable of leading another person, or even a government, to the individual holding that iPhone. As a result, freedom of information can quickly come into conflict with one’s right to privacy.
What type of safeguards are we expecting — or even demanding — to be embedded in these technologies to ensure our rights? How do we resolve the conflict between two freedoms? Unfortunately these questions are rarely examined, or even asked, because the pace at which technology is created and subsequently adopted doesn’t afford the time for reflection.
Too often, as both individuals and society, we simply ignore these tensions. Instead of examining these issues it is far easier to shake our iPhones and hope we hit a culinary jackpot. However, unlike the Magic 8-ball, technology won’t answer these questions for us. We need to be more reflective with emerging technologies and hold companies, such as Apple, accountable to individuals.
In the end we can’t complain about our freedoms or rights being taken away from us when we, and others, are freely giving them away.