TECHNOLOGY vs POLITICS
The New Normal: Humans, Machines and Politics
The dust has settled on a rather intense political period in the US, where the Democrats won against a loud and aggressive GOP machinery. President Donald Trump’s access to leading social media platforms was shut down. In Uganda, the incumbent, Yoweri Museveni, won a widely contested new mandate. Access to the internet was shut down in the run-up to this election. In Tanzania, John Pombe Magufuli won another widely contested new mandate. Access to the internet was shut down in the run-up to this election, yet again.
We cannot deny the fact that technology has always played a major role in politics. A. Pando has written in How Politics Will Come to Rely on Technology about Cambridge Analytica. The latter, an analytics firm was on the spotlight in 2016 when it was accused of manipulating user data and personal information to influence the U.S. elections. This event became one of the most infamous demonstration of how political actors could leverage technology, its efficacy and success with emphasis on just how disruptive technology can be in the hands of competent and willing political actors.
Political narratives will be driven, shaped and dispersed using technology. Technology will provide new ways to settle scores and for political maneuvering: As platforms for mass mobilization, where individuals can be recruited to a cause from a global target audience; as tools of mass instruction, where individuals can be indoctrinated for a particular cause using virtual means and as tools for mass subversion where information open-source media can be used to inform global audiences. Interconnection of billions of gadgets has the potential to facilitate surveillance by governments (or other actors) on a massive scale.
Democracies depend on the masses for election of political figures into government. To convince the people, political parties and organizations require strategies for success. Strategies to inform and disinform. Strategies to counter the competition’s information and disinformation efforts. For our generation’s political actors, technology is your friend if you know how to work it. Or how to hack it. Woe betide you if you are a politician that does not know the far-reaching implications of technology on politics.
Politics uses all forms of media during election periods, but social media always keeps the conversation going long after the elections. This is probably the reason why we are always reminded to use the social platforms wisely as the ‘internet never forgets’. In politics things get heated (or appear to be) easily - opponents do their best to convince voters to support their agenda. We get viral videos on social media platforms that involve politicians spewing hate, memes (ask your favorite spy-queen about this) that make us laugh. These are two sides of the same coin.
In Technology for Governance, Politics and Democracy, TK Novelli argues that the possibility to engage directly with the citizens at every stage of the democratic process has shown both negative and positive effects. There is neutrality with respect to good or bad outcomes when it comes to governance ICTs, politics, and democracies. This means that we cannot overlook the influence and control these technology platforms promote. Even though it is possible to influence communities in meaningful political participation, there is equal possibility of managing, distorting, and disseminating information through technology.
The U.S., Uganda and Tanzania earned the dubious distinctions of precipitating a rethink of social media controls triggered by the electoral atmosphere. In Uganda and Tanzania, social media users and advocacy groups raised concerns over the blockage on WhatsApp and Twitter access. This brings to the fore how blocking internet and social media access are harmful to democracy. Tanzania has had a history of free and fair elections but 2020’s election changed the narrative. In Uganda, the government confronted Google, Facebook, and Twitter, alleging that these platforms were abused by the opposition.
In the U.S., the president lost to the opposition and but his supporters violently stormed Capitol Hill. This earned Mr. Trump a swift indefinite suspension from Facebook and Instagram, and a permanent suspension from Twitter. Due to his incredible fighting spirit, the former president turned to a Twitter alternative known as Parler. Unluckily, Parler’s hosts such as Google and Apple pulled the app out of their stores. As earlier discussed, there is neutrality in the outcomes of these decisions. In Tanzania’s case, the president fought the opposition by ensuring its supporters have little engagement while the case in U.S. had technology companies fighting the president.
These dynamics should lead us to question whether technology has become politics’ toughest opponent. Is democracy competing with technology? All these attempts at silencing differing groups may have yet unknown implications for political systems in future.