Essay, Research Paper
Propaganda in the Online Free Speech Campaign
Propaganda and Mass Communication
July 1, 1996
In February 1996, President Bill Clinton signed into law the
Telecommunications Act of 1996, the first revision of our country’s
communications laws in 62 years. This historic event has been greeted with
primarily positive responses by most people and companies. Most of the
Telecommunications act sets out to transform the television, telephone, and
related industries by lowering regulatory barriers, and creating law that
corresponds with the current technology of today and tomorrow. One part of the
Telecommunications act, however, is designed to create regulatory barriers
within computer networks, and this has not been greeted with admirable
commentary. This one part is called the Communications Decency Act (CDA), and
it has been challenged in court from the moment it was passed into law. Many of
the opponents of the CDA have taken their messages to the Internet in order to
gain support for their cause, and a small number of these organizations claim
this fight as their only cause. Some of these
organizations are broad based civil liberties groups, some fight for freedom of
speech based on the first amendment, and other groups favor the lowering of laws
involving the use of encrypted data on computers. All of these groups, however,
speak out for free speech on the Internet, and all of these groups have utilized
the Internet to spread propaganda to further this common cause of online free
speech and opposition to the CDA.
Context in which the propaganda occurs
Five years ago, most people had never heard of the Internet, but today the
Internet is a term familiar to most people even if they are not exactly sure
about what the Internet is. Along with the concept of the Internet, it is
widely known that pornography and other adult related materials seem to be
readily available on the Internet, and this seems to be a problem with most
people. Indeed, it does not take long for even a novice Internet user to search
out adult materials such as photographs, short movies, text based stories and
live discussions, chat rooms, sexual aide advertisements, sound files, and even
live nude video. The completely novel and sudden appearance of the widely
accessible Internet combined with the previously existing issues associated with
adult materials has caused a great debate around the world about what should be
done. The major concern is that children will gain access to materials that
should be reserved only for adults. Additionally, there is concern that the
Internet is being used for illegal activities such as child pornography. In
response to the concerns of many people, the government enacted the
Communications Decency Act which attempts to curtail these problems by defining
what speech is unacceptable online and setting guidelines for fines and
prosecution of people or businesses found guilty of breaking this law. While
the goal of keeping children from gaining access to pornography is a noble one
that few would challenge, the problem is that the CDA has opened a can of worms
for the computer world. Proponents of the CDA claim that the CDA is necessary
because the Internet is so huge that the government is needed to help curb the
interaction of adult materials and children. Opponents of the CDA claim that
the wording of the CDA is so vague that, for example, an online discussion of
abortion would be illegal under the new law, and our first amendment rights
would therefore be pulled out from under us. Opponents also argue that Internet
censorship should be done at home by parents, not by the government, and that
things such as child pornography are illegal anyway, so there is no need to re-
state this in a new law. At this point, the battle lines have been drawn and
like everything else in society, everyone is headed into the courtroom to debate
it out. While this happens, the propagandists have set up shop on the Internet.
In terms of a debate about the first amendment and the restriction of free
speech, this current battle is nothing new. The debate over free speech has
been going on for as long as people have been around, and in America many great
court cases have been fought over free speech. The Internet’s new and
adolescent status does not exclude it from problems. Just as all other forms of
mass communication have been tested in the realms of free speech and propaganda,
so will the Internet.
Identity of the propagandists
There are scores of online groups that work to promote free speech on the
Internet, but there are a few who stand out because of the scope of their
activities, their large presence on the Internet, and their apparently large
numbers of supporters. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is today one of
the most visual online players in the fight against the CDA, but was established
only in 1990 as a non-profit organization before the Internet started to gain
its status as a daily part of our lives. Mitchell D. Kapor, founder of Lotus
Development Corporation, along with his colleague John Perry Barlow, established
the EFF to “address social and legal issues arising from the impact on society
of the increasingly pervasive use of computers as a means of communication and
information distribution.” In addition, the EFF also notes that it “will
support litigation in the public interest to preserve, protect and extend First
Amendment rights within the realm of computing and telecommunications technology
.” Also in the press release that announced the formation of the EFF, Kapor
said, “It is becoming increasingly obvious that the rate of technology
advancement in communications is far outpacing the establishment of appropriate
cultural, legal and political frameworks to handle the issues that are arising.”
Clearly, the EFF is very up-front and open about its belief that the American
legal system is currently not equipped to handle the daily reliance and use of
computers in society, and that the EFF will facilitate in handling problems in
the area of litigation and computers. Initial funding of the EFF was provided in
part by a private contribution from Steve Wozniak, the co-founder of Apple
Computer, and since then contributions have come from industry giants such as
AT&T, Microsoft, Netscape Communications, Apple Computer, IBM, Ziff-Davis
Publishing, Sun Microsystems, and the Newspaper Association of America. It is
likely that these companies see the need for assistance when the computer world
collides with the world of law, and also see the EFF as one way for the rights
of the computer industry and its customers to be upheld. A second player in the
area of online free speech protection is the Center for Democracy and Technology
(CDT). The CDT, founded in 1994, is less up-front about their history and
funding, but states that its mission is to, “develop public policies that
preserve and advance democratic values and constitutional civil liberties on the
Internet and other interactive communications media.” Like the EFF, the CDT is
located in Washington, DC, and is a non-profit group funded by, according to the
1996 annual report, “individuals, foundations, and a broad cross section of the
computer and communications industry.” A third major player in the online free
speech movement is The Citizens Internet Empowerment Coalition (CIEC, pronounced
“seek”). This is the group who filed the original lawsuit against the US
Department of Justice and Attorney General Janet Reno to overturn the CDA based
on, in part, the use of the word “indecent”. The plaintiffs in this lawsuit are
a very diverse group, and include many who are also cited as contributors to the
EFF. Some of these plaintiffs include the American Booksellers Association, the
Freedom to Read Foundation, Apple Computer, Microsoft, America Online, the
Society of Professional Journalists, and Wired magazine. In their appeal to
gain new members, CIEC states that they are, “a coalition of Internet users,
businesses, non-profit organizations and civil liberties advocates formed to
challenge the constitutionality of the Communications Decency Act because they
believe it violates their free speech rights and condemns the Internet to a
future of burdensome censorship and government intrusion.” Like the CDT, CIEC
does not directly state what organizations support their cause or how much money
is changing hands, but based on the companies supporting the lawsuit filed by
the CIEC, it is almost certain that the same computer and publishing related
companies are paying for CIEC’s existence. Finally, unlike other groups which
are activists for several causes, CIEC has the one and only mission of
challenging the CDA and does not claim to have any other purpose.
Ideology and purpose behind the campaign
There are several interrelated reasons motivating the online free speech
movement. The most visual, and therefore one of the most obvious, reasons for
the online presence of the free speech movement is to sign up new supporters.
Current technology of the Internet is ideal for gathering information from
people without inconveniencing them. While exploring the Internet in the privacy
of one’s own home, it takes only seconds to type in your name, address, and
other information so that it can be sent to the headquarters of an organization.
When compared to the traditional process of walking into a traditional
storefront, talking with a human, and then writing out your membership
information on paper, this new electronic method is superior. A person can
become an online free speech supporter at 2am while sitting in his or her
underwear and eating leftovers while sitting at home without having to worry
about talking to a pushy recruiter. Because of this ease of gathering
information, it is possible for
an organization to quickly recruit large numbers of members. Also, in terms of
the demographics of the members, the mere fact that they are signing up online
generates a certain, desirable demographic group of people. Even though
computers are becoming easier to use every day, the majority of Internet users
are educated and tend to have higher incomes than the average. At the head of
CIEC’s page where new members are encouraged to sign up, there is a large banner
proclaiming, “Over 47,000 Individual Internet Users Have Joined as of June 17,
1996!”. This particular technique of announcing the number of new recruits is
popular among various online organizations who recruit new members because it
lets the user know that he is not alone. The user will see the large number and
know that he or she will be part of a large group of supporters and therefore
feel safe about signing up with the cause. Once an individual gets “in the door”
of an online free speech website, he or she is encouraged to become a member or
supporter, but why are the supporters needed? I believe that when presented in
a legal setting, these large membership lists can be used to demonstrate that
numerous people do exist who are in favor of the online free speech campaign.
Just as people vote for laws or politicians, membership lists demonstrate that
people have “voted” for this cause. While a membership list is not quite as
powerful as an election, it does show that real “everyday” people support this
cause. When the online free speech campaign takes the CDA case to the Supreme
Court, it will be armed with long lists of people who support what these
organizations are trying to do, and the knowledge of all of the supporters could
be just enough to tilt the judges’ decision in the right direction. Another
purpose behind the online free speech campaigns is to attract more businesses to
the effort. When, for example, a software company who advertises on the Net
proclaims to be a supporter of the movement, then the movement gets free
advertising. When the names of computer companies such as Microsoft and Apple
are mentioned in the introductory and sign up information, other companies might
feel the urge to join because of the “me too” effect in which the smaller
companies look up to the bigger companies and might tend to adopt the policies
of the giants. For example, if YYZ Software knows that Microsoft is supporting
the free speech online movement, YYZ might feel important if it supports the
cause too. While the number company owners or managers browsing a site will be
much smaller than the number of individual people looking at the same site, this
idea of throwing around the name of famous companies is an attempt to attract at
least some supporters. Even though only a small number of supporters could be
gained through this channel, it is still a channel, and therefore important no
matter how small. Also, if this method happens to bring a large company into
the group, then the organization could gain great financial support. While it
is likely that all the Netscapes and IBMs of the world are already aware of the
online free speech movement, new companies and new fortunes are made frequently
in the fast moving world of the computer industry, so an unknown company today
could be a key player tomorrow. It is, therefore, important for the online free
speech movement to be constantly recruiting new companies, because the need for
large financial backers never ends, and you never know when a mom and pop
operation today will be the next Microsoft tomorrow.
Another motivation behind the campaign is the protection of businesses
and their interests. For example, a new online magazine for scientists in the
biomedical field is being formed, and the company behind the venture, Current
Science, is investing between $7.5 and $9 million in the project (Rothstein).
With money like this at risk, it is obvious that freedom of speech must be
secured in order for ventures like this to work. Finally, the ultimate goal for
all groups is the repeal of the CDA, but the deletion of the CDA does not mean
the end of free speech problems on the Internet, so these groups will always
exist in some form or another. Just as there is an ongoing debate about what
books are appropriate for who, there will always be a debate about what Internet
content is appropriate for who. Add to this the global aspect of the Internet,
and the scope and complexity of the issue can be envisioned.
Target audience
The clever, or perhaps just convenient aspect about online free speech
propaganda is that the propaganda is located at the very same spot that the
debate is about. In other words, if you want to promote free speech, go to
where the speech is taking place- the Internet. By promoting propaganda online
about online free speech, you are directly targeting the audience you want to
target. People who do not utilize the Internet will be less interested than
those who do, so it makes sense to locate your campaign on the Internet, where
the people there will naturall
issues. An added bonus of the Internet is its relatively low cost compared to
traditional media outlets such as print or radio, so not only are these groups
promoting their causes almost directly to the people they want to reach, they
are doing it at a very low cost compared with more traditional methods. On the
other hand, these online free speech organizations have little, if any
propaganda outside of the Internet, so they are therefore not reaching the
maximum number of possible people. While they all maintain traditional offices,
phone numbers, postal mailing addresses, and fax numbers, they are virtually
unknown by the populace outside of the Internet. While purchasing print or
television advertisements might not be as direct and monetarily efficient as
utilizing the Internet to promote propaganda, those traditional methods would
help get the word out to the largest number of people.. Just as all other forms
of mass media have been utilized for the spread of propaganda, so will the
Internet.
Media utilization techniques
This section is by far the most interesting because it deals primarily
with the actual examples and techniques of propaganda used by the online free
speech movement. While the propaganda of these groups is primarily limited to
the electronic realm of the Internet, it is important to remember that the
Internet is itself a multimedia tool. Unlike newspaper, for example, the
Internet can convey words, pictures, sound, and moving video. As an added
dimension, these forms can vary in unlimited colors, intensities, qualities and
quantities so that the viewer does not always know what to expect. The
important propagandistic idea of utilizing all available channels to maximize
the effect of propaganda is certainly at use here.
My first involvement with the online free speech movement, and the
reason why I decided to investigate this topic, was the Blue Ribbon Campaign.
Almost a year ago, I began to notice the occurrence of the same blue ribbon icon
on many different Internet web locations and homepages. These icons are similar
to the red AIDS awareness ribbon in terms of their appearance and function, and
the actual size of the icon in most locations is typically only about 8 mm high
by 25 wide. Of course this size depends on several computer specific variables,
but the point is that the Blue Ribbon Campaign icon is small so that it appears
quickly without taking much transfer time. The people behind the Blue Ribbon
icon knew that if they created a large space and time hogging image, that people
would become frustrated with the lethargic image and fail to gain respect for it.
However, in reality, this small icon is tiny and unobtrusive so that its
appearance on a web page is not bothersome.
The idea of using a blue ribbon is smart because of the association with
the AIDS red ribbon campaign. While people have different opinions about
homosexuality, most people, if not all, agree that aids must be stopped. Using
this logic, it makes sense to utilize this almost universal appeal of the red
ribbon by the creation of a blue ribbon. Additionally, the red ribbon icon is
very well established and is widely recognized, so once again, the adoption of a
similar blue ribbon icon is smart.
The genius of the Internet’s world wide web is the use of hyperlinks or
hypertext. Hypertext is the system of allowing the reader to click on something
and be instantly transported to another location that relates to what he or she
clicked on. Every time a Blue Ribbon Campaign icon exists on the world wide web,
it contains the Internet homepage address of the Electronic Frontier Foundation,
one of the key players in the online free speech movement. Therefore, by
clicking on the Blue Ribbon icon, the reader is instantly transferred to EFF’s
homepage. When compared again to the AIDS red ribbon movement, the advantage of
the Internet system are obvious. When one sees a person wearing an AIDS red
ribbon, he or she can not automatically and instantaneously receive information
about AIDS. The person would have to ask the red ribbon wearer for a phone
number or address where AIDS information could be found. With the Blue Ribbon
Campaign, however, the information is instant, and it fits right in with today’s
fast moving society. A person can see the Blue Ribbon icon, and can immediately
see what it means. There is no time for the person to lose interest due to
making a phone call or waiting for a postal letter to be delivered.
Therefore on a daily basis I was seeing the Blue Ribbon Campaign icons,
and several times I clicked on those icons in order to gain more information
about this symbol that kept popping up all over the place. If, on a particular
day, I was not in the mood to learn about the EFF, I could easily go back to
what I was doing before I clicked on the blue ribbon icon. However, since the
icon kept appearing at various web sites, there were times when I did feel like
exploring this interesting phenomenon further, and because the blue ribbon icon
was easy to run across, it was easy for me to enter the EFF and see what they
had to offer.
The EFF’s homepages do contain a brief history of the organization, but
there is no information about the actual origin of the Blue Ribbon Campaign.
According to electronic mail I received from Dennis Derryberry at the EFF after
querying about the origin of the Blue Ribbon Campaign: The Blue Ribbon Campaign
does not belong to any specific group; it is shared by all groups and
individuals who value and support free speech online. I believe the idea
originally was sparked by a woman who has been helping us with membership
functions, but amid all the expansion of the campaign, we kind of forgot where
it really came from. I guess that’s just the spirit of a campaign for the
benefit of the many. (Derryberry) Even if the Blue Ribbon Campaign does not
belong to any one group, it was originated by the EFF and all of the blue ribbon
icons point back to the EFF.
One of the first options of things to do when one first sees the EFF’s
opening page is to join the EFF, the Blue Ribbon Campaign, or both.. Joining
the Blue Ribbon Campaign is simple, and basically involves just giving them a
small amount of personal information and then copying one of several blue ribbon
icons to be used on your web site. There are many, many different blue ribbons
available of all different sizes and compositions, but they all revolve around
the basic blue ribbon idea. If a user is not fully pleased with the online
selection if available icons, there is an option to receive information about
many others that are available. Finally, it is also possible to create your own
blue ribbon icon and allow the EFF to give it away to be used for the same cause.
This entire emphasis on the graphic image of the campaign is a smart move
because people’s interest is aroused by images more than words. If the words
“Blue Ribbon Campaign” were seen everywhere, the impact would be less dramatic
than the colored image of the blue ribbon that accompanies these words. Even
though the doorway to the EFF is graphic based, the bulk of the EFF’s web site
contains document after document of textual information that all relates to the
CDA and freedom of speech. Also located here is the entire text of the
Telecommunications Act of 1996, including all text of the CDA. Internet users
who click on the blue ribbon icon will be taken directly to the part of the
EFF’s website that deals with the Blue Ribbon Campaign. Because the Blue Ribbon
Campaign is not the only cause the EFF supports, there is of course much more to
the EFF’s website than just this. Some of the sections of the EFF’s homepage
are:
The Blue Ribbon Campaign section on the EFF’s homepage is set apart from
the other areas by use of the traditional blue ribbon icon. This section begins
with a link to the newest information about the CDA, and then goes on to list
links to several things including introductory information about the campaign,
federal, state, and local information, an archive of past information, examples
of Internet sites that could be banned under the CDA, activism information, and
finally a “Skeptical?” link to a page that tries to convince skeptics about
believing the EFF’s cause.
About EFF is the first thing that new visitors to the site will want to
read. This contains a brief history of the organization and answers most of the
questions people might have. This area also goes into the beliefs and
motivations behind the EFF.
Action Alerts is a list of current events that the EFF is currently
monitoring. For example, one of the most recent action alerts deals with the
latest decision on the CDA. This section also encourages people to take action
in the Blue Ribbon Campaign and provides a list of various ways to help. At the
top of the list there is a disclaimer about civil disobedience being “at least
nominally illegal”. Some of the suggested activities include: supporting a
28th amendment to the U.S. Constitution to extend First Amendment rights to the
Internet, attend rallies, wear T-shirts that promote free speech online, put a
real blue ribbon pin on your backpack if you are a student, etc.. This section
also contains a list of previous example of protest and demonstration of CDA
opposition, so show that people have actually gone out to stand up for the
things that are promoted on this site.
Guide to the Internet is a document that helps acquaint novices with the
Internet in general, and does not contain any EFF or free speech related
specific material. While this seems pretty innocent, its purpose here is a bit
deeper. If more people can become more familiar with the Internet, then more
people will use the Internet and therefore hopefully become interested in online
free speech.
Archive index is an essential tool on the EFF website because of the large
number of different documents available here. This is a searchable index that
aides users in finding specific information contained in the EFF pages. For
example, if you wanted to see if the word “pornography” occurred in the CDA, you
could search for it.
Newsletter is a section that contains the current and past newsletters
of the EFF. These newsletters are updates about things the EFF is currently
involved with. I think that although much of the information contained in these
newsletters is redundant in that it can be found elsewhere on the site, there
are two reasons for this. First, the newsletter format is one that everyone is
familiar with. If a person is new to the EFF site and sees the “newsletter”
section, he or she will automatically have a general idea how information will
be presented in this format, and it will therefore be easier and more welcoming
to read than other types of information. Secondly, the newsletter is important
because it is repeated information. One key aspect of propaganda is repetition,
so the duplication of certain information in the newsletter accomplishes that.
Calendar is a listing of future events and dates that are important to
EFF. Many of the listings here are protest rallies and schedule speeches that
look good when many people attend. This provides a consolidated listing of
dates that is easy to access, without having to search all over the site for
things. Also, the information here is available for download so that it can be
put into a person’s personal time management software on his or her own computer.
This gives the EFF an indirect link to remind you where to go and when.
Job openings provides information about applying to the EFF for a job
with the EFF.
Merchandise lets members and nonmembers purchase T-shirts and metal Blue
Ribbon Campaign pins to help spread the word.
Awards gives a list of the 19 awards won by the EFF for various things
such as “Best of the Web” and “Top 250 Lycos Sites”. The display of these
awards legitimizes the organization and shows to others that many people are
visiting this site.
Staff Homepages at first seems somewhat boring, but this section is
actually a list of the staff, in rank order, and a short description of what
each person does at the EFF. Clicking on the person’s name takes you to their
homepage. This display of information once again reinforces the idea of white
propaganda that the EFF uses.
Miscellaneous contains a sponsors list, other publications of interest,
and EFF related images, sounds, and animations.
A second example of online free speech propaganda on the Internet is a
homepage promoting the lawsuit filed by The Citizens Internet Empowerment
Coalition (CIEC, “seek”) against the U.S. Department of Justice and Attorney
General Janet Reno. This page is designed to look like a 1700’s handbill or
poster and to arouse emotions of patriotism and fighting for one’s country. It
would be difficult for an American to view this document and not be reminded of
how we fought for our freedom from the English. Icons of patriots shouting out
loud, canons and American flags, and pictorial representations of the
Constitution all arouse emotions of fighting for what is right. This page also
contains an 4 minute audio clip that is available for download. This audio is
Judith Krug of the American Libraries Association speaking about the censorship
of libraries. The reader has to only click on the icon and the audio will be
transferred to his or her computer and the user listens to the audio as it is
transmitted. Aside from these audio and visual messages, this site is
similar to the EFF’s in that it contains lots of information and links to
related anti-CDA sites.
Another website that utilizes propaganda is operated by the Center for
Democracy and Technology (CDT). This site is one of many that utilizes an
animated “Free Speech” icon that displays fireworks exploding in the air. Like
other examples, this too is very patriotic. Also like other sites, the CDT
displays various Internet awards they have won, as well as the number of people
they have signed up who support the lawsuit against the CDA.
Counter propaganda
While there are groups and people who favor the CDA, there is very
little propaganda promoting these beliefs. Part of the reason for this is that
the whole debate over the CDA seems to be a very nonpartisan issue in terms of
Republicans and Democrats. If this had been a partisan issue, there would
certainly be propaganda on both sides. The main reason that little counter
propaganda exists is that the CDA is the law, so people who are for it have
already been appeased to a certain extent. The anti-CDA groups are protesting
and using propaganda because the CDA is the law, and they want it changed. As
with many things in life, it is more common to hear complaints from people who
are not satisfied than from people who are ple