February 2, 2012
This past month saw an increase in attention given to two controversial bills working their way through the United States Congress: the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect IP Act (PIPA). To condense the summary given in a Spectator article last week written by Sean Fujimori ’14, SOPA and PIPA are designed to help enforce existing copyright law by providing the government with more authority to shut down offending ISPs and foreign websites. These intentions have been met with general criticism from opponents, saying that the bills are too vague, too broad, and as such, will open the door for government-led censorship of the Internet.
Fair enough, but to go beyond Fujimori’s one-sided coverage, both parties in this debate have legitimate and substantiated points. However, beyond the specifics of the bills, a larger critique can be made of the means by which the public has engaged on this issue. While Fujimori’s article touts the threats of SOPA and PIPA being trumped by democracy and reason, a closer look shows that the “dramatic show of force by opponents of the bills” fails to grasp context and a true understanding of what responsibilities rest with citizens of this country.
This notion of shortcoming can be demonstrated by highlighting an important flaw in SOPA protesters’ opposition process. Consider accepting for a moment that PIPA and SOPA are as dangerous as critics claim and will “break the internet” as we know it. In this dire situation, with a clear and present danger to our citadel of free speech, what was the response? For a majority of those jumping on the bandwagon, involvement consisted of making a Facebook post or signing an online petition. Those going the extra step contacted their representatives’ offices in Washington at the urgings of Google and Wikipedia.
While these actions were a notch above complete apathy, I would argue they remained in the category of slacktivism: political engagement that requires minimum investment and nearly no effort. It seems that we are beginning to believe the best means for constructive political change costs us each less than a minute and can be done without leaving the computer. If this is true, we are either getting lazy or we are failing to recognize the danger in this approach.
The meaningfulness of campaigning via Facebook can be compared to that of being “friends’’with someone on Facebook. Yes, social media sites are a useful way to communicate and organize information, but actions in the real world remain the ultimate determinant for a friendship’s strength. If not, we’re all a lot closer than expected with those “friends” we haven’t talked to since high school. In the same manner, it is ultimately actions in the real world that determine the direction of our democracy. It’s staying informed and getting involved in live discussions and decision making that ultimately results in productivity and helps our country move in the right direction.
When this real life engagement fails or does not exist, our participation is reduced to what happens on Facebook. This is where we lose a vital connection with the political process and our government and where success is described as it was by Wikipedia the day after its blackout: “shutting down Congress’s switchboards and melting the servers.” This is evidence of the antagonistic mentality that results when the real life connection with our democracy is lost.
For those who don’t agree with the Facebook friendship analogy, look at where we are now: The online campaign against SOPA and PIPA gained widespread support due to the ease of participation and arguably led to the bills being labeled as “dead on arrival” to the floors of Congress. But breadth of the opposition should not be confused with depth.
Out of the outcry against SOPA and PIPA came little chance for discussion. Unfortunately, the focus on defeating the bills overlooked the middle ground echoed by both sides: that the purpose of the bills—protecting individuals from theft of intellectual property rights—is widely agreed upon and that we must work together to find the means to achieve it. This is where a little more effort is required, and real life engagement becomes necessary. This is where the recent campaign against SOPA and PIPA, while successful, falls short of a healthy democracy.