On Friday, September 17, as the general elections in Russia opened, Apple and Google, which dominate the smartphone market, were forced to block a voting instructions app designed by opponents of power, removing it from stores. App Store application and Google Play Store.
An unprecedented turnaround, as the two companies had nevertheless resisted to the initial requests of the Russian authorities. Natalia Krapiva, lawyer for the NGO Access Now, believes that this event constitutes a turning point in the relations between American Internet companies and the government of Vladimir Putin, paving the way for future abuses.
The Russian authorities have, according to the “Financial Times”, threatened to arrest Google employees, and similar incidents took place in India with Twitter and Facebook recently; is this a new escalation in the clash between digital companies and certain governments?
Similar events have taken place in Thailand and Brazil, where Facebook employees have been arrested or threatened with arrest. In Russia, it appears that at least in the case of Google, and if anonymous employee testimonies are to be believed, men have entered offices and threatened teams, which is striking. I think this marks a new chapter in the opposition between authoritarian governments and tech companies. This is serious and I think more and more dictators will use this tactic now. In addition, I see a new element here: the battle has shifted and no longer concerns only social networks but also app stores, which I think is unprecedented.
What factors come into play when a company decides whether or not to accept a request from authorities like the ones we have just seen?
I can’t speak for the platforms, but from what we understand and based on discussions with these companies, there are companies that have developed a human rights policy and are trying to integrate it into their decision-making process. But it all depends on the real power of human rights teams and their ability to influence the legal and executive teams of the company. In addition, some companies will tell us that they are obliged to reconcile their commitment to human rights with the local laws and the laws of the country where they are located. There are also other considerations that come into play, such as the size of the domestic market and how many users they can potentially lose by opting out or if they are blocked. And, now, we must also take into account the physical security of their employees.
Can Russia seek to follow the Chinese model, by putting forward Russian alternatives to famous Western services and by seeking to ban certain American companies?
They try, but it’s very different from China, because the public there has never really experienced a free Internet. In Russia, until now, YouTube, for example, has been extremely free and robust, used by young people, influencers, the media and civil society. It is very difficult to shut everything down in one day. The government therefore remains cautious, but it seems that it is moving slowly in this direction.
It’s hard for me to imagine, in the long run, that authorities would block app stores, because everyone relies on them, and iPhones and Android phones would become unusable. If companies refuse the authorities’ requests and the government blocks them outright, it will be very difficult, both because of the public backlash, and because the officials are using these services themselves.
A few years ago, the social network LinkedIn was banned in Russia because it did not respect local data storage laws. Can it happen again?
It’s different because LinkedIn wasn’t used that much in Russia at the time. While YouTube and app stores, on the other hand, are extremely popular, and citizens use Facebook or Instagram, not only to keep up with the news and learn about the world, but also to monetize content, promote their business… and need these services. This is why they did not directly block these platforms: because they know that the public reaction would be substantial, and that people, even those who are not versed in politics, could demonstrate. Now this is something they fear.
In addition, technically, it is difficult to block a service. They tried with Twitter and they managed to disrupt the service but it wasn’t strong enough, you could still use a VPN [des « réseaux privés virtuels », qui permettent de contourner la censure du web] or other workaround tools.
Can companies find themselves having to choose between accepting censorship requests or simply leaving a country?
There are always ways to resist. Telegram, for example, opted for an alternative strategy: they pulled their servers out of Russia but continued to operate in the country and escape lockdowns. This is something that is possible but requires a lot of thought, preparation and investment for companies because it would go against Russian laws, which require them to have servers and store data on the territory.
Most of the big digital companies are American: does the United States have a role to play here?
The United States has a very important role and it is very unfortunate that the authorities have not yet spoken, because it is known that the Russian government has even called the representative of the United States to influence these companies through the US government. They absolutely must speak out, because citizens are threatened by Russia, which is using all of its political power. With the commitment of the new administration [Biden] for human rights and freedom of expression, this silence says a lot about their inability to act for these values.
Recently we have seen European states and even the US government attempt to force these companies to – for example – weaken their encryption or allow surveillance that creates a lot of risk for users around the world. This kind of thing does not help, because democratic states themselves use their political power to put pressure on these companies.
New report expresses concern over growing government stranglehold on the internet
In its latest report on digital freedoms in the world, published Tuesday, September 21, the NGO Freedom House is worried about the ever-greater ambitions of governments to control more severely large digital companies. At least 48 states out of the 70 observed by the organization have taken action “Legal or administrative” against tech companies in 2021, she notes.
“While some actions reflected a legitimate desire to limit harmful phenomena, such as the misuse of data or financial manipulation, many new laws have imposed excessively broad censorship and new data collection obligations on the private sector”, specifies the NGO.
This text also details many other threats to digital freedoms, such as Internet shutdowns, the cyber-surveillance trade and disinformation.