1 00:00:00,440 --> 00:00:10,299 *music* 2 00:00:10,299 --> 00:00:12,679 Let's start. Be welcome! 3 00:00:12,679 --> 00:00:16,880 More than two years ago, Edward Snowden's files have become public. 4 00:00:16,880 --> 00:00:18,410 They went public 5 00:00:18,410 --> 00:00:20,910 and the media went crazy. 6 00:00:20,910 --> 00:00:23,160 And the public maybe not so much, 7 00:00:23,160 --> 00:00:26,250 as you may have noticed amongst your friends and family, 8 00:00:26,250 --> 00:00:28,000 as well I did. 9 00:00:28,000 --> 00:00:34,530 A lot remains the same after Snowden's revelations, 10 00:00:34,530 --> 00:00:38,039 even if people are concerned about surveillance. 11 00:00:38,039 --> 00:00:44,780 The following talk by Arne Hintz and Lina Dencik from University of Cardiff explores 12 00:00:44,780 --> 00:00:46,019 just that. 13 00:00:46,019 --> 00:00:54,739 They analyzed how actually the media reacted to the relations made by Edward Snowden 14 00:00:54,739 --> 00:00:56,550 and they also looked at how the public, 15 00:00:56,550 --> 00:01:03,100 such as journalists and other people and activists, reacted to Edward Snowden's disclosures. 16 00:01:03,100 --> 00:01:09,520 So please give a warm round of applause to Arne Hintz and Lina Dencik. Thank you! 17 00:01:09,520 --> 00:01:17,790 *applause* 18 00:01:17,790 --> 00:01:21,910 Arne: Thank you very much, there are still a few free seats over there. 19 00:01:21,910 --> 00:01:25,290 Hello everybody, my name is Arne Hintz, this is Lina Denzik. 20 00:01:25,290 --> 00:01:31,620 We are both from Cardiff University, from the school of journalism, media and cultural studies, 21 00:01:31,620 --> 00:01:34,380 so not from the tech department. 22 00:01:34,380 --> 00:01:38,960 We want to talk about some of the results of a research project 23 00:01:38,960 --> 00:01:42,400 that we've been working on this year and for the past... 24 00:01:42,400 --> 00:01:45,470 for a bit more than a year 25 00:01:45,470 --> 00:01:50,300 and it's called "Digital Citizenship and Surveillance Society: UK State-Media-Citizen Relations 26 00:01:50,300 --> 00:01:51,800 after the Snowden Leaks", 27 00:01:51,800 --> 00:01:56,980 and it's about the implications of the Snowden leaks in four areas: 28 00:01:56,980 --> 00:02:01,440 News media, civil society, policy and technology 29 00:02:01,440 --> 00:02:05,430 and here what we want to do is present just a few findings from that project 30 00:02:05,430 --> 00:02:11,230 and focus on two areas, the news media part and the civil society part. 31 00:02:11,230 --> 00:02:16,780 It's all focused on the UK, the country where Cardiff University is located 32 00:02:16,780 --> 00:02:22,510 so there won't be a lot of international comparisons, not a lot about Germany and so on, 33 00:02:22,510 --> 00:02:29,470 but I think maybe at the end we can maybe draw some comparisons ourselves here in this room. 34 00:02:32,730 --> 00:02:38,890 So this has been the project basically, the title as you see it over there. 35 00:02:38,890 --> 00:02:43,190 The news media part has basically asked how the british media represented the Snowden 36 00:02:43,190 --> 00:02:45,190 leaks and digital surveillance. 37 00:02:45,190 --> 00:02:51,400 The society part is about questions such as: What is the nature of public knowledge with 38 00:02:51,400 --> 00:02:52,740 regards to digital surveillance? 39 00:02:52,740 --> 00:02:56,130 Are everyday communication practices changing? 40 00:02:56,130 --> 00:03:01,040 And how are activists affected by the revelations of mass surveillance? 41 00:03:01,040 --> 00:03:04,560 The policies part is still ongoing, it's still being developed 42 00:03:04,560 --> 00:03:08,700 and it's about the current policy and regulatory framework of digital surveillance 43 00:03:08,700 --> 00:03:12,890 and reform proposals and current reforms that are taking place. 44 00:03:12,890 --> 00:03:17,599 And the technology part is about the technological infrastructure of surveillance 45 00:03:17,599 --> 00:03:22,150 and techonological possibilities of counter-surveillance and resistance. 46 00:03:22,150 --> 00:03:27,970 And then we want to bring all this together and ask: How does that re-define what we may 47 00:03:27,970 --> 00:03:30,610 understand as digital citizenship? 48 00:03:30,610 --> 00:03:34,080 The research team includes a number of people from Cardiff University 49 00:03:34,080 --> 00:03:40,260 including us, including other lecturers, professors, staff members of Cardiff University 50 00:03:40,260 --> 00:03:44,750 and a few research assistants and research associates that we employed for this, 51 00:03:44,750 --> 00:03:53,760 plus a couple of guys from Oxford and one from Briar from a tech development project. 52 00:03:53,760 --> 00:03:59,099 We also have an advisory board with some colleagues from academia 53 00:03:59,099 --> 00:04:03,970 but also representatives of digital rights organisations, such as Open Rights Group, 54 00:04:03,970 --> 00:04:05,690 Privacy International and others. 55 00:04:05,690 --> 00:04:11,770 We have a project website, where you can learn more about the project, about the background 56 00:04:11,770 --> 00:04:13,920 and also some preliminary findings. 57 00:04:13,920 --> 00:04:20,220 We also had a conference earlier this year, in June, maybe some of you were there. 58 00:04:20,220 --> 00:04:25,150 It was in Cardiff with some interesting speakers to the conference 59 00:04:25,150 --> 00:04:29,810 and also combined the academic and the practical part a little bit. 60 00:04:29,810 --> 00:04:34,960 So. A few glimpses of the results in these two areas that I mentioned. 61 00:04:34,960 --> 00:04:42,080 So for the media research part we were interested in studying how the British news media have 62 00:04:42,080 --> 00:04:46,639 represented the Snowden leaks and also digital surveillance more broadly. 63 00:04:46,639 --> 00:04:54,630 And so we asked: How are debates over surveillance constructed? What are the angles and opinions? 64 00:04:54,630 --> 00:04:57,040 What are usual sources? And so on. 65 00:04:57,040 --> 00:05:02,460 We need to start on an anecdotal basis. 66 00:05:02,460 --> 00:05:07,840 Some examples of media coverage that emerged very quickly after the Snowden revelations, 67 00:05:07,840 --> 00:05:12,630 again in the UK press, which show different types of the coverage. 68 00:05:12,630 --> 00:05:17,820 So we probably all know that the Guardian was very instrumental in the revelations 69 00:05:17,820 --> 00:05:25,030 and provided a lot of information, really took this role of the fourth estate and of 70 00:05:25,030 --> 00:05:27,169 investigative journalism quite seriously. 71 00:05:27,169 --> 00:05:34,000 On the other hand, other newspapers like this one were very critical about the Snowden revelations 72 00:05:34,000 --> 00:05:38,729 and also about the Guardian for informing people about these and running with these revelations. 73 00:05:40,169 --> 00:05:44,639 And then there were others like this one, that was a famous example. 74 00:05:44,639 --> 00:05:52,300 The former editor of the Independent, actually another liberal, middle ground, not really 75 00:05:52,300 --> 00:05:56,350 left but at least not ultra conservative newspaper. 76 00:05:56,350 --> 00:06:00,430 Who says "Edward Snowden's secrets may be dangerous, I would not have published them". 77 00:06:00,430 --> 00:06:06,180 Okay, can debate that, but then he says "if MI5 warns that this is not in the public interest, 78 00:06:06,180 --> 00:06:08,650 who am I to disbelieve them?". 79 00:06:08,650 --> 00:06:10,600 *laughing* 80 00:06:10,600 --> 00:06:12,550 That's an interesting understanding of journalism 81 00:06:12,550 --> 00:06:16,810 and it was later retracted, it was debated quite a lot. 82 00:06:16,810 --> 00:06:28,150 But we see that also this caution towards publishing something like this has been quite 83 00:06:28,150 --> 00:06:28,949 wide-spread. 84 00:06:28,949 --> 00:06:31,270 So what did we do? 85 00:06:31,270 --> 00:06:38,310 Here's a timeline of Snowden and surveillance related coverage in the press in this case 86 00:06:38,310 --> 00:06:39,540 in the UK. 87 00:06:39,540 --> 00:06:44,240 And we looked at five case studies, five moments of coverage. 88 00:06:44,240 --> 00:06:47,540 The first were the initial revelations of Snowden. 89 00:06:47,540 --> 00:06:53,139 The second the interception of communications in foreign embassies and European Union offices 90 00:06:53,139 --> 00:06:58,430 and spying on world leaders' phone communications, such as Angela Merkel's for example. 91 00:06:58,430 --> 00:07:02,620 The third was the detention of Glenn Greenwald's partner David Miranda at Heathrow Airport 92 00:07:02,620 --> 00:07:04,600 under anti-terror legislation. 93 00:07:04,600 --> 00:07:11,030 Which raised debates around freedom of the press and national security. 94 00:07:11,030 --> 00:07:15,310 Then we looked at the parliamentary report into the death of Lee Rigby. 95 00:07:15,310 --> 00:07:20,810 Which was a case that was described as a terrorist attack on a British soldier on the streets 96 00:07:20,810 --> 00:07:22,500 of London. 97 00:07:22,500 --> 00:07:28,150 And it led to debates around social media companies' role in tackling terrorism. 98 00:07:28,150 --> 00:07:30,370 And then finally the Charlie Hebdo attacks in Paris, 99 00:07:30,370 --> 00:07:35,270 which prompted debates around digital encryption, freedom of speech and the resurrection of 100 00:07:35,270 --> 00:07:40,180 the so-called Snooper's Charter in the UK, 101 00:07:40,180 --> 00:07:45,080 the legislation around surveillance. 102 00:07:45,080 --> 00:07:49,620 So a few results: 103 00:07:49,620 --> 00:07:54,539 Snowden was clearly prominent in the media coverage, and generally was covered using 104 00:07:54,539 --> 00:07:56,930 mostly neutral or even positive language, 105 00:07:56,930 --> 00:08:00,729 described as a whistleblower as we see here at the bottom. 106 00:08:00,729 --> 00:08:04,919 But if we look at the focus on issues around surveillance taken in the stories 107 00:08:04,919 --> 00:08:13,360 and so at the context of coverage of surveillance, the most important one here has to do 108 00:08:13,360 --> 00:08:18,020 as we can see there, probably it's a little bit small to read. 109 00:08:18,020 --> 00:08:22,479 But the most important has to do with themes of terrorism, 110 00:08:22,479 --> 00:08:27,259 with themes of the role of security agencies and government response. 111 00:08:27,259 --> 00:08:30,548 So that's been very much the context of discussing in 112 00:08:30,548 --> 00:08:33,708 most media coverage of discussing the context of discussing Snowden revelations 113 00:08:33,708 --> 00:08:35,208 and surveillance more broadly. 114 00:08:35,208 --> 00:08:40,580 And that is in stark contrast to discussing surveillance in terms of human rights, personal 115 00:08:40,580 --> 00:08:43,049 privacy and freedom of the press. 116 00:08:43,049 --> 00:08:49,920 In other words: rights and digital... and citizen-based perspectives on surveillance. 117 00:08:49,920 --> 00:08:55,040 If we look at who was used as the sources in these stories, we see a pattern that is 118 00:08:55,040 --> 00:08:58,800 actually quite typical in media sourcing generally. 119 00:08:58,800 --> 00:09:02,520 Politicians are by far the most prominent source. 120 00:09:02,520 --> 00:09:05,810 And that is not unusual at all. 121 00:09:05,810 --> 00:09:12,000 But in this case it means that elite concerns around surveillance are most prominent, not 122 00:09:12,000 --> 00:09:13,540 citizen concerns. 123 00:09:13,540 --> 00:09:19,290 Political sources are framing the debate and how it is interpreted. 124 00:09:19,290 --> 00:09:25,649 And so unsurprisingly then the oppinions raised by these sources are for example, as we see 125 00:09:25,649 --> 00:09:28,990 there, that surveillance should be increased 126 00:09:28,990 --> 00:09:33,950 or at least is necessary, at least has to be maintained. 127 00:09:33,950 --> 00:09:38,290 That the Snowden leaks have compromised the work of intelligence services 128 00:09:38,290 --> 00:09:42,870 and that social media companies should do more to fight terror and to increase their 129 00:09:42,870 --> 00:09:44,470 own surveillance. 130 00:09:44,470 --> 00:09:48,839 And so this dominant framework understands surveillance as a valuable activity, 131 00:09:48,839 --> 00:09:55,380 and one for which both intelligence services and business actors have a responsibility. 132 00:09:55,380 --> 00:09:59,830 Rather than it being primarily problematic for citizens. 133 00:09:59,830 --> 00:10:05,290 And where it is presented as problematic, in the snooping on world leaders case study, 134 00:10:05,290 --> 00:10:10,209 surveillance was seen as damaging to international relations and therefore problematic. 135 00:10:10,209 --> 00:10:15,399 And that's something that is primarily of relevance to big players rather than ordinary 136 00:10:15,399 --> 00:10:16,170 citizens. 137 00:10:16,170 --> 00:10:20,709 So from these short glimpses, what we can see, just a few preliminary conclusions, 138 00:10:20,709 --> 00:10:27,089 is that yes, there was extensive and often positive reporting on Snowden himself, in 139 00:10:27,089 --> 00:10:28,360 some media at least. 140 00:10:28,360 --> 00:10:32,970 But debates around surveillance are framed by elites, rather than citizens 141 00:10:32,970 --> 00:10:38,610 and this elite-centered structure of news coverage means that the consequences and the 142 00:10:38,610 --> 00:10:42,600 extent particularly of mass surveillance of citizens 143 00:10:42,600 --> 00:10:44,610 are largely invisible in media coverage. 144 00:10:44,610 --> 00:10:48,450 There's a strong framing on national security and so on, 145 00:10:48,450 --> 00:10:53,640 but there is quite insufficient information on the practices and implications of surveillance 146 00:10:53,640 --> 00:10:55,980 for normal citizens. 147 00:10:55,980 --> 00:11:01,399 And so the issues of mass surveillance that were actually so central in Snowden's revelations, 148 00:11:01,399 --> 00:11:04,149 remain relatively invisible in these debates, 149 00:11:04,149 --> 00:11:09,050 apart from perhaps the Guardian coverage. 150 00:11:09,050 --> 00:11:16,260 And so we could say that media justify and normalize current surveillance practices, 151 00:11:16,260 --> 00:11:23,220 and that discussions about individual rights and human security are structurally discouraged. 152 00:11:23,220 --> 00:11:24,170 That is the media part 153 00:11:25,670 --> 00:11:29,620 Lina: so i'll just go briefly through some of our key findings for what we call the civil 154 00:11:29,620 --> 00:11:31,450 society work stream on this. 155 00:11:31,450 --> 00:11:36,910 Which looks at two aspects, so there is the public knowledge and attitudes on the Snowden 156 00:11:36,910 --> 00:11:38,450 leaks and digital surveillance. 157 00:11:38,450 --> 00:11:42,350 And then there's the second part which is particularly to do with responses amongst 158 00:11:42,350 --> 00:11:43,899 political activists. 159 00:11:43,899 --> 00:11:48,720 And for the first part, the public opinion research, we did a number of focus groups across 160 00:11:48,720 --> 00:11:49,899 different demographics in the UK, 161 00:11:49,899 --> 00:11:53,339 in order to get us a diverse range of opinions and views. 162 00:11:53,339 --> 00:11:59,180 So that ranges from sort of high income people working the financial centre to local young 163 00:11:59,180 --> 00:12:03,120 Muslim groups within Cardiff itself. 164 00:12:03,120 --> 00:12:05,959 So a different range and different groups of people. 165 00:12:05,959 --> 00:12:11,589 And then for the research on the activist responses we did a number of interviews with 166 00:12:11,589 --> 00:12:13,550 different groups and organisations, 167 00:12:13,550 --> 00:12:16,420 from large NGOs to smaller community groups. 168 00:12:16,420 --> 00:12:21,100 Ranging from environmental groups, labour activists anti-war activists like "Stop the 169 00:12:21,100 --> 00:12:21,450 War", 170 00:12:21,450 --> 00:12:24,990 economic justice groups like "Global Justice Now", and community 171 00:12:24,990 --> 00:12:30,420 and civil liberty groups such as also "CAGE", who spoke earlier today. 172 00:12:30,420 --> 00:12:31,720 And talked with them. 173 00:12:31,720 --> 00:12:36,390 So there's particularly groups that weren't digital rights activists or tech activists 174 00:12:36,390 --> 00:12:36,870 specifically, 175 00:12:36,870 --> 00:12:41,649 to try and get an understanding of how other political activists view this issue in particular 176 00:12:41,649 --> 00:12:42,860 in response to the Snowden leaks. 177 00:12:42,860 --> 00:12:48,930 So with the first bit on public opinion in our focus groups we had a range of themes. 178 00:12:48,930 --> 00:12:51,800 Understanding and experiences of surveillance, 179 00:12:51,800 --> 00:12:54,510 knowledge and opinions on Snowden leaks, 180 00:12:54,510 --> 00:12:56,540 concerns with privacy and personal data, 181 00:12:56,540 --> 00:12:58,920 questions around online behaviour and practices 182 00:12:58,920 --> 00:13:02,470 and attitudes towards intelligence services. 183 00:13:02,470 --> 00:13:06,700 So just a couple of key points from these focus groups: 184 00:13:06,700 --> 00:13:11,350 First of all there was particularly low knowledge of who Edward Snowden was, 185 00:13:11,350 --> 00:13:15,940 and even less knowledge of what the content of the leaks were. 186 00:13:15,940 --> 00:13:21,450 And there was a lot of confusion in discussions with Julian Assange, Chelsea Manning and Wikileaks 187 00:13:21,450 --> 00:13:21,750 really, 188 00:13:21,750 --> 00:13:24,160 in terms of how people had come about this story. 189 00:13:24,160 --> 00:13:30,350 And there were a lot of mix-up between those different stories. 190 00:13:30,350 --> 00:13:36,320 In terms of actually understandings of surveillance all of this state surveillance isn't really 191 00:13:36,320 --> 00:13:38,570 isolated in how people speak about it. 192 00:13:38,570 --> 00:13:43,149 It overlaps also with questions of corporate surveillance and also peer surveillance or 193 00:13:43,149 --> 00:13:44,670 employer surveillance and so forth. 194 00:13:44,670 --> 00:13:49,029 So a lot of concerns are not necessarily about state surveillance per se and it's difficult 195 00:13:49,029 --> 00:13:52,350 to isolate this as a particular issue. 196 00:13:52,350 --> 00:13:57,139 And also when it comes to what constitutes surveillance, 197 00:13:57,139 --> 00:14:01,540 the initial responses would be things like CCTV and sort of these types of things were 198 00:14:01,540 --> 00:14:04,690 seen as more kind of real forms of surveillance. 199 00:14:04,690 --> 00:14:08,860 But on the other hand it was very clear that people felt that the collection of data 200 00:14:08,860 --> 00:14:12,410 and also including the collection of meta data, so distinguishing also from it being 201 00:14:12,410 --> 00:14:15,089 not about content, constitutes surveillance. 202 00:14:15,089 --> 00:14:21,070 So that was generally how people felt about what surveillance actually means. 203 00:14:21,070 --> 00:14:27,480 In terms then of concerns around this, people's worries about state surveillance in particular 204 00:14:27,480 --> 00:14:30,399 but dominantly concerns lack of transparency around it. 205 00:14:30,399 --> 00:14:36,339 So a lack of transparency around what is being collected, but also how it's being used and 206 00:14:36,339 --> 00:14:37,190 what it's being used for, 207 00:14:37,190 --> 00:14:42,720 and also what the regulatory framework is that's in place surrounding it. 208 00:14:42,720 --> 00:14:46,660 And also concerns over the lack of knowledge or understanding of how to actually opt out, 209 00:14:46,660 --> 00:14:50,970 or resist or circumvent collection of data. 210 00:14:50,970 --> 00:14:55,209 And in terms of sort of changes in online behaviour then, 211 00:14:55,209 --> 00:14:58,430 these concerns do manifest themselves in some changes, but it's mainly in terms of sort 212 00:14:58,430 --> 00:15:00,279 of self-regulating behaviour, 213 00:15:00,279 --> 00:15:03,760 not saying things that are too controversial online and so forth, 214 00:15:03,760 --> 00:15:09,880 rather than actually changes in using different tools or different communication platforms, 215 00:15:09,880 --> 00:15:13,860 which wasn't prominent at all in our focus groups. 216 00:15:13,860 --> 00:15:17,589 And what we also saw as sort of implications of this is that there was sort of an internalising 217 00:15:17,589 --> 00:15:18,970 of some of these justifications 218 00:15:18,970 --> 00:15:22,540 that have been very prominent also in the media, particularly this phrase: "nothing 219 00:15:22,540 --> 00:15:24,880 to hide, nothing to fear". 220 00:15:24,880 --> 00:15:31,339 Although in this case there was clear differences between the different demographic 221 00:15:31,339 --> 00:15:32,699 groups that we spoke with. 222 00:15:32,699 --> 00:15:35,670 Meaning that some people were more comfortable saying this phrase "nothing to hide, nothing 223 00:15:35,670 --> 00:15:36,769 to fear", 224 00:15:36,769 --> 00:15:40,910 whereas for example when we spoke to local Muslim groups they problematised this position 225 00:15:40,910 --> 00:15:41,480 much more. 226 00:15:41,480 --> 00:15:44,589 So there is definitely variation here in terms of that, 227 00:15:44,589 --> 00:15:48,970 but there is a sense in which some of these justifications have been internalized. 228 00:15:48,970 --> 00:15:52,519 And actually what we've seen is what we phrase this as a kind of surveillance realism, 229 00:15:52,519 --> 00:15:56,760 is that surveillance has become normalized to such an extent, 230 00:15:56,760 --> 00:16:01,000 it is difficult for people to really understand or imagine a society in which surveillance 231 00:16:01,000 --> 00:16:03,240 doesn't take place. 232 00:16:03,240 --> 00:16:08,170 Which might also relate to some of these questions around a lack of understanding of how to actually 233 00:16:08,170 --> 00:16:10,949 resist this or opt out from this. 234 00:16:10,949 --> 00:16:16,279 So i think a key point that we wanted to make with our research with these focus groups, 235 00:16:16,279 --> 00:16:16,540 is 236 00:16:16,540 --> 00:16:20,910 that we need to re-distinguish here between public consent versus public resignation, when 237 00:16:20,910 --> 00:16:23,260 we talk about attitudes towards surveillance, 238 00:16:23,260 --> 00:16:26,459 meaning that it isn't necessary that people consent to this going on 239 00:16:26,459 --> 00:16:31,800 but actually have resigned to the fact that this is how society is being organised. 240 00:16:31,800 --> 00:16:35,870 To then move on to interviews with activists. 241 00:16:35,870 --> 00:16:38,110 We also had similar questions here, 242 00:16:38,110 --> 00:16:40,170 so understanding and experiences of surveillance, 243 00:16:40,170 --> 00:16:44,180 and knowledge and opinions of Snowden leaks and attitudes towards state surveillance. 244 00:16:44,180 --> 00:16:48,930 And then we also wanted to explore this question around current online behaviour and practices 245 00:16:48,930 --> 00:16:53,600 and whether there had been any changes and responses to the Snowden leaks. 246 00:16:53,600 --> 00:16:57,820 And again just some key findings here on these questions: 247 00:16:57,820 --> 00:17:03,500 So basically the activists that we spoke with were generally very aware of surveillance, 248 00:17:03,500 --> 00:17:07,589 but again it was visible and physical forms of surveillance that were more prominent in 249 00:17:07,589 --> 00:17:09,419 how activists spoke about it. 250 00:17:09,419 --> 00:17:14,209 And this is particularly and perhaps particularly in the UK a context, 251 00:17:14,209 --> 00:17:18,618 because there is a very troublesome history in the UK with police infiltration into activist 252 00:17:18,618 --> 00:17:18,868 groups, 253 00:17:18,868 --> 00:17:22,849 which has really impacted the activist scene quite a lot within the UK. 254 00:17:22,849 --> 00:17:26,989 And often this was how the activists we spoke with would talk about surveillance first and 255 00:17:26,989 --> 00:17:27,799 foremost, 256 00:17:27,799 --> 00:17:33,850 rather than about these more virtual forms and visible forms of surveillance. 257 00:17:33,850 --> 00:17:39,659 And also perhaps linked to that then despite this general awareness and wide-spread experiences 258 00:17:39,659 --> 00:17:40,600 of surveillance, 259 00:17:40,600 --> 00:17:44,619 the activists we spoke with didn't know a great deal of detail about the Snowden leaks 260 00:17:44,619 --> 00:17:45,519 particularly. 261 00:17:45,519 --> 00:17:50,649 And again there was this confusion with Chelsea Manning and Wikileaks. 262 00:17:50,649 --> 00:17:56,249 And importantly also there was a sort of general expectation some of these quotes sort of highlight 263 00:17:56,249 --> 00:17:57,049 that, 264 00:17:57,049 --> 00:18:02,369 that state surveillance goes on, this is sort of expected. 265 00:18:02,369 --> 00:18:05,210 And it's confirmed for activists when police are often there, 266 00:18:05,210 --> 00:18:07,960 when they've organized events or protests and demonstrations, 267 00:18:07,960 --> 00:18:10,899 or when activities have been intercepted. 268 00:18:10,899 --> 00:18:14,759 And so the Snowden leaks in themselves and the realities of mass surveillance 269 00:18:14,759 --> 00:18:19,169 came as little surprise to the political activists in the UK. 270 00:18:19,169 --> 00:18:24,059 And perhaps also therefore or one other reason there hasn't been much response from the groups 271 00:18:24,059 --> 00:18:24,899 we spoke with anyway, 272 00:18:24,899 --> 00:18:27,149 in terms of changing online behaviour. 273 00:18:27,149 --> 00:18:30,549 Particularly not directly because of Snowden. 274 00:18:30,549 --> 00:18:31,499 And there are some exceptions here, 275 00:18:31,499 --> 00:18:34,899 so for example Greenpeace did really change their communication behaviour 276 00:18:34,899 --> 00:18:37,029 as a direct response to the Snowden leaks. 277 00:18:37,029 --> 00:18:41,019 And CAGE i think as we heard earlier had recently also changed communication practices, 278 00:18:41,019 --> 00:18:43,019 although at the time of our interview with them 279 00:18:43,019 --> 00:18:47,440 they hadn't done as much as they're doing now. 280 00:18:47,440 --> 00:18:50,679 Predominantly however there has been very little change in online behaviour, 281 00:18:50,679 --> 00:18:55,679 and where it has taken place it's been part of a sort of longer term consciousness of 282 00:18:55,679 --> 00:18:57,220 surveillance. 283 00:18:57,220 --> 00:19:02,350 And the kind of changes we have seen more are things like face to face interaction. 284 00:19:02,350 --> 00:19:08,929 So more face to face interaction, perhaps slightly more careful online communication. 285 00:19:08,929 --> 00:19:12,299 But in terms of encryption: 286 00:19:12,299 --> 00:19:18,919 We found little use of encryption again although with exceptions with some of the groups, 287 00:19:18,919 --> 00:19:22,139 but partly this was due to questions of convenience, 288 00:19:22,139 --> 00:19:24,460 and a perceived lack of technical ability. 289 00:19:24,460 --> 00:19:28,399 Which I think are arguments that we're quite familiar with, when it comes to questions around 290 00:19:28,399 --> 00:19:28,830 this. 291 00:19:28,830 --> 00:19:33,049 But it was also related to a particular kind of rationale thas was expressed in some of 292 00:19:33,049 --> 00:19:34,499 the interviews that we did, 293 00:19:34,499 --> 00:19:40,859 that somehow using encrypted software is about being hidden or closed in some ways, 294 00:19:40,859 --> 00:19:45,629 whereas activists strive for open and transparent organisations. 295 00:19:45,629 --> 00:19:51,129 So that somehow contradicts this aim to be transparent and open and inclusive. 296 00:19:51,129 --> 00:19:57,159 That somehow it also excludes people to start to use encrypted communication. 297 00:19:57,159 --> 00:20:00,330 And linked to that also many of the activists we spoke with expressed the notion 298 00:20:00,330 --> 00:20:05,869 that their activities and their role in society didn't constitute a need to really worry about 299 00:20:05,869 --> 00:20:07,049 surveillance. 300 00:20:07,049 --> 00:20:10,759 So despite being aware of surveillance and expecting it to go on, 301 00:20:10,759 --> 00:20:13,450 there was a sense in which some of the organisations here 302 00:20:13,450 --> 00:20:15,570 perceived themselves as fairly mainstream, 303 00:20:15,570 --> 00:20:17,119 and therefore kind of safe. 304 00:20:17,119 --> 00:20:19,989 And didn't really need to worry about surveillance. 305 00:20:19,989 --> 00:20:23,299 And really that surveillance would only really need to be something to worry about, 306 00:20:23,299 --> 00:20:29,299 if they moved into more radical forms of politics and action, 307 00:20:29,299 --> 00:20:31,599 whatever that might be. 308 00:20:31,599 --> 00:20:35,539 So in some ways we might think of this as kind of it acts to somewhat keep the mainstream 309 00:20:35,539 --> 00:20:35,950 in check, 310 00:20:35,950 --> 00:20:40,070 in that there would only surveillance becomes a variable only if you do certain kinds of 311 00:20:40,070 --> 00:20:42,369 actions. 312 00:20:42,369 --> 00:20:46,509 So and therefore also there wasn't really in terms of sort of questions around digital 313 00:20:46,509 --> 00:20:49,179 rights and advocacy work around policies, 314 00:20:49,179 --> 00:20:52,649 and policy around privacy and so forth, 315 00:20:52,649 --> 00:20:56,950 wasn't something that the activists we spoke with, most of them anyway, 316 00:20:56,950 --> 00:21:01,470 didn't see that as something that directly featured on their agenda. 317 00:21:01,470 --> 00:21:04,690 So it wasn't really something that they were so concerned with themselves, 318 00:21:04,690 --> 00:21:09,710 but rather that type of activism is kind of outsourced to other groups like digital rights 319 00:21:09,710 --> 00:21:11,479 activists or tech activists. 320 00:21:11,479 --> 00:21:15,659 That that's what they do, we are doing something else. 321 00:21:15,659 --> 00:21:19,970 So I think what we sort of want to suggest with that is that our research seems anyway 322 00:21:19,970 --> 00:21:20,580 to suggest, 323 00:21:20,580 --> 00:21:24,639 that there are some limitations around resistance to surveillance, 324 00:21:24,639 --> 00:21:29,989 in that this resistance seems to remain within the silos of only certain types of actors. 325 00:21:29,989 --> 00:21:35,559 So we're sort of asking: How can we then move beyond that? 326 00:21:35,559 --> 00:21:39,820 And start thinking of surveillance in terms of perhaps data justice, 327 00:21:39,820 --> 00:21:45,059 or somehow thinking of how surveillance connects or resistance to surveillance connects 328 00:21:45,059 --> 00:21:48,460 to broader social and economic justice agendas. 329 00:21:48,460 --> 00:21:50,849 And of course some of this is already happening, 330 00:21:50,849 --> 00:21:53,460 and some of it has been discussed here at this congress. 331 00:21:53,460 --> 00:21:57,179 So for example how does data collection lead to discrimination? 332 00:21:57,179 --> 00:21:59,859 Or how does it come to suppress dissent? 333 00:21:59,859 --> 00:22:04,789 But also how does surveillance relate to working conditions and workers' rights for example, 334 00:22:04,789 --> 00:22:08,889 or how does it link to inequality and poverty? 335 00:22:08,889 --> 00:22:11,409 So I suppose our research suggests that we need to think about 336 00:22:11,409 --> 00:22:15,720 that if encryption and technical solutions and discussions around digital rights such 337 00:22:15,720 --> 00:22:16,749 as privacy 338 00:22:16,749 --> 00:22:21,710 remain really within certain circles and perhaps events like this and so forth, 339 00:22:21,710 --> 00:22:27,349 how can we get it to resonate with a broader public in some ways? 340 00:22:27,349 --> 00:22:29,460 So — wow, we finished much faster than we thought we would. 341 00:22:29,460 --> 00:22:35,299 But anyway. So basically we've had a snapshot now of sort of recent public debate, 342 00:22:35,299 --> 00:22:40,249 and sort of ones that suggest that we might need to think about how to connect concerns 343 00:22:40,249 --> 00:22:41,789 with surveillance, 344 00:22:41,789 --> 00:22:47,379 that are discussed in places like this to other issues in order to resonate with a broader 345 00:22:47,379 --> 00:22:48,629 public. 346 00:22:48,629 --> 00:22:50,169 And that's it, we have time for questions 347 00:22:50,169 --> 00:23:00,339 *applause* 348 00:23:00,339 --> 00:23:05,590 A: Ask questions or comments, or additional information about some other projects. 349 00:23:05,590 --> 00:23:10,320 Angel: Please, line up at the microphones, so you can speak clearly your questions into the 350 00:23:10,320 --> 00:23:13,190 microphone, please. 351 00:23:13,190 --> 00:23:16,759 The microphone in the back, please. 352 00:23:20,589 --> 00:23:21,449 Go ahead. 353 00:23:21,449 --> 00:23:28,129 Question: Hey. So do you think this lack of technical understanding of the Snowden leaks 354 00:23:28,129 --> 00:23:34,539 might be due to Snowden fatigue, that is people getting really tired of reading a Snowden 355 00:23:34,539 --> 00:23:35,320 article? 356 00:23:35,320 --> 00:23:38,859 And another one and another one: Did you know you might have contributed to it? 357 00:23:38,859 --> 00:23:41,869 Angel: Can you maybe repeat the question? 358 00:23:41,869 --> 00:23:45,639 And if you leave the room, please do so quietly, 359 00:23:45,639 --> 00:23:47,519 because we can't understand his question. 360 00:23:47,519 --> 00:23:56,109 Q: Sorry. So the question is: This lack of understanding of the content of the Snowden leaks, maybe 361 00:23:56,109 --> 00:23:58,320 on a basic technical level, 362 00:23:58,320 --> 00:24:03,649 could that something that contributed to that, could that be Snowden fatigue? 363 00:24:03,649 --> 00:24:09,450 L: And you're referring to this sort of drip-feed way of releasing those documents... 364 00:24:09,450 --> 00:24:12,869 Q: Not necessarily criticizing the way it was released, but there was a hell of a lot 365 00:24:12,869 --> 00:24:15,060 of content and a lot of people got bored of it. 366 00:24:15,060 --> 00:24:19,899 L: Right. okay. *mumbling* 367 00:24:19,899 --> 00:24:24,219 A: There's a bit of that I think probably that we see 368 00:24:24,219 --> 00:24:29,710 and The Guardian at some point stopped their coverage or releasing more information 369 00:24:29,710 --> 00:24:34,669 and then we've saw more information coming out through other sources and Intercept and 370 00:24:34,669 --> 00:24:36,669 so on. 371 00:24:36,669 --> 00:24:44,320 But I think what we are focusing on or what we saw in media coverage particularly, 372 00:24:44,320 --> 00:24:48,690 were some deficiencies I think in the media coverage, 373 00:24:48,690 --> 00:24:54,429 and we would create this link mainly between the lack of knowledge 374 00:24:54,429 --> 00:24:57,580 and the deficiencies in the media coverage per se. 375 00:24:57,580 --> 00:25:06,340 Not necessarily in The Guardian, but probably most other media organizations and other newspapers. 376 00:25:08,220 --> 00:25:12,289 L: I think there's different views on that because a lot of people feel like it's stayed 377 00:25:12,289 --> 00:25:13,219 in the public debate 378 00:25:13,219 --> 00:25:18,129 or in the public realm, because there was a continuation of revelations that came after 379 00:25:18,129 --> 00:25:18,389 each other, 380 00:25:18,389 --> 00:25:22,529 rather than just doing this data dump thing and you know just doing everything in one 381 00:25:22,529 --> 00:25:23,200 go. 382 00:25:23,200 --> 00:25:27,629 So I think we will probably have been able to say the same thing if it was done differently 383 00:25:27,629 --> 00:25:28,330 as well. 384 00:25:29,900 --> 00:25:31,950 Angel: There is a question from the internet. 385 00:25:31,950 --> 00:25:38,710 Q: Yes. Ifup is asking as far as he or she understood the people were not informed pretty 386 00:25:38,710 --> 00:25:41,469 well on what really was revealed. 387 00:25:41,469 --> 00:25:45,729 Wouldn't it have been the task of the media to inform them? 388 00:25:45,729 --> 00:25:48,509 And how could they have been done better? 389 00:25:48,509 --> 00:25:55,769 L: This seems to be a rhetorical question in that they didn't... yes 390 00:25:55,769 --> 00:25:59,280 A: Well yes, they should have. 391 00:25:59,280 --> 00:26:04,849 Ideally we would think that it is the task of the media to inform, 392 00:26:04,849 --> 00:26:11,179 we saw that some media did inform, others did do pretty much the opposite. 393 00:26:11,179 --> 00:26:13,320 Then there's the question how to improve that. 394 00:26:13,320 --> 00:26:17,049 And what is the role of different types of media and alternative media 395 00:26:17,049 --> 00:26:21,899 and what does need to change structurally in forms of mainstream media? 396 00:26:21,899 --> 00:26:23,109 But that is a big debate. 397 00:26:23,939 --> 00:26:28,719 L: And we should also say that we've done interviews with journalists, asking questions 398 00:26:28,719 --> 00:26:32,489 as to why they covered this the way that they did. 399 00:26:32,489 --> 00:26:36,139 And hopefully those interviews will reveal something more, 400 00:26:36,139 --> 00:26:38,210 but those are still ongoing. 401 00:26:38,210 --> 00:26:43,200 But we've had for example James Ball from The Guardian who came to our conference in 402 00:26:43,200 --> 00:26:43,739 June, 403 00:26:43,739 --> 00:26:47,229 and talked about some of the structural problems with a couple of journalists who cover security 404 00:26:47,229 --> 00:26:48,409 issues. 405 00:26:48,409 --> 00:26:54,369 And there's quite a lot of obstacles and so for them to do that in a critical and investigatory 406 00:26:54,369 --> 00:26:54,700 way. 407 00:26:54,700 --> 00:26:58,719 So I think those are the issues that we want to explore when we find out more through these 408 00:26:58,719 --> 00:26:59,859 those interviews. 409 00:27:00,599 --> 00:27:04,019 Angel: We have time for one last question, please make it short 410 00:27:06,989 --> 00:27:10,219 Q: Hello. That's better 411 00:27:10,219 --> 00:27:12,909 I'm not surprised to be honest, 412 00:27:12,909 --> 00:27:18,009 we have seen a similar thing by John Oliver, so Last Week Tonight, I can only recommend 413 00:27:18,009 --> 00:27:19,889 that scene. 414 00:27:19,889 --> 00:27:23,309 So the question is only about what do we talk about, 415 00:27:23,309 --> 00:27:25,219 so can everybody relate to that? 416 00:27:25,219 --> 00:27:28,049 I have just one question to the first slides you have shown 417 00:27:28,049 --> 00:27:31,049 the numbers: What do they reveal? 418 00:27:33,689 --> 00:27:34,919 A: Numbers? 419 00:27:34,919 --> 00:27:39,499 Q: In your first slides there were all of those bar charts with kind of numbers and 420 00:27:39,499 --> 00:27:40,879 I was interested in those numbers. 421 00:27:40,879 --> 00:27:42,700 A: Okay. 422 00:27:42,700 --> 00:27:45,789 Q: I guess occurences. 423 00:27:45,789 --> 00:27:49,700 A: Yes, so at the beginning we showed the time line of... 424 00:27:49,700 --> 00:27:51,619 L: Numbers of mumbling 425 00:27:51,619 --> 00:28:02,639 A: Ah yes. These were the dates of the publication and that is the volume of publication 426 00:28:02,639 --> 00:28:05,440 again: Looking at the press in this case, 427 00:28:05,440 --> 00:28:08,389 looking at not just The Guardian, but all kinds of other newspapers. 428 00:28:08,389 --> 00:28:12,379 That's one part of the research and there will be another part of the research that 429 00:28:12,379 --> 00:28:15,239 you will find information about this on the website, 430 00:28:15,239 --> 00:28:20,229 which is about broadcasting, which is about TV and radio coverage. 431 00:28:20,229 --> 00:28:24,210 But so far what we saw is that there is a fairly similar picture 432 00:28:24,210 --> 00:28:26,330 in terms of how these curves developed, 433 00:28:26,330 --> 00:28:30,039 and also in terms of the content of the coverage. 434 00:28:31,419 --> 00:28:33,049 Angel: I'd say time is up. 435 00:28:33,049 --> 00:28:36,309 Thank you very much Lina Dencik and Arne Hintz for your talk! 436 00:28:36,309 --> 00:28:37,569 *applause* 437 00:28:37,569 --> 00:28:45,799 *music*