|
EungyungEileenChoiFirstEssay 8 - 11 Jan 2020 - Main.EungyungEileenChoi
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstEssay" |
|---|
| | | The history of internet opinion manipulation in Korean politics dates way back. Several politicians from different political parties were convicted for hiring people to distribute disinformation through the internet to slander his opposing candidate in a primary race or election, in 2004, 2008, and 2012. A former head of the Korean intelligence agency is serving jail time for having ordered his subordinates to post mass comments or retweet comments in support of Ms. Park who was then running for president. | |
<
< | Baby, One more time | >
> | [ ] | | | Now, some might question what real harm does it? Does the number of 'likes' or 'dislikes' really matter? Don't people have their own views and opinions? Even major news media spread incorrect or inaccurate news from time to time. More importantly, most times it is very difficult to draw a clear line between information, misinformation, and disinformation. If we were to ban any information that bears a risk of being incorrect, wouldn't that sacrifice the sacred freedom of speech? | |
<
< | Well, a classic psychological experiment by Solomon Asch suggests those things matter. In his well-known conformity experiment, Asch observed that about one third (32%) of the participants conformed to the clearly wrong majority view although most of them said that they did not really believe their answer but were afraid of being different (McLeod? , S. A. (2018, Dec 28). Solomon Asch - Conformity Experiment. https://www.simplypsychology.org/asch-conformity.html) Asch suggested that it was the social pressure and thus should be able toare know that and thus they should screen the information and Shouldn't people know better than just receiving it as a plain fact? their reasoning incorrect anywa iFollowing the above developments in Korea, I'm terrified about the consequences that the misuse of the internet can have on democracy. However, I also believe that democracy is still the best method to protect civil rights and to effectively and fairly run a country. There is an old saying in Korea that describes my feelings towards this issue, 'I hate you, but one more time'. It is used in situations where one loves another person so much that one cannot abandon the other person in spite of his/her faults and gives him/her another try. Therefore, rather than jumping to the conclusion that we should declare democracy dead because of the risks it faces in the internet society, | >
> | Well, a classic psychological experiment by Solomon Asch suggests those things matter. In his well-known conformity experiment, Asch observed that about one third (32%) of the participants conformed to the clearly wrong majority view although most of them claimed that they did not really believe their answers to be true. McLeod? , S. A. (2018, Dec 28). Solomon Asch - Conformity Experiment. https://www.simplypsychology.org/asch-conformity.html Asch suggested that it was the group pressure that was making those people respond in conformity with the majority. Also, according to the experiment, people are more likely to conform if the number of majority is larger. So, the number of 'likes' or 'dislikes' on a posting regarding a political candidate might have an influence on prospective voters. Voters might refrain from expressing their views if they see the 'likes' or 'dislikes' of the majority is different, in a poll, for example. The poll results, in turn, could affect the same or other voter's decision. False or unverified information degrading a candidate might not be believed right out but if voters are exposed to disinformation over and over again, more are likely to believe the story. As the number of believers grows, group pressure might kick in with a snowballing effect. People who don't believe the story may silence, the majority view will grow even bigger, the pressure goes up, etc. The Cambridge Analytica If coupled with behavioral targeting, The impact grows even bigger if you use personal information to sort out and target neutral or vulnerable individuals and bombard them with fake news that creates fear and hatred in them so that they discharge a candidate and vote for the other.
By tweaking the majority view and by creating negative appearancesa candidate's fate could change the fate of a candidate, as is the suspicion of many Americans with respect to the 2016 presidential election. it will also harm the might be changed they might begin a voter might actually be affected by the number of 'likes' or 'dislikes' on a posting regarding a political candidate. And if this adds up to hundreds and thousands posting, it might even change the result of an election. | | |
Who has actually been doing this? It doesn't seem necessary to write an essay countering this argument unless someone is really making it. |
|
|
EungyungEileenChoiFirstEssay 6 - 10 Jan 2020 - Main.EungyungEileenChoi
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstEssay" |
|---|
| | | In the aftermath of the impeachment, Mr. Moon was elected as the new president and his political party gained the majority in the Korean parliament. One year after, the current ruling party requested the police to investigate suspicious activity on the internet. They found that the number of 'likes' of articles opposing Mr. Moon and 'dislikes' of articles that favored Mr. Moon spiked in an irregular pattern. Few months later, a man, widely known by its social media ID 'Duru King', was convicted for impairing the operation of portal website servers by manipulating the numbers of 'likes' or 'dislikes' for certain articles or opinions using a hacking tool called 'King crab'. It was found that Duru King had initially operated the King crab for the benefit of Mr. Moon during his presidential election campaign for which he received some money from a very important figure in Mr. Moon's camp. After President Moon's victory, Duru King asked that a man well-acquainted with himself should be appointed as a high-rank diplomat but his request was rejected. That's when he turned his back and started to use the King crab against Mr. Moon. | |
<
< | The history of internet opinion manipulation in Korean politics dates way back. Several politicians from different political parties were convicted for hiring people to distribute false information through the internet to slander his opposing candidate in a primary race or election, in 2004, 2008, and 2012. A former head of the Korean intelligence agency is serving jail time for having ordered his subordinates to post mass comments or retweet comments that support Ms. Park who was then running for president. | >
> | The history of internet opinion manipulation in Korean politics dates way back. Several politicians from different political parties were convicted for hiring people to distribute disinformation through the internet to slander his opposing candidate in a primary race or election, in 2004, 2008, and 2012. A former head of the Korean intelligence agency is serving jail time for having ordered his subordinates to post mass comments or retweet comments in support of Ms. Park who was then running for president. | | | Baby, One more time | |
<
< | Now, some might question what real harm it does to tweak a few numbers of 'likes' or 'dislikes' or put out some false information on the internet. Most of the information on the internet is not verified, most times even the author or source is anonymous, and most people know that, don't they? However, even if people are not sure whether an information or opinion is genuine and true, it can have a substantial impact. A classic psychological experiment by Solomon Asch observed that about one third (32%) of the participants conformed to the clearly wrong majority view although most of them said that they did not really believe their answer but were afraid of being different (McLeod? , S. A. (2018, Dec 28). Solomon Asch - Conformity Experiment. https://www.simplypsychology.org/asch-conformity.html) Asch suggested that it was the social pressure and thus should be able toare know that and thus they should screen the information and Shouldn't people know better than just receiving it as a plain fact? their reasoning incorrect anywa iFollowing the above developments in Korea, I'm terrified about the consequences that the misuse of the internet can have on democracy. However, I also believe that democracy is still the best method to protect civil rights and to effectively and fairly run a country. There is an old saying in Korea that describes my feelings towards this issue, 'I hate you, but one more time'. It is used in situations where one loves another person so much that one cannot abandon the other person in spite of his/her faults and gives him/her another try. Therefore, rather than jumping to the conclusion that we should declare democracy dead because of the risks it faces in the internet society, | >
> | Now, some might question what real harm does it? Does the number of 'likes' or 'dislikes' really matter? Don't people have their own views and opinions? Even major news media spread incorrect or inaccurate news from time to time. More importantly, most times it is very difficult to draw a clear line between information, misinformation, and disinformation. If we were to ban any information that bears a risk of being incorrect, wouldn't that sacrifice the sacred freedom of speech?
Well, a classic psychological experiment by Solomon Asch suggests those things matter. In his well-known conformity experiment, Asch observed that about one third (32%) of the participants conformed to the clearly wrong majority view although most of them said that they did not really believe their answer but were afraid of being different (McLeod? , S. A. (2018, Dec 28). Solomon Asch - Conformity Experiment. https://www.simplypsychology.org/asch-conformity.html) Asch suggested that it was the social pressure and thus should be able toare know that and thus they should screen the information and Shouldn't people know better than just receiving it as a plain fact? their reasoning incorrect anywa iFollowing the above developments in Korea, I'm terrified about the consequences that the misuse of the internet can have on democracy. However, I also believe that democracy is still the best method to protect civil rights and to effectively and fairly run a country. There is an old saying in Korea that describes my feelings towards this issue, 'I hate you, but one more time'. It is used in situations where one loves another person so much that one cannot abandon the other person in spite of his/her faults and gives him/her another try. Therefore, rather than jumping to the conclusion that we should declare democracy dead because of the risks it faces in the internet society, | | |
Who has actually been doing this? It doesn't seem necessary to write an essay countering this argument unless someone is really making it. |
|
|
EungyungEileenChoiFirstEssay 5 - 09 Jan 2020 - Main.EungyungEileenChoi
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstEssay" |
|---|
| | |
The Candlelight Revolution | |
<
< | In March 2017, the Korean Supreme Court decided to impeach the then-president Ms. Park. Several events led to this impeachment. A scandal that involved Ms. Choi, a close friend of Ms. Park, misusing her relationship with the president to squeeze out money from Korean conglomerates and a marine accident that caused the death of many young students for which Ms. Park was accounted to be liable. Angry people poured into the streets and requested Ms. Park to resign. When Ms. Park refused to do so, the National Assembly called for impeachment and the Supreme Court approved. Because the people were holding candlelights while protesting, this impeachment is often referred to as the 'Candlelight Revolution'. There is no contestation that the internet played a significant role in the Candlelight Revolution. News and rumors relating to Ms. Park were widely disseminated through personal broadcasting media, people's anger was snowballed through interaction on social media, and instant messengers were used to organize protests. Thus, some people perceive the Candlelight Revolution as a true example of the internet promoting democracy in its most favorable way. | >
> | In March 2017, the Korean Supreme Court decided to impeach the then-president Ms. Park. Several events led to this impeachment. A scandal that involved Ms. Choi, a close friend of Ms. Park, misusing her relationship with the president to squeeze out money from Korean conglomerates and a marine accident during which the president kept herself locked-in in her bedroom and did not receive reports nor give any orders to rescue the drowning passengers who were mainly high-school students. Angry people poured into the streets and requested Ms. Park to resign. When Ms. Park refused to do so, the National Assembly called for impeachment and the Supreme Court approved. Because the people were holding candlelights while protesting, this impeachment is often referred to as the 'Candlelight Revolution'. There is no contestation that the internet played a significant role in the Candlelight Revolution. News and rumors relating to Ms. Park were widely disseminated through personal broadcasting media, people's anger was snowballed through interaction on social media, and instant messengers were used to organize protests. Thus, some people perceive the Candlelight Revolution as a true example of the internet promoting democracy in its most favorable way. | | | The King crab | |
<
< | Another side of the story. Early this year, a man widely known by its social media ID 'Duru King' was convicted. Duru King was found guilty for impairing the operation of portal website servers by manipulating the numbers of 'likes' or 'dislikes' for certain articles or opinions posted on such websites using a hacking tool called 'King crab'. At first, Duru King operated the King crab for the benefit of the now-president Moon during his presidential election campaign and received some money from a congressman who was a very important figure in Mr. Moon's camp. After President Moon's victory, Duru King asked for more, that a man well-acquainted to himself should be appointed as consul-general. As his request was rejected he turned his back on Mr. Moon and started to use the King crab against him. Ironically enough, it was President Moon's political party that first requested the police to investigate this case because they found that the number of 'likes' of some articles or opinions opposing Mr. Moon spiked in an irregular way.
Also, during the criminal trial of Ms. Park that followed the impeachment, it turned out that much of the news, especially those that had been distributed through personal broadcasts or social media had no grounds or were fake. Although Ms. Park was found guilty for most charges filed against her, it was this type of fake news such as that Ms. Park took viagra pills and had sex with a priest when the children on the ferry were drowning, that made people storm the streets.
How do we know?
Perhaps it was more the dead children and the corruption. Or the
stories, which may have been more true, that she was having sex with
Choi. Perhaps she was actually impeached for being a lesbian, which
is how it looked from NY, rather than because there was state money
paid for Ms Choi's daughter's horses, or influence behind her
university admission, all of which was—to be
blunt—rather familiar in the upper reaches of Korean politics
and society. Heretofore, however, it was sufficient to put
Presidents in jail for corruption after they left office, or to
drive them to suicide. From outside Korea, the misogyny and
homophobia seems more important than the particular content of the
rumors.
| >
> | In the aftermath of the impeachment, Mr. Moon was elected as the new president and his political party gained the majority in the Korean parliament. One year after, the current ruling party requested the police to investigate suspicious activity on the internet. They found that the number of 'likes' of articles opposing Mr. Moon and 'dislikes' of articles that favored Mr. Moon spiked in an irregular pattern. Few months later, a man, widely known by its social media ID 'Duru King', was convicted for impairing the operation of portal website servers by manipulating the numbers of 'likes' or 'dislikes' for certain articles or opinions using a hacking tool called 'King crab'. It was found that Duru King had initially operated the King crab for the benefit of Mr. Moon during his presidential election campaign for which he received some money from a very important figure in Mr. Moon's camp. After President Moon's victory, Duru King asked that a man well-acquainted with himself should be appointed as a high-rank diplomat but his request was rejected. That's when he turned his back and started to use the King crab against Mr. Moon. | | | | |
>
> | The history of internet opinion manipulation in Korean politics dates way back. Several politicians from different political parties were convicted for hiring people to distribute false information through the internet to slander his opposing candidate in a primary race or election, in 2004, 2008, and 2012. A former head of the Korean intelligence agency is serving jail time for having ordered his subordinates to post mass comments or retweet comments that support Ms. Park who was then running for president. | | | Baby, One more time | |
<
< | Following the above developments in Korea, and learning about similar stories of Facebook and Cambridge Analytica, I'm terrified about the consequences that the misuse of the internet can have on democracy. However, I also believe that democracy is still the best method to protect civil rights and to effectively and fairly run a country. There is an old saying in Korea that describes my feelings towards this issue, 'I hate you, but one more time'. It is used in situations where one loves another person so much that one cannot abandon the other person in spite of his/her faults and gives him/her another try. Therefore, rather than jumping to the conclusion that we should declare democracy dead because of the risks it faces in the internet society, | >
> | Now, some might question what real harm it does to tweak a few numbers of 'likes' or 'dislikes' or put out some false information on the internet. Most of the information on the internet is not verified, most times even the author or source is anonymous, and most people know that, don't they? However, even if people are not sure whether an information or opinion is genuine and true, it can have a substantial impact. A classic psychological experiment by Solomon Asch observed that about one third (32%) of the participants conformed to the clearly wrong majority view although most of them said that they did not really believe their answer but were afraid of being different (McLeod? , S. A. (2018, Dec 28). Solomon Asch - Conformity Experiment. https://www.simplypsychology.org/asch-conformity.html) Asch suggested that it was the social pressure and thus should be able toare know that and thus they should screen the information and Shouldn't people know better than just receiving it as a plain fact? their reasoning incorrect anywa iFollowing the above developments in Korea, I'm terrified about the consequences that the misuse of the internet can have on democracy. However, I also believe that democracy is still the best method to protect civil rights and to effectively and fairly run a country. There is an old saying in Korea that describes my feelings towards this issue, 'I hate you, but one more time'. It is used in situations where one loves another person so much that one cannot abandon the other person in spite of his/her faults and gives him/her another try. Therefore, rather than jumping to the conclusion that we should declare democracy dead because of the risks it faces in the internet society, | | |
Who has actually been doing this? It doesn't seem necessary to write an essay countering this argument unless someone is really making it. |
|
|
EungyungEileenChoiFirstEssay 4 - 26 Nov 2019 - Main.EbenMoglen
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstEssay" |
|---|
| | | Also, during the criminal trial of Ms. Park that followed the impeachment, it turned out that much of the news, especially those that had been distributed through personal broadcasts or social media had no grounds or were fake. Although Ms. Park was found guilty for most charges filed against her, it was this type of fake news such as that Ms. Park took viagra pills and had sex with a priest when the children on the ferry were drowning, that made people storm the streets. | |
>
> | How do we know?
Perhaps it was more the dead children and the corruption. Or the
stories, which may have been more true, that she was having sex with
Choi. Perhaps she was actually impeached for being a lesbian, which
is how it looked from NY, rather than because there was state money
paid for Ms Choi's daughter's horses, or influence behind her
university admission, all of which was—to be
blunt—rather familiar in the upper reaches of Korean politics
and society. Heretofore, however, it was sufficient to put
Presidents in jail for corruption after they left office, or to
drive them to suicide. From outside Korea, the misogyny and
homophobia seems more important than the particular content of the
rumors.
| | | Baby, One more time | |
<
< | Following the above developments in Korea, and learning about similar stories of Facebook and Cambridge Analytica, I'm terrified about the consequences that the misuse of the internet can have on democracy. However, I also believe that democracy is still the best method to protect civil rights and to effectively and fairly run a country. There is an old saying in Korea that describes my feelings towards this issue, 'I hate you, but one more time'. It is used in situations where one loves another person so much that one cannot abandon the other person in spite of his/her faults and gives him/her another try. Therefore, rather than jumping to the conclusion that we should declare democracy dead because of the risks it faces in the internet society, I want to start with making small suggestions that hopefully will help prevent misuse of the internet for political purposes: | >
> | Following the above developments in Korea, and learning about similar stories of Facebook and Cambridge Analytica, I'm terrified about the consequences that the misuse of the internet can have on democracy. However, I also believe that democracy is still the best method to protect civil rights and to effectively and fairly run a country. There is an old saying in Korea that describes my feelings towards this issue, 'I hate you, but one more time'. It is used in situations where one loves another person so much that one cannot abandon the other person in spite of his/her faults and gives him/her another try. Therefore, rather than jumping to the conclusion that we should declare democracy dead because of the risks it faces in the internet society,
Who has actually been doing this? It doesn't seem necessary to write an essay countering this argument unless someone is really making it.
I want to start with making small suggestions that hopefully will help prevent misuse of the internet for political purposes: | | | First, knowingly or negligently distributing news that is fake with the intention to favor a political party should be taken very seriously and punished accordingly. Although such acts already constitute a crime in many countries, my personal view is that the punishments are often disproportionate to their negative and mostly irreparable impacts. To deter people from doing so, it is necessary to impose more severe punishment for these type of offenses. | |
>
> |
It would be good, at this stage, at least to acknowledge the arguments that lie behind the US constitutional prohibition on punishing such activity at all. It's fine to disagree with that view of the relationship between free speech and democracy, but the arguments in favor of prohibiting criminalization of political speech aren't trivial and deserve to be reckoned with.
| | | Second, manipulating public opinions should be determined as a separate type of crime and should be subject to severe punishment. In the above case, Duru King was only convicted for impairing the operation of the server of the portal website because there was no other criminal offense applicable to his acts. | |
>
> |
On the other side is Justice Holmes' famous statement that "every idea is an incitement." Manipulating public opinion is the purpose of free speech, is it not?
| | | Third, it should be prohibited to monitor people's online activities for purposes that have not been properly disclosed to and consented by the individual. Although websites provide notices such as cookie policies, most time the information is insufficient, too vague. Moreover, they don't provide the option to 'opt-out' because it is either you agree to the policy or you cannot use this website. Further, one cannot choose the purpose and use of one's information and must either take it or leave it all. | |
>
> | It's not clear what
this paragraph has to do with the preceding parts of the draft. I
think the best route to a stronger essay is precisely to explore
further the relationship between this last call, for "data
protection" law, and democracy. That might help to explain the
complex relationship between problematic influence and core free
speech, which is presently covered over by the punitive tone
embodied in the idea of criminal regulation of political expression.
| | |
|
|
|
|
|
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
|
|