Teo Kermeliotis

If the rather hasty, western view that wants those who refer to themselves in the third person to be in the threshold of schizophrenia is valid, then psychiatrists all over the world should soon start preparing themselves for a huge workload.

Millions of Facebook users have been incorporating such practises for a long time now in their daily online activities, feeling the urge to express their feelings and inform the world of their thoughts and plans.

As if the world did not already know.

Sadly enough for those of us who almost always struggle to come up with upbeat and boasting updates for our virtual statuses, the amount of information that exists out there about us is so extensive, that often it does not leave much space for our buoyant, kind-of-hip version.

A constantly increasing network of applications is designed and installed to stoke a vast system of surveillance, destined to deliver results in the name of promiscuous purposes, from deterrence and control to convenience and marketing.

The 9/11 attacks and the consequent rise of security in the policy agenda undoubtedly accelerated the implementation of such measures. Both the biometrics and the video surveillance industry are growing at a fast rate, with rocketing sales in the last few years. At the same time, surveillance technology is rapidly becoming an important part of the arms trade.

“Every breath you take, every move you make”

Ubiquitous security cameras monitor our moves, look down on us while driving and walking, as well as scan the areas we go for shopping and entertainment. They are growing in numbers and getting smaller, to the point of invisibility, while more sophisticated technology is enhancing their capacity.  

Features such as “Talking CCTV” – in which operators can intimidate via loudspeakers anyone thinking of behaving in an inappropriate manner – and “The Bug” – an “intelligent” system that uses movement tracking software to predict a crime by detecting, zooming in and following those who might be acting in a suspicious way – are not figments of an Orwellian mindset but just a few aspects of the many established trends that govern the “under-the-lens”  society.

Under the European Directive on Data Retention, all the fixed-line and mobile operators are required to keep records of their customers’ communications no matter if they are investigated or not. Although the content is not recorded, a range of data that most people value as private such as the destination, date and duration of phone calls and text messages are stored and could be made available to law enforcement authorities, for up to two years.

The European Commission is also considering a new policy on biometrics, including the creation of a central database of fingerprints, while under new proposals all non-Europeans would be asked to submit facial scans and fingerprints before being allowed to enter the continent.

At the same time, governments are ordering the airline carriers to hand over travel records while border agents can seize laptops without cause to search them for criminal evidence; mobile phones with embedded GPS constantly keep an automatic trail of the phones holders’ location; shopping centres track the motion of their clients by triangulating their cell phones; credit or debit cards record spending patterns.

The list is enormous and is growing in accordance with technological achievements. How far is the future where individual identification will be based on odour or saliva? 

“Digital ghost”

And of course, the surveillance net can creep and perforate virtual walls too. A number of companies, from Internet Service Providers to web-based businesses, are our official online shadows, monitoring all our web searches and visits. They gather data on which sites we visit, at what time and for how long, what do we consume and what we are interested in buying. As Privacy International says, “in the off-line world this would be comparable to, for example, having someone follow you through a shopping mall, scanning each page of every magazine you browse though, every pair of shoes that you looked at and every menu entry you read at the restaurant.”

Data mining and behaviour advertising are inextricably associated in the digitised world. Consumerism targeting the individuals by putting them at the centre of all choices seems to has found, in the face of the Internet, an ideal platform to act, as the virtual world is both isolated and public.

Webmail providers, such as Gmail, scan every e-mail read or sent and then display relevant ads keyed to certain words. Charter Communications, the third largest cable operator in the US, has recently spoken of plans to introduce a new system that will capture their customers’ online surfing, and then provide the information to advertising networks through a third party.

Just a few weeks ago, a US court ordered Google to give every log of every video watched by Youtube users, including their ID and IP addresses, to Viacom, the media conglomerate. Would that ruling ever be possible if Google did not keep that amount of user data in the first place?

Also, as expected, the aforementioned European Directive on Data Retention applies, of course, to the online world as well, with similar provisions about the monitoring of all internet activity (e-mails, URLs, etc) by the ISPs.

At the same time, the expansion of social networking sites has seen millions of people willingly reveal a vast amount of detailed information about their lives, blurring even further the lines between private and public. This has not gone without cost to many, as their experience of such exposure ranges from minor consequences such as personal embarrassment to more grave ones like job losses, lost opportunities and negative profiling.

Looking from some distance, it is not difficult to realise that it is rather easy to be deceived by the isolative nature of the online process. Yet, it is essential to truly internalise, beyond the point of simple knowledge, that whatever we do online is leaving an electronic trail behind us that is here to stay.

The understanding of such a reality can undoubtedly create a bleak conception to many over the shape of modern life, as it is not difficult to comprehend how this has the ability to monumentally affect every day choices. Yet, as Bill Thompson puts it, “it is possible to take an optimistic view and treat our current concerns as a reflection of a period of transition and generational difference: we may just be taking our time coming to terms with the new levels of exposure.”

“Brave new world”

As different perceptions and prejudices collide in this rapidly changing environment, we still need to find our way around the new system. Today we are wary that online photos showing us drunk at parties could deter recruiters from hiring us, but in twenty years time it is quite likely that most employers will be much more lenient, as they will have their own online past and will be more familiar with such images.

Perhaps in the end we should dare to go one step further. The idea of identity is at the core of the most important debates of our time. Industrialisation and the enlightenment have given us an idea of “self” and of the boundaries between private and public that seem natural but are not. With the industrial age now in a transient stage, we should acknowledge that the concept of identity is itself a social construct and therefore subject to modification. The boundaries are now re-chartered, with technology playing a key role in the process. Bill Thompson explains: “The growth of online services, social tools and surveillance are challenging the assumptions that underpin the enlightenment idea of identity and we will see new ideas emerge to help us cope in an increasingly digitised world where little is truly private.”

At the top of this massive wave of public exposure, from the external, omnipresent monitoring to the voluntary revelation of personal and possibly harmful information, lie some fundamental questions whose answers can determine the route of our existence in the interconnected world. Are we willing to sacrifice freedom of expression in the name of avoiding unwanted public exposure? Should we choose between safety and privacy?

These questions can often be misleading and result to extorted choices. Just as liberty requires both security and privacy, respect for the individual and freedom of expression are equally important in the digitised environment.  Similar to the annoying prospect of being treated as citizens under constant investigation or as life-long objects in a market research project, there is the danger of encouraging the breeding of “clinical” behaviours by imposing self censorship to avoid potential personal harm.

Such fears can deeply affect our attitude towards a wide set of every day choices. Are we going to care, for example, about the CCTV cameras that monitor our moves if we want to go to a demonstration that condemns the involvement of our country in a war? Are we going to post pictures of that protest on Facebook?

Perhaps our response can draw some inspiration from our previous reactions while other monumental changes were taking place. In the same way that 18th century people dealt with the culture shock of moving from the fields into factories by developing urban culture and its plethora of attitudes and characteristics, we should now adjust our mindset in the modern conditions and assess what from everything being done is “acceptable and even normal,” as Bill Thompson points out.

Although without the benefit of hindsight, it is not incongruous to underline the historic significance of our generation. The fading memories of the world before the heavy interconnection might be rapidly abandoning us but they have not yet completely evaporated. Without acting as if the standards that dominated the world half a century ago can still be applied today – or have some inherent eternal wisdom – we should boldly enter this brave new world, trying to keep values such as tolerance, respect and openness at the core of the modern world. The burden is heavy and the conditions are not easy. Yet, it is vital to succeed.

Anthony Barnett

Anthony Barnett (London, OK): Compass have just issued a Neal Lawson inspired statement on the Glasgow East result with some ideas about what a Labour government they approve of would do. A taste of the argument is,

the coalition that brought Labour to power in 1997 has been shattered. Between 1997 and 2005, the party lost 4 million voters - and this time we saw a further pulling-away of the working-class vote that New Labour has always ill-advisedly taken for granted. Meanwhile, people across all classes and social groups are turning away from the party. Particularly in England the Tories are on the march; partly thanks to the sense that they are engaging with concerns that lie at the centre of people's lives.

Needless to say, Gordon Brown's stiff, remote style of leadership doesn't help. But there is a more fundamental political problem that is destroying the Labour Party. Even at a time when the credit crunch and rising prices mean that the post-Thatcher settlement is being questioned as never before, a supposedly progressive government refuses to address the way that the unrestrained free-market is damaging people's lives in no end of areas: from housing and rising fuel bills, to crippling consumer debt and insecurity at work, and on to the dysfunctional inequality that defines so many of the UK's current problems.

Others may be distracted by New Labour kremlinology, and the question of whether one of Brown's cabinet colleagues might somehow be persuaded to replace him. For us, there is no point in talking about such changes if the conversation isn't fundamentally about a change of direction...

Tom Griffin

Tom Griffin (London, The Green Ribbon): The SNP has tonight won the Glasgow East by-election by the narrowest of margins, 365 votes, following a recount.

Underlying the narrow victory, however, was a huge swing of 22.54 per cent, which according to to Professor John Curtice would leave Labour with only 1 MP if it were projected across Scotland. This is not unique in by-election terms, but what is unprecedented is that was achieved by a party that is itself an incumbent Government.

Curtice suggested that the result confirms the SNP's position as the major challenger to Labour in Scotland at the next general election.

Although the Conservatives took third place ahead of the Liberal Democrats, who continued their recent run of poor by-election results, the Tory share of the vote actually fell by one per cent.

 

 

Tom Griffin

Tom Griffin (London, The Green Ribbon): The Conservatives' link-up with the Ulster Unionists is provoking a great deal of interest around the blogosphere today.

Over at Brassneck, Mick Fealty sees the move as a sign that the Tories have finally developed a coherent response to devolution.

From a unionist (in the broadest sense of that word) perspective the new arrangements may finally give both parties a purpose beyond the narrow protection of a political union that is no longer under coherent attack from outside, but in grave danger of losing coherence from within. Read the rest of this post...

Anthony Barnett

Anthony Barnett (London, OK):  The new issue of Total Politics is out and well displayed in W H Smiths in Victoria (but not yet on its website). It has an exchange over whether there should be fixed term parliaments which includes a piece Iain Dale asked me to write some time ago - it is a very pleasant surprise to open a magazine and find you have written in it! The exchange is a bit awkward as I argue for the German system when a no-confidence motion can force an election which is otherwise fixed for every four years while my opponent thinks the Germans do not have a fixed term for that very reason. Oh well... Here is my last para:

 Read the rest of this post...

Alasdair Murray

Alasdair Murray and Jonny Medland (London, CentreForum): CentreForum this week published a pamphlet which laments the lack of debate about measures to combat illegal migration in the UK. Authors Demetrios Papademetriou and Will Somerville of the Washington-based Migration Policy Institute argue that, in comparison with other developed countries, the UK appears stuck in a state of denial about the scale and intractability of the problem. They propose a carefully crafted earned amnesty programme - which in conjunction with better use of other migration policy tools including enforcement - might just offer a way out of the political impasse.  

As if to prove the authors' point, the reaction to the proposals has been depressingly dismissive.  Read the rest of this post...

Tom Griffin

Tom Griffin (London, The Green Ribbon): On a day when the Conservatives are expected to be also-rans in Scotland, David Cameron has delivered the clearest possible signal of his commitment to the union. In a joint Telegraph article with Ulster Unionist leader Sir Reg Empey, he calls for a renewal of the historic alliance between the two parties.

As leaders we met at Westminster last week and agreed to set up a joint working group to explore the possibilities of closer cooperation leading to the creation of a new political and electoral force in Northern Ireland. That working group will report to us in the autumn Read the rest of this post...

Tom Griffin

Tom Griffin (London, The Green Ribbon): A cross-party group of MPs yesterday tabled an amendment to the Embryology Bill that would extend Britain's post-1967 abortion law to Northern Ireland.

This could be an interesting can of worms for the Prime Minister as the Sunday Telegraph noted at the weekend:

The issue is doubly politically sensitive for Mr Brown because it threatens to reopen the row about how Labour secured the support of nine Democratic Unionist party MPs – crucial to the Government's success in winning last month's Commons vote on extending the period terrorist suspects can be held without charge to 42 days. The Prime Minister has denied any "deal" was done with the DUP. However, Shaun Woodward, the Northern Ireland Secretary, reassured the DUP at the time that the Government had no plans to extend abortion laws to the province. 
 Read the rest of this post...

Philip Hosking

Philip Hosking (Cornwall, The Cornish Democrat): As a response to the article by David of Britology Watch -What are we fighting for? Libertarians and nationalists must make common cause- just some thoughts.

There is much to tempt in your post; a bill of rights, federal government and electoral reform for instance. An England (and Cornwall) wide solution does also need to be found leaving the direction of future reform in Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and the Crown protectorates in the hands of their respective populations. Would the creation of an English parliament guarantee any of these vital developments or as has been suggested merely fossilize power once more in a centralized establishment? Are you suggesting those who pursue constitutional, electoral and civil rights reform should join the Campaign for an English Parliament (CEP) as a means to achieve their goals or are you suggesting something more subtle?

As has been pointed out an English parliament in itself does not guarantee any of the above and much less the dispersal of power away from Westminster. Libertarians who wish to see effective decision making ability devolved down to our communities are unlikely to take up your offer, and as a Cornishman I've yet to hear why an English parliament would be good for me or Cornwall. On the other hand as someone who appreciates the idea of national self determination I would not wish to deny the people of England the choice of an all England body if that is what they wanted. Read the rest of this post...

Tom Griffin

Tom Griffin (London, The Green Ribbon):Today is the final day of campaigning in the Glasgow East by-election. Initial speculation about a Labour meltdown that could spell the end for Gordon Brown has largely died away, but Alex Salmond has refused to back away from predictions that the vote would be a 'political earthquake'. Read the rest of this post...

Guy Aitchison

Guy Aitchison (London, OK): Last week John Jackson blogged on the heroic efforts of Michael Wills to drive through the Governance of Britain agenda in the face of hostility from his parliamentary colleagues and the press and as the government of which he is a part implodes. As part of the process Wills has been travelling around the country holding open table discussions on different aspects of the agenda. He recently stopped off in my hometown of Bristol to discuss plans for the British Statement of Values, the Bill of Rights and Responsibilies, community engagement and barriers to voting.

The good people of Bristol offered sage advice to the Government, captured in this MoJ document. Not least they pointed out that any "public engagement had to be meaningful and worthwhile to the participants involved and that their contribution is going to be taken into account as part of the decision-making process." Next stop Nottingham, followed by Newcastle, Brighton and London. If you attend a discussion do let us know your thoughts on how it went.

 

 Read the rest of this post...

Damian O'Loan

Damian O'Loan (Paris): What kind of company was Labour keeping when it relied on DUP votes to get 42 day detention through the Commons? The answer is becoming clearer by the day.

Iris Robinson MP, MLA, wife of Northern Ireland First Minister Peter, has made three horrendous statements on public morality. The latest to be reported: “There can be no viler act, apart from homosexuality and sodomy, than sexually abusing innocent children.” Read the rest of this post...

Matt Wardman

Matt Wardman (Wardman Wire): This is the second in the lastest series of Blogpower Roundups, and this is my roundup of some of the current live issues around Civil Liberties.

While there are differences between bloggers on some questions at the edge on just what comes under Civil Liberties, there's usually a strong consensus around the right to self-expression, and that restriction of topics that we can write about or the excessive monitoring of online activity are BAD things.
Heather Yaxley has reflected on the whole theme of Defending Blogs.
In this roundup, I've covered recent Blogpower posts, and highlighted a number of other posts that I have come across. As it is a thematic roundup, I am going back several weeks.

Colin Campbell's comment about extra speed cameras in South Australia prompted me to do some digging into just how many speed cameras we have now in the UK. The answer: one hell of a lot - perhaps 7,000-10,000 plus all those installed in cars and on motorcyles.

By my count there are 75 links in this post. Enjoy. Read the rest of this post...

Anthony Barnett

Anthony Barnett (London, OK): In a meditation on the fate of "Big Player" Unionism in Scotland, in today's FT, John Lloyd fails to register that this is now an argument taking place in England - the really big change from ten years ago. He looks forward cautiously to a Labour win in Glasgow on Thursday and at the same time considers what the argument for the Union needs to be now in Scotland. He asks,

"And what, indeed, would a renewed Unionism look and sound like? Mr Brown has sought to equate Britishness with "a passion for liberty anchored in a sense of duty and an intrinsic commitment to fair play", as he put it three years ago, when still chancellor of the exchequer." Read the rest of this post...

Guy Aitchison

Guy Aitchison (London, OK): Have we seen the last of the "British" acre? The 700-year old land measurement has apparently been banned by the EU following a meeting in Brussels last week.

The Sun (as you may have guessed) is not best pleased, informing its readers that "Britain" (don't they mean England?) has used the acre to measure land since " the late 13th century under Edward I’s reign." The word acre is apparently derived from the Old English for "open field" and was considered the amount of land tillable by a man behind an ox in one day. The measurement was eventually defined by law under Queen Victoria in the Weights and Measures Act of 1878 as being 4,840 square yards or 43,560 square feet.

This history was brought to an end last week when a "lowly Whitehall official" nodded through the EU orders that sealed the acre's fate. What do OK readers think? Surely the humble acre deserved better than this.

 Read the rest of this post...

Stuart Weir

Stuart Weir (Cambridge, Democratic Audit): Just imagine being ready to drive off to work when an unmarked white van pulls up, armed police pour out and while one policeman smashes a side window of your car, the others drag you and push you to the ground a hand-gun pressed against the back of your head - five days after armed police have shot dead the innocent Jean Charles de Menezes! (The Guardian has CCTV footage of the arrest here)

This was the terrifying ordeal that the entirely innocent Omar Ahmet had to go through having been identified as a possible terrorist suspect by a worker at the hotel where he had stayed the night. The worker had telephoned the Merseyside police after seeing a photo of the suspect in a newspaper and told them that he was "85 per cent" certain that Ahmet was the man. Ahmet is a fair-skinned man of Cypriot heritage; the wanted terrorist was a black Eritrean. He had lodged car rental documents and his credit card with his home address in Maidenhead with the hotel. Read the rest of this post...

Tom Griffin

Tom Griffin (London, The Green Ribbon): The Government's approach to social cohesion has been challenged today in a new report from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

Immigration and Social Cohesion in the UK, by Mary Hickman, Helen Crowley and Nick Mai of London Metropolitan University, questions 'the idea that we need a fixed notion of Britishness and British values'  Read the rest of this post...

Tom Griffin

Tom Griffin (London, The Green Ribbon): Divisions in the Northern Ireland Executive resurfaced at the weekend, when the Irish News reported that a meeting due to take place on Thursday is in doubt:

If the one scheduled for July 24 does not take place an entire quarter of the year will have passed between the last meeting on June 19 and next possible date.

It will also mean that First Minister Peter Robinson has only presided over one executive meeting since taking office.

There are an estimated 40 pieces of government business trapped in limbo as papers and proposals await executive approval.  Read the rest of this post...

Guy Aitchison

Guy Aitchison (London, OK): Iain Dale is compiling his annual Guide to Political Blogging to be published in September and wants your votes for the Top Ten Political Blogs in the UK. To vote simply email your top ten (ranked from 1 to 10) to toptenblogs@totalpolitics.com with Top 10 in the subject line. The deadline for submitting your Top 10 is Friday August 15th. You can also leave your Top 10 in the Comments on Iain's blog here.
 Read the rest of this post...

Tom Griffin

Tom Griffin (London, The Green Ribbon):November 30, 2010 is the day to mark in your diary, according to the Sunday Times. Kenneth Gibson, the MSP for Cunninghame North has apparently let slip details of the SNP's heavily symbolic timetable for Scottish independence.

The plan calls for a referendum bill to be introduced on 25 January, Burns Day, ahead of a vote in November on St Andrews Day.

That will only happen, of course, if the SNP minority government can get a majority for the bill. The outcome of the current Labour and Liberal Democrat leadership debates may tell us a lot about how likely that is. Read the rest of this post...