By Joe Garofoli, San Francisco Chronicle
Hillary Rodham Clinton entered dangerous territory Sunday when she asked Silicon Valley tech companies to root out suspected terrorists who use their services to communicate.
As an example of why companies need to stop terrorists from using their social networks, Clinton pointed to Tashfeen Malik, a shooter in last week’s San Bernardino massacre who pledged her allegiance to the Islamic State online.
“If you look at the story about this woman and maybe the man, too, who got radicalized, self-radicalized, we’re going to need help from Facebook and from YouTube and from Twitter,” Clinton told ABC News. “They cannot permit the recruitment and the actual direction of attacks or the celebration of violence by this sophisticated Internet user.”
Her reaction is a textbook example of tough-on-terrorism rhetoric. But it also means turning private companies into an arm of the government.
How is a social media site supposed to not “permit the recruitment” of terrorists using its service?
First, there are the technical hurdles: Think of resources a company like Twitter would need to patrol the estimated 46,000 Islamic State supporters on its network cranking out some 200,000 tweets per day.
Besides, tech firms shouldn’t be in the business of censoring speech on behalf of government, said Electronic Frontier Foundation International director Danny O’Brien.
Even trying to do the government’s bidding is a slippery slope.
“So who defines ‘terrorism’?” O’Brien said. “Does Facebook, for example, intend to enforce its policies only against those that the United States government describes as terrorists, or will it also respond if Russia says someone is a terrorist?”
At a speech later Sunday after her initial comments, Clinton anticipated the blowback. “You are going to hear all the familiar complaints: ‘freedom of speech.’”
That’s not just a complaint — it’s part of the Constitution.
If companies allow the government to pick and choose whose speech is permitted, they face huge business risks: Would users turn away from a social media outlet that’s also an informant?
Clinton isn’t the only politician trying to enlist tech to do the government’s job. Sen. Dianne Feinstein is planning to reintroduce legislation that would require social media companies to report what they think is terrorist activism to law enforcement.
“We are at a different stage now,” the California Democrat said. “I’m all for freedom of speech, but it doesn’t mean encouraging terrorism.”
These requests echo the calls of federal and intelligence officials, who urged tech companies to cripple their encryption practices shortly after the Paris attacks. President Obama again called out tech companies during his Oval Office address Sunday.
“I will urge high-tech and law-enforcement leaders to make it harder for terrorists to use technology to escape from justice,” Obama said.
Still, there has been no evidence showing that the Paris terrorists used encrypted communications to plan their attack.
Though they have emerged as something of a political punching bag, tech companies are trying to play nice.
Clinton remains one of the industry’s favored candidates. Unlike her GOP rivals, she favors net neutrality and is more in tune with the valley’s position on same-sex marriage and immigration. Her campaign has received $727,000 from those who work in the technology industry, trailing Republican Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, according to the nonpartisan site Crowdpac.
“We share the government’s goal of keeping terrorist content off our site,” Facebook said Monday. “Facebook has zero tolerance for terrorists, terror propaganda, or the praising of terror activity and we work aggressively to remove it as soon as we become aware of it.
“If we become aware of a threat of imminent harm or a planned terror attack, our terms permit us to provide that information to law enforcement and we do. This is an ever-evolving landscape, and we will continue to engage regularly with NGOs (non-governmental organizations), industry partners, academics, and government officials on how to keep Facebook, and other Internet services, free of terrorists or terror-promoting material.”
©2015 the San Francisco Chronicle Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
