Telecom and telecom provided social networking means big business in Africa, with multiple providers capitalizing on Fourth Industrial Revolution-borne technological access within diverse markets rife with human capital. I spoke to American Cyber Analyst Zachary Campbell about this exciting climate, and the intent of its lead actors, those operating for growth and for good, and indeed those operating with less than savory motivations.
Zachary Campbell, an American, has worked in the U.S Government integration space in support of various defense and public safety agencies. His focus areas include Cybersecurity, Technology and Social Media Telecommunication.
What has the rise of western social media firms like Facebook looked like in Africa?
We’re only a few years removed from 2013, but it must feel like ages for a company shouldering the kind of troubles that Facebook is.
Back then, the world’s largest social media company had yet to face even a single congressional hearing, fake news scandal or reputation crisis. Africa, in particular, was ground zero for explosive growth for Facebook. When you consider how many first-time web users reside on the African continent, it’s clear to see just how significant it was when Facebook first arrived.
What happened then?
This was during the Internet.org days, the sort-of non-profit launched by Facebook with the goal of providing people with free internet access. While it was ostensibly laudable, it was ultimately abandoned after just a few years due to outcry from human rights organizations aspersing its “walled garden” structure of controlled information and services. In the poorest parts of the world, the worry is that this type of information is too easily manipulated by authoritarian leaders.
So Facebook dropped the project and then it took an authoritarian turn. Were there any ripple effects throughout the continent?
Unfortunately, the lesson born out of Facebook’s experience flew over the heads of a few folks in the corporate space. Presently, freedom of assembly and expression are under fire in many countries via authoritarian leaders intent on fixing and controlling elections. The means by which they achieve this are becoming increasingly sophisticated and often times they are aided by influencers within the private sector.
Tanzania was once considered a bastion of prosperity but its current President, John Magufuli, has managed to implement multiple laws targeting dissent. Exorbitant license fees to be a “blogger,” and enforcing subjective content guidelines – along with levying fines against alleged violators of these guidelines – are just several examples of how the scales of power are being tipped conspicuously toward authoritarian rule.
Uganda is another great example of the powers that be targeting dissent and peaceful assembly via social media taxes. Egypt’s leader, Abdel Fateh el-Sisi, has gone as far as issuing prison sentences to people believed to be guilty of propagating “fake news” via social media, even if they’re doing it unintentionally.
Obviously, “fake news” has become something of a canticle in the United States for Trump supporters and even Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey has been accused of “shadow-banning” users on his platform who display more right-leaning sympathies but that all pales in comparison to what is happening in poorer regions of the world.
But surely this is not the sole fault of social media companies, or is it?
Naturally, you would think that Google, Facebook and other Silicon Valley giants would be under the most pressure to hand over user information and aid repressive states’ surveillance efforts. China, however, is Africa’s largest international technology partner and surprisingly silent when it comes to putting forth questions about user privacy.
The “Digital Silk Road”, an initiative to build out fiber optic networks across the African continent, has received far less press in recent years compared to China’s financial investments in the region. There’s also legitimate concern that dissident movements on the continent will only face greater levels of persecution due to the fact that many of Africa’s state-owned firms are tethered so tightly to China’s intelligence apparatus. Plainly, it’s a situation that many fear is ripe for exploitation.
According to a recent report by Quartz, several Chinese firms have made unprecedented strides in Africa. Transsion Holdings, for example, is Africa’s largest phone maker, and is rumored to allow “backdoor” access to its devices. CloudWalk is undertaking a mass facial recognition program in Zimbabwe. Huawei’s past participation in government surveillance is legendary, and Huawei is now advising Kenya on its ICT master plan.
So would you say that China poses the greatest threat to the democratization of Africa?
It is not just Beijing that is partnering with African authoritarians to repress citizens. Other companies have quietly become some of the worst human rights offenders in Africa, including at least one major European telecommunications firm, which has largely kept its questionable practices in the region quiet from its shareholders and from international human rights groups.
This western company, like others that see the advantage of a good public image, has successfully branded itself as a responsible corporate citizen, and has even pledged to uphold the values of the UN Global Compact, the UN Guiding Principles for Business and Human Rights, and several other codes of conduct. But the activities of its affiliates in Africa reveals a pattern of behavior that is even more objectionable than what Chinese state companies are doing in the region.
With more than 50 million global subscribers, this western company has operated in at least six African countries, where it has colluded with repressive regimes and used its technology to influence elections.
In 2016, for example, the company complied with the regime in N’Djamena to cut off Internet access for eight months in advance of elections, and to send out anonymous SMS messages to the company’s subscribers, discouraging attendance at opposition political rallies. During the 2015-2018 timeframe, the company shut down Internet access in the DRC for more than 20 days at important political moments. At various other times, this “laudable” western company has been accused of dodgy tax practices, violating local labor laws, and engaging in monopolistic practices, all of which are detrimental to the fragile institutions that attempt to enforce rule of law in the region.
What should the next steps be?
Africa is democratically challenged. Multinational corporations like this European telecommunications company should not be permitted to undermine western principles in order to gain market advantage in Africa, all the while hiding behind a false media front created by their own public relations departments. Telecommunications providers in Africa should come under a microscope, given that the product they supply is digital information, and the free flow of information is essential to a healthy democracy. Some of the more shocking practices of these companies should be exposed, and measures should be implemented at both local and international levels to prevent further abuses. Only then will Africa succeed in rooting out the past and achieving its true potential.
Contact me via email at mfon.nsehe @ gmail.com or on Twitter @MfonobongNsehe
