{"id":178527,"date":"2021-02-08T12:00:13","date_gmt":"2021-02-08T12:00:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/?p=178527"},"modified":"2021-02-02T07:58:17","modified_gmt":"2021-02-02T07:58:17","slug":"the-coup-we-are-not-talking-about","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/2021\/02\/the-coup-we-are-not-talking-about\/","title":{"rendered":"The Coup We Are Not Talking About"},"content":{"rendered":"<blockquote>\n<p id=\"article-summary\" class=\"css-w6ymp8 e1wiw3jv0\"><em>We can have democracy, or we can have a surveillance society, but we cannot have both.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/29ZuboffOpen-superJumbo.jpg\" ><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-medium wp-image-178528\" src=\"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/29ZuboffOpen-superJumbo-200x300.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"200\" height=\"300\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/29ZuboffOpen-superJumbo-200x300.jpg 200w, https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/29ZuboffOpen-superJumbo-681x1024.jpg 681w, https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/29ZuboffOpen-superJumbo-768x1155.jpg 768w, https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/29ZuboffOpen-superJumbo-1022x1536.jpg 1022w, https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/29ZuboffOpen-superJumbo.jpg 1362w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 200px) 100vw, 200px\" \/><\/a><\/p>\n<p><em>29 Jan 2021 &#8211; <\/em>Two decades ago, the American government left democracy\u2019s front door open to California\u2019s fledgling internet companies, a cozy fire lit in welcome. In the years that followed, a surveillance society flourished in those rooms, a social vision born in the distinct but reciprocal needs of public intelligence agencies and private internet companies, both spellbound by a dream of total information awareness. Twenty years later, the fire has jumped the screen, and on Jan. 6, it threatened to burn down democracy\u2019s house.<\/p>\n<div class=\"css-1fanzo5 StoryBodyCompanionColumn\">\n<div class=\"css-53u6y8\">\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">I have spent exactly 42 years studying the rise of the digital as an economic force driving our transformation into an information civilization. Over the last two decades, I\u2019ve observed the consequences of this surprising political-economic fraternity as those young companies morphed into surveillance empires powered by global architectures of behavioral monitoring, analysis, targeting and prediction that I have called surveillance capitalism. On the strength of their surveillance capabilities and for the sake of their surveillance profits, the new empires engineered a fundamentally anti-democratic epistemic coup marked by unprecedented concentrations of knowledge about us and the unaccountable power that accrues to such knowledge.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">In an information civilization, societies are defined by questions of knowledge \u2014 how it is distributed, the authority that governs its distribution and the power that protects that authority. Who knows? Who decides who knows? Who decides who decides who knows? Surveillance capitalists now hold the answers to each question, though we never elected them to govern. This is the essence of the epistemic coup. They claim the authority to decide who knows by asserting ownership rights over our personal information and defend that authority with <a href=\"https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/media\/2021\/jan\/22\/google-threatens-to-shut-down-search-in-australia-if-digital-news-code-goes-ahead\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">the power to control<\/a> critical information systems and infrastructures.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">The horrific depths of Donald Trump\u2019s attempted political coup ride the wave of this shadow coup, prosecuted over the last two decades by the antisocial media we once welcomed as agents of liberation. On Inauguration Day, President Biden said that \u201cdemocracy has prevailed\u201d and promised to restore the value of truth to its rightful place in democratic society. Nevertheless, democracy and truth remain under the highest level of threat until we defeat surveillance capitalism\u2019s other coup.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<aside class=\"css-ew4tgv\" aria-label=\"companion column\"><\/aside>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"css-1fanzo5 StoryBodyCompanionColumn\">\n<div class=\"css-53u6y8\">\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">The epistemic coup proceeds in four stages.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">The first is the appropriation of epistemic rights, which lays the foundation for all that follows. Surveillance capitalism originates in the discovery that companies can stake a claim to people\u2019s lives as free raw material for the extraction of behavioral data, which they then declare their private property.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">The second stage is marked by a sharp rise in <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2020\/01\/24\/opinion\/sunday\/surveillance-capitalism.html\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\" >epistemic inequality<\/a>, defined as the difference between what I can know and what can be known about me. The third stage, which we are living through now, introduces epistemic chaos caused by the profit-driven algorithmic amplification, dissemination and microtargeting of corrupt information, much of it produced by coordinated schemes of disinformation. Its effects are felt in the real world, where they splinter shared reality, poison social discourse, paralyze democratic politics and sometimes instigate violence and death.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">In the fourth stage, epistemic dominance is institutionalized, overriding democratic governance with computational governance by private surveillance capital. The machines know, and the systems decide, directed and sustained by the illegitimate authority and anti-democratic power of private surveillance capital. Each stage builds on the last. Epistemic chaos prepares the ground for epistemic dominance by weakening democratic society \u2014 all too plain in the insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<aside class=\"css-ew4tgv\" aria-label=\"companion column\">\n<div id=\"c-col-editors-picks\" class=\"css-j64t31\"><\/div>\n<\/aside>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"css-79elbk\" data-testid=\"photoviewer-wrapper\">\n<div class=\"css-1ejtqg1 ehw59r12\" data-testid=\"photoviewer-children\">\n<div class=\"css-tux0zj ehw59r13\" data-testid=\"photoviewer-overlay\">\n<div class=\"css-h7jfto ehw59r14\">\n<div>\n<div class=\"css-8h527k\">\n<div data-testid=\"lazyimage-container\"><picture class=\"css-1j5kxti\"><source srcset=\"https:\/\/static01.nyt.com\/images\/2021\/01\/29\/opinion\/sunday\/29Zuboff2\/29Zuboff2-mobileMasterAt3x.jpg?quality=75&amp;auto=webp&amp;disable=upscale&amp;width=600\" media=\"(max-width: 599px) and (min-device-pixel-ratio: 3),(max-width: 599px) and (-webkit-min-device-pixel-ratio: 3),(max-width: 599px) and (min-resolution: 3dppx),(max-width: 599px) and (min-resolution: 288dpi)\" \/><source srcset=\"https:\/\/static01.nyt.com\/images\/2021\/01\/29\/opinion\/sunday\/29Zuboff2\/29Zuboff2-mobileMasterAt3x.jpg?quality=75&amp;auto=webp&amp;disable=upscale&amp;width=1200\" media=\"(max-width: 599px) and (min-device-pixel-ratio: 2),(max-width: 599px) and (-webkit-min-device-pixel-ratio: 2),(max-width: 599px) and (min-resolution: 2dppx),(max-width: 599px) and (min-resolution: 192dpi)\" \/><source srcset=\"https:\/\/static01.nyt.com\/images\/2021\/01\/29\/opinion\/sunday\/29Zuboff2\/29Zuboff2-mobileMasterAt3x.jpg?quality=75&amp;auto=webp&amp;disable=upscale&amp;width=1800\" media=\"(max-width: 599px) and (min-device-pixel-ratio: 1),(max-width: 599px) and (-webkit-min-device-pixel-ratio: 1),(max-width: 599px) and (min-resolution: 1dppx),(max-width: 599px) and (min-resolution: 96dpi)\" \/><\/picture><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"css-79elbk\" data-testid=\"photoviewer-wrapper\">\n<div class=\"css-1a48zt4 ehw59r15\" style=\"text-align: center;\" data-testid=\"photoviewer-children\">\n<figure class=\"css-jcw7oy e1g7ppur0\" role=\"group\" aria-label=\"media\">\n<div class=\"css-1xdhyk6 erfvjey0\"><picture><source srcset=\"https:\/\/static01.nyt.com\/images\/2021\/01\/29\/opinion\/sunday\/29Zuboff2\/29Zuboff2-mobileMasterAt3x.jpg?quality=75&amp;auto=webp&amp;disable=upscale&amp;width=600\" media=\"(max-width: 599px) and (min-device-pixel-ratio: 3),(max-width: 599px) and (-webkit-min-device-pixel-ratio: 3),(max-width: 599px) and (min-resolution: 3dppx),(max-width: 599px) and (min-resolution: 288dpi)\" \/><source srcset=\"https:\/\/static01.nyt.com\/images\/2021\/01\/29\/opinion\/sunday\/29Zuboff2\/29Zuboff2-mobileMasterAt3x.jpg?quality=75&amp;auto=webp&amp;disable=upscale&amp;width=1200\" media=\"(max-width: 599px) and (min-device-pixel-ratio: 2),(max-width: 599px) and (-webkit-min-device-pixel-ratio: 2),(max-width: 599px) and (min-resolution: 2dppx),(max-width: 599px) and (min-resolution: 192dpi)\" \/><source srcset=\"https:\/\/static01.nyt.com\/images\/2021\/01\/29\/opinion\/sunday\/29Zuboff2\/29Zuboff2-mobileMasterAt3x.jpg?quality=75&amp;auto=webp&amp;disable=upscale&amp;width=1800\" media=\"(max-width: 599px) and (min-device-pixel-ratio: 1),(max-width: 599px) and (-webkit-min-device-pixel-ratio: 1),(max-width: 599px) and (min-resolution: 1dppx),(max-width: 599px) and (min-resolution: 96dpi)\" \/><img decoding=\"async\" class=\"css-1m50asq aligncenter\" src=\"https:\/\/static01.nyt.com\/images\/2021\/01\/29\/opinion\/sunday\/29Zuboff2\/29Zuboff2-articleLarge.jpg?quality=75&amp;auto=webp&amp;disable=upscale\" sizes=\"((min-width: 600px) and (max-width: 1004px)) 84vw, (min-width: 1005px) 60vw, 100vw\" srcset=\"https:\/\/static01.nyt.com\/images\/2021\/01\/29\/opinion\/sunday\/29Zuboff2\/29Zuboff2-articleLarge.jpg?quality=90&amp;auto=webp 600w,https:\/\/static01.nyt.com\/images\/2021\/01\/29\/opinion\/sunday\/29Zuboff2\/29Zuboff2-jumbo.jpg?quality=90&amp;auto=webp 1024w,https:\/\/static01.nyt.com\/images\/2021\/01\/29\/opinion\/sunday\/29Zuboff2\/29Zuboff2-superJumbo.jpg?quality=90&amp;auto=webp 2048w\" \/><\/picture><\/div><figcaption class=\"css-1l44abu ewdxa0s0\"><em><span class=\"css-cnj6d5 e1z0qqy90\"><span class=\"css-1ly73wi e1tej78p0\">Credit&#8230;<\/span>Saul Loeb\/Agence France-Presse \u2014 Getty Images<\/span><\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"css-1fanzo5 StoryBodyCompanionColumn\">\n<div class=\"css-53u6y8\">\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">We live in the digital century during the formative years of information civilization. Our time is comparable to the early era of industrialization, when owners had all the power, their property rights privileged above all other considerations. The intolerable truth of our current condition is that America and <a href=\"https:\/\/global.oup.com\/academic\/product\/bulk-collection-9780190685515?cc=us&amp;lang=en&amp;\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">most other liberal democracies<\/a> have, so far, ceded the ownership and operation of all things digital to the political economics of private surveillance capital, which now vies with democracy over the fundamental rights and principles that will define our social order in this century.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<aside class=\"css-ew4tgv\" aria-label=\"companion column\"><\/aside>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"css-1fanzo5 StoryBodyCompanionColumn\">\n<div class=\"css-53u6y8\">\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">This past year of pandemic misery and Trumpist autocracy magnified the effects of the epistemic coup, revealing the murderous potential of antisocial media long before Jan. 6. Will the growing recognition of this other coup and its threats to democratic societies finally force us to reckon with the inconvenient truth that has loomed over the last two decades? We may have democracy, or we may have surveillance society, but we cannot have both. A democratic surveillance society is an existential and political impossibility. Make no mistake: This is the fight for the soul of our information civilization.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">Welcome to the third decade.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"link-736378f9\" class=\"css-ow6j0y eoo0vm40\">The Surveillance Exception<\/h2>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">The public tragedy of Sept. 11 dramatically shifted the focus in Washington from debates over federal privacy legislation to a mania for total information awareness, turning Silicon Valley\u2019s innovative surveillance practices into objects of intense interest. As Jack Balkin, a professor at Yale Law School, <a href=\"https:\/\/digitalcommons.law.yale.edu\/fss_papers\/225\/\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">observed<\/a>, the intelligence community would have to \u201crely on private enterprise to collect and generate information for it,\u201d in order to reach beyond constitutional, legal, or regulatory constraints, controversies that are central today. By 2013, the<a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=edP95iJWVBI\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\"> CIA\u2019s chief technology officer outlined<\/a> the agency\u2019s mission \u201cto collect everything and hang on to it forever,\u201d acknowledging the internet companies, including Google, Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, and Fitbit and telecom companies, for making it possible. The revolutionary roots of surveillance capitalism are planted in this unwritten political doctrine of surveillance exceptionalism, bypassing democratic oversight, and essentially granting the new internet companies a license to steal human experience and render it as proprietary data.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">Young entrepreneurs without any democratic mandate landed a windfall of infinite information and unaccountable power. Google\u2019s founders, Larry Page and Sergey Brin, exercised absolute control over the production, organization and presentation of the world\u2019s information. Facebook\u2019s Mark Zuckerberg has had absolute control over what would become a primary means of global communication and news consumption, along with all the information concealed in its networks. The group\u2019s membership grew, and a swelling population of global users proceeded unaware of what just happened.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">The license to steal came with a price, binding the executives to the continued patronage of elected officials and regulators as well as the sustained ignorance, or at least learned resignation, of users. The doctrine was, after all, a political doctrine, and its defense would require a future of political maneuvering, appeasement, engagement and investment.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">Google led the way with what would become one of the world\u2019s richest lobbying machines. In 2018 nearly half the Senate received contributions from Facebook, Google and Amazon, and the companies <a href=\"https:\/\/www.msn.com\/en-us\/money\/other\/facebook-and-amazon-set-records-in-annual-spending-on-washington-lobbying\/ar-BB1d0002\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">continue to set spending records<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">Most significant, surveillance exceptionalism has meant that the United States and many other liberal democracies chose surveillance over democracy as the guiding principle of social order. With this forfeit, democratic governments crippled their ability to sustain the trust of their people, intensifying the rationale for surveillance.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"link-25d69fb3\" class=\"css-ow6j0y eoo0vm40\">The Economics and Politics of Epistemic Chaos<\/h2>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">To understand the economics of epistemic chaos, it\u2019s important to know that surveillance capitalism\u2019s operations have no formal interest in facts. All data is welcomed as equivalent, though not all of it is equal. Extraction operations proceed with the discipline of the Cyclops, voraciously consuming everything it can see and radically indifferent to meaning, facts and truth.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<aside class=\"css-ew4tgv\" aria-label=\"companion column\"><\/aside>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"css-1fanzo5 StoryBodyCompanionColumn\">\n<div class=\"css-53u6y8\">\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">In a <a href=\"https:\/\/www.buzzfeed.com\/ryanmac\/growth-at-any-cost-top-facebook-executive-defended-data?utm_term=.stWyyGQnb#.cnkEEaN0v\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">leaked memo<\/a>, a Facebook executive, Andrew Bosworth, describes this willful disregard for truth and meaning: \u201cWe connect people. That can be good if they make it positive. Maybe someone finds love. \u2026 That can be bad if they make it negative. \u2026 Maybe someone dies in a terrorist attack. \u2026 The ugly truth is \u2026 anything that allows us to connect more people more often is *de facto* good.\u201d<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">In other words, asking a surveillance extractor to reject content is like asking a coal-mining operation to discard containers of coal because it\u2019s too dirty. This is why content moderation is a last resort, a public-relations operation in the spirit of ExxonMobil\u2019s social responsibility messaging. In Facebook\u2019s case, data triage is undertaken either to minimize the risk of user withdrawal or to avoid political sanctions. Both aim to increase rather than diminish data flows. The extraction imperative combined with radical indifference to produce systems that ceaselessly escalate the scale of engagement but don\u2019t care what engages you.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">I\u2019m homing in now on Facebook not because it\u2019s the only perpetrator of epistemic chaos but because it\u2019s the largest social media company and its consequences reach farthest.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">The economics of surveillance capitalism begot the extractive Cyclops, turning Facebook into an advertising juggernaut and a killing field for truth. Then an amoral Mr. Trump became president, demanding the right to lie at scale. Destructive economics merged with political appeasement, and everything became infinitely worse.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">Key to this story is that the politics of appeasement required little more than a refusal to mitigate, modify or eliminate the ugly truth of surveillance economics. Surveillance capitalism\u2019s economic imperatives turned Facebook into a societal tinderbox. Mr. Zuckerberg merely had to stand down and commit himself to the bystander role.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.wsj.com\/articles\/facebook-knows-it-encourages-division-top-executives-nixed-solutions-11590507499\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">Internal<\/a> research presented in 2016 and 2017 demonstrated causal links between Facebook\u2019s algorithmic targeting mechanisms and epistemic chaos. One researcher concluded that the algorithms were responsible for the viral spread of divisive content that helped fuel the growth of German extremist groups. Recommendation tools accounted for 64 percent of \u201cextremist group joins,\u201d she found \u2014 dynamics <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2021\/01\/14\/opinion\/facebook-far-right.html\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\" >not unique to Germany<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<aside class=\"css-ew4tgv\" aria-label=\"companion column\"><\/aside>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"css-1fanzo5 StoryBodyCompanionColumn\">\n<div class=\"css-53u6y8\">\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">The Cambridge Analytica scandal <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2018\/04\/04\/us\/politics\/cambridge-analytica-scandal-fallout.html\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\" >in March 2018<\/a> riveted the world\u2019s attention on Facebook in a new way, offering a window for bold change. The public began to grasp that Facebook\u2019s political advertising business is a way to rent the company\u2019s suite of capabilities to microtarget users, manipulate them and sow epistemic chaos, pivoting the whole machine just a few degrees from commercial to political objectives.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"css-79elbk\" data-testid=\"photoviewer-wrapper\">\n<div class=\"css-1ejtqg1 ehw59r12\" data-testid=\"photoviewer-children\">\n<div class=\"css-tux0zj ehw59r13\" data-testid=\"photoviewer-overlay\">\n<div class=\"css-1xdhyk6 erfvjey0\"><picture class=\"css-1j5kxti\"><\/picture>\n<div class=\"css-8h527k\">\n<div data-testid=\"lazyimage-container\"><picture class=\"css-1j5kxti\"><img decoding=\"async\" class=\"css-1m50asq aligncenter\" src=\"https:\/\/static01.nyt.com\/images\/2021\/01\/29\/opinion\/sunday\/29Zuboff1\/29Zuboff1-articleLarge.jpg?quality=75&amp;auto=webp&amp;disable=upscale\" sizes=\"((min-width: 600px) and (max-width: 1004px)) 84vw, (min-width: 1005px) 60vw, 100vw\" srcset=\"https:\/\/static01.nyt.com\/images\/2021\/01\/29\/opinion\/sunday\/29Zuboff1\/29Zuboff1-articleLarge.jpg?quality=90&amp;auto=webp 600w,https:\/\/static01.nyt.com\/images\/2021\/01\/29\/opinion\/sunday\/29Zuboff1\/29Zuboff1-jumbo.jpg?quality=90&amp;auto=webp 1024w,https:\/\/static01.nyt.com\/images\/2021\/01\/29\/opinion\/sunday\/29Zuboff1\/29Zuboff1-superJumbo.jpg?quality=90&amp;auto=webp 2048w\" \/><\/picture><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"css-79elbk\" data-testid=\"photoviewer-wrapper\">\n<div class=\"css-1a48zt4 ehw59r15\" style=\"text-align: center;\" data-testid=\"photoviewer-children\">\n<figure class=\"css-jcw7oy e1g7ppur0\" role=\"group\" aria-label=\"media\"><figcaption class=\"css-1l44abu ewdxa0s0\"><strong><span class=\"css-cnj6d5 e1z0qqy90\"><span class=\"css-1ly73wi e1tej78p0\">Credit&#8230;<\/span>Pool photo by Graeme Jennings\/EPA, via Shutterstock<\/span><\/strong><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"css-1fanzo5 StoryBodyCompanionColumn\">\n<div class=\"css-53u6y8\">\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">The company launched some modest initiatives, promising more transparency, a more robust system of third-party fact checkers and a policy to limit \u201ccoordinated inauthentic behavior,\u201d but through it all, Mr. Zuckerberg conceded the field to Mr. Trump\u2019s demands for unfettered access to the global information bloodstream.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"css-1fanzo5 StoryBodyCompanionColumn\">\n<div class=\"css-53u6y8\">\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">Mr. Zuckerberg <a href=\"https:\/\/www.wsj.com\/articles\/facebook-knows-it-encourages-division-top-executives-nixed-solutions-11590507499\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">rejected internal proposals<\/a> for operational changes that would reduce epistemic chaos. A <a href=\"https:\/\/www.theinformation.com\/articles\/facebook-researchers-found-companys-political-whitelist-influenced-misinformation-spread\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">political whitelist<\/a> identified over 100,000 officials and candidates whose accounts were exempted from fact-checking, despite internal research showing that users tend to believe false information shared by politicians. In September 2019 the company <a href=\"https:\/\/about.fb.com\/news\/2019\/09\/elections-and-political-speech\/\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">said<\/a> that political advertising would not be subject to fact-checking.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">To placate his critics in 2018, Mr. Zuckerberg commissioned a civil rights audit led by Laura Murphy, a former director of the ACLU\u2019s Washington legislative office. The <a href=\"https:\/\/about.fb.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/07\/Civil-Rights-Audit-Final-Report.pdf\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">report<\/a> published in 2020 is a cri de coeur expressed in a river of words that bear witness to dashed hopes \u2014 \u201cdisheartened,\u201d \u201cfrustrated,\u201d \u201cangry,\u201d \u201cdismayed,\u201d \u201cfearful,\u201d \u201cheartbreaking.\u201d<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">The report is consistent with a nearly complete rupture of the <a href=\"https:\/\/knightfoundation.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/03\/Gallup-Knight-Report-Techlash-Americas-Growing-Concern-with-Major-Tech-Companies-Final.pdf\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">American public\u2019s faith<\/a> in Big Tech. When asked how Facebook would adjust to a political shift toward a possible Biden administration, a company spokesman, Nick Clegg, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.bloomberg.com\/news\/features\/2020-09-17\/facebook-and-mark-zuckerberg-need-trump-even-more-than-trump-needs-facebook?sref=B3uFyqJT\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">responded,<\/a> \u201cWe\u2019ll adapt to the environment in which we\u2019re operating.\u201d And so it did. On Jan. 7, the day after it became clear that Democrats would control the Senate, <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2021\/01\/07\/technology\/facebook-trump-ban.html\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\" >Facebook announced<\/a> that it would indefinitely block Mr. Trump\u2019s account.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">We are meant to believe that the destructive effects of epistemic chaos are the inevitable cost of cherished rights to freedom of speech. No. Just as catastrophic levels of carbon dioxide in the earth\u2019s atmosphere are the consequence of burning fossil fuels, epistemic chaos is a consequence of surveillance capitalism\u2019s bedrock commercial operations, aggravated by political obligations and set into motion by a 20-year-old dream of total information that slid into nightmare. Then a plague came to America, turning the antisocial media conflagration into a wildfire.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"link-7214f181\" class=\"css-ow6j0y eoo0vm40\">Epistemic Chaos Meets a Mysterious Microorganism<\/h2>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">As early as February 2020, the World Health Organization <a href=\"https:\/\/www.who.int\/docs\/default-source\/coronaviruse\/situation-reports\/20200202-sitrep-13-ncov-v3.pdf?sfvrsn=195f4010_6\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">reported<\/a> a Covid-19 \u201cinfodemic,\u201d with myths and rumors spreading on social media. By March, researchers at the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center <a href=\"https:\/\/www.researchgate.net\/publication\/339923047_Coronavirus_Goes_Viral_Quantifying_the_COVID-19_Misinformation_Epidemic_on_Twitter\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">concluded<\/a> that medical misinformation related to the coronavirus was \u201cbeing propagated at an alarming rate on social media,\u201d endangering public safety.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<aside class=\"css-ew4tgv\" aria-label=\"companion column\"><\/aside>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"css-1fanzo5 StoryBodyCompanionColumn\">\n<div class=\"css-53u6y8\">\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">The Washington Post reported in late March that with <a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonpost.com\/technology\/2020\/03\/27\/facebook-zuckerberg-coronavirus-test\/\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">nearly 50 percent<\/a> of the content on Facebook\u2019s news feed related to Covid-19, a very small number of \u201cinfluential users\u201d were driving the reading habits and feeds of a vast number of users. A study released in April by the <a href=\"https:\/\/reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk\/types-sources-and-claims-covid-19-misinformation\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">Reuters Institute<\/a> confirmed that high-level politicians, celebrities and other prominent public figures produced 20 percent of the misinformation in their sample, but attracted 69 percent of social media engagements in their sample.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">A <a href=\"https:\/\/www.isdglobal.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/COVID-19-Briefing-03-Institute-for-Strategic-Dialogue-12th-May-2020.pdf\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">study<\/a> released in May by Britain\u2019s Institute for Strategic Dialogue identified a core group of 34 extremist right-wing websites disseminating Covid disinformation or linked to established health misinformation hubs now focused on Covid-19. From January to April of 2020, public Facebook posts linking to these websites garnered 80 million interactions, while posts linking to the W.H.O.\u2019s website received 6.2 million interactions, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention received 6.4 million.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">An Avaaz <a href=\"https:\/\/secure.avaaz.org\/campaign\/en\/facebook_threat_health\/\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">study<\/a> released in August exposed 82 websites spreading Covid misinformation reaching a peak of nearly half a billion Facebook views in April. Content from the 10 most popular websites drew about 300 million Facebook views, compared with 70 million for 10 leading health institutions. Facebook\u2019s modest content moderation efforts were no match for its own machine systems engineered for epistemic chaos.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">In October a <a href=\"https:\/\/ncdp.columbia.edu\/custom-content\/uploads\/2020\/10\/Avoidable-COVID-19-Deaths-US-NCDP.pdf\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">report<\/a> from the National Center for Disaster Preparedness at Columbia University estimated the number of avoidable Covid-19 deaths. More than 217,000 Americans had died. Tragically, the analysis concluded that at least 130,000 of those deaths could have been avoided. Of the four key reasons cited, details of each one, including the \u201clack of mask mandate\u201d and \u201cmisleading the public,\u201d reflect the orgy of epistemic chaos loosed upon America\u2019s daughters and sons.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">This is the world in which a deadly mysterious microorganism flourished. We turned to Facebook in search of information. Instead we found lethal strategies of epistemic chaos for profit.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"link-e08476d\" class=\"css-ow6j0y eoo0vm40\">Epistemic Terrorism<\/h2>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">In 1966, Peter Berger and Thomas Luckmann wrote a short book of seminal importance, \u201cThe Social Construction of Reality.\u201d Its central observation is that the \u201ceveryday life\u201d we experience as \u201creality\u201d is actively and perpetually constructed by us. This ongoing miracle of social order rests on \u201ccommon sense knowledge,\u201d which is \u201cthe knowledge we share with others in the normal self-evident routines of everyday life.\u201d<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">Think about traffic: There are not enough police officers in the world to ensure that every car stops at every red light, yet not every intersection triggers a negotiation or a fight. That\u2019s because in orderly societies we all know that red lights have the authority to make us stop and green lights are authorized to let us go. This common sense means that we each act on what we all know, while trusting that others will too. We\u2019re not just obeying laws; we are creating order together. Our reward is to live in a world where we mostly get where we are going and home again safely because we can trust one another\u2019s common sense. No society is viable without it.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<aside class=\"css-ew4tgv\" aria-label=\"companion column\"><\/aside>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"css-1fanzo5 StoryBodyCompanionColumn\">\n<div class=\"css-53u6y8\">\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">\u201c<em class=\"css-2fg4z9 e1gzwzxm0\">All<\/em> societies are constructions in the face of chaos,\u201d write Berger and Luckmann. Because norms are summaries of our common sense, norm violation is the essence of terrorism \u2014 terrifying because it repudiates the most taken-for-granted social certainties. \u201cNorm violation creates an attentive audience beyond the target of terror,\u201d <a href=\"https:\/\/www.goodreads.com\/book\/show\/2379169.Political_Terrorism?from_search=true&amp;from_srp=true&amp;qid=9qs14VkRJ3&amp;rank=5\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">write<\/a> Alex P. Schmid and Albert J. Jongman in \u201cPolitical Terrorism,\u201d a widely cited text on the subject. Everyone experiences the shock, disorientation, and fear. The legitimacy and continuity of our institutions are essential because they buffer us from chaos by formalizing our common sense.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">Deaths of kings and peaceful transfers of power in democracies are critical moments that heighten society\u2019s vulnerability. The norms and laws that guide these junctures are rightly treated with maximum gravity. Mr. Trump and his allies prosecuted an election-fraud disinformation campaign that ultimately translated into violence. It took direct aim at American democracy\u2019s point of maximum institutional vulnerability and its most fundamental norms. As such, it qualifies as a form of epistemic terrorism, an extreme expression of epistemic chaos. Mr. Zuckerberg\u2019s determination to lend his economic machine to the cause makes him an accessory to this assault.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"css-79elbk\" data-testid=\"photoviewer-wrapper\">\n<div class=\"css-1ejtqg1 ehw59r12\" data-testid=\"photoviewer-children\">\n<div class=\"css-tux0zj ehw59r13\" data-testid=\"photoviewer-overlay\">\n<div class=\"css-h7jfto ehw59r14\">\n<div>\n<div class=\"css-8h527k\">\n<div class=\"css-1xdhyk6 erfvjey0\"><picture class=\"css-1j5kxti\"><\/picture>\n<div class=\"css-8h527k\">\n<div data-testid=\"lazyimage-container\"><picture class=\"css-1j5kxti\"><source srcset=\"https:\/\/static01.nyt.com\/images\/2021\/01\/29\/opinion\/sunday\/29Zuboff3\/29Zuboff3-mobileMasterAt3x.jpg?quality=75&amp;auto=webp&amp;disable=upscale&amp;width=600\" media=\"(max-width: 599px) and (min-device-pixel-ratio: 3),(max-width: 599px) and (-webkit-min-device-pixel-ratio: 3),(max-width: 599px) and (min-resolution: 3dppx),(max-width: 599px) and (min-resolution: 288dpi)\" \/><source srcset=\"https:\/\/static01.nyt.com\/images\/2021\/01\/29\/opinion\/sunday\/29Zuboff3\/29Zuboff3-mobileMasterAt3x.jpg?quality=75&amp;auto=webp&amp;disable=upscale&amp;width=1200\" media=\"(max-width: 599px) and (min-device-pixel-ratio: 2),(max-width: 599px) and (-webkit-min-device-pixel-ratio: 2),(max-width: 599px) and (min-resolution: 2dppx),(max-width: 599px) and (min-resolution: 192dpi)\" \/><source srcset=\"https:\/\/static01.nyt.com\/images\/2021\/01\/29\/opinion\/sunday\/29Zuboff3\/29Zuboff3-mobileMasterAt3x.jpg?quality=75&amp;auto=webp&amp;disable=upscale&amp;width=1800\" media=\"(max-width: 599px) and (min-device-pixel-ratio: 1),(max-width: 599px) and (-webkit-min-device-pixel-ratio: 1),(max-width: 599px) and (min-resolution: 1dppx),(max-width: 599px) and (min-resolution: 96dpi)\" \/><img decoding=\"async\" class=\"css-1m50asq aligncenter\" src=\"https:\/\/static01.nyt.com\/images\/2021\/01\/29\/opinion\/sunday\/29Zuboff3\/29Zuboff3-articleLarge.jpg?quality=75&amp;auto=webp&amp;disable=upscale\" sizes=\"((min-width: 600px) and (max-width: 1004px)) 84vw, (min-width: 1005px) 60vw, 100vw\" srcset=\"https:\/\/static01.nyt.com\/images\/2021\/01\/29\/opinion\/sunday\/29Zuboff3\/29Zuboff3-articleLarge.jpg?quality=90&amp;auto=webp 600w,https:\/\/static01.nyt.com\/images\/2021\/01\/29\/opinion\/sunday\/29Zuboff3\/29Zuboff3-jumbo.jpg?quality=90&amp;auto=webp 1024w,https:\/\/static01.nyt.com\/images\/2021\/01\/29\/opinion\/sunday\/29Zuboff3\/29Zuboff3-superJumbo.jpg?quality=90&amp;auto=webp 2048w\" \/><\/picture><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<section class=\"meteredContent css-1r7ky0e\">\n<div class=\"css-79elbk\" data-testid=\"photoviewer-wrapper\">\n<div class=\"css-1a48zt4 ehw59r15\" style=\"text-align: center;\" data-testid=\"photoviewer-children\">\n<figure class=\"css-jcw7oy e1g7ppur0\" role=\"group\" aria-label=\"media\"><figcaption class=\"css-1l44abu ewdxa0s0\"><strong><span class=\"css-cnj6d5 e1z0qqy90\"><span class=\"css-1ly73wi e1tej78p0\">Credit&#8230;<\/span>Jeff Chiu\/Associated Press<\/span><\/strong><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"css-1fanzo5 StoryBodyCompanionColumn\">\n<div class=\"css-53u6y8\">\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">Like baseball, everyday reality is an adventure that begins and ends at home base, where we are safe. No society can police everything all the time, least of all a democratic society. A healthy society rests on a consensus about what is a deviation and what is normal. We venture out from the norm, but we know the difference between the outfield and home, the reality of everyday life. Without that, as we have now experienced, things fall apart. Democrats drinking blood? Sure, why not? Hydroxychloroquine for Covid-19? Right this way! Storm the Capitol and make Mr. Trump dictator? Yeah, we\u2019ve got that!<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">Society renews itself as common sense evolves. This requires trustworthy, transparent, respectful institutions of social discourse, especially when we disagree. Instead we are saddled with the opposite, nearly 20 years into a world dominated by a political-economic institution that operates as a chaos machine for hire, in which norm violation is key to revenue.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">Social media\u2019s no-longer-young men defend their chaos machines with a twisted rendition of First Amendment rights. Social media is not a public square but a private one governed by machine operations and their economic imperatives, incapable of, and uninterested in, distinguishing truth from lies or renewal from destruction.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">For many who hold freedom of speech as a sacred right, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes\u2019s 1919 dissenting opinion in <a href=\"http:\/\/www.law.cornell.edu\/supct\/html\/historics\/USSC_CR_0250_0616_ZD.html\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">Abrams v. United States<\/a> is a touchstone. \u201cThe ultimate good desired is better reached by free trade in ideas,\u201d he wrote. \u201cThe best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market.\u201d The corrupt information that dominates the private square does not rise to the top of a free and fair competition of ideas. It wins in a rigged game. No democracy can survive this game.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"css-1fanzo5 StoryBodyCompanionColumn\">\n<div class=\"css-53u6y8\">\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">Our susceptibility to the destruction of common sense reflects a young information civilization that has not yet found its footing in democracy. Unless we interrupt surveillance economics and revoke the license to steal that legitimates its antisocial operations, the other coup will continue to strengthen and produce fresh crises. What must be done now?<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"link-6aba267e\" class=\"css-ow6j0y eoo0vm40\">Three Principles for the Third Decade<\/h2>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">Let\u2019s begin with a thought experiment: Imagine a 20th century with no federal laws to regulate child labor or assert standards for workers\u2019 wages, hours and safety; no workers\u2019 rights to join a union, strike or bargain collectively; no consumer rights; and no governmental institutions to oversee laws and policies intended to make the industrial century safe for democracy. Instead, each company was left to decide for itself what rights it would recognize, what policies and practices it would employ and how its profits would be distributed. Fortunately, those rights, laws and institutions did exist, invented by people over decades across the world\u2019s democracies. As important as those extraordinary inventions remain, they do not protect us from the epistemic coup and its anti-democratic effects.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">The deficit reflects a larger pattern: The United States and the world\u2019s other liberal democracies have thus far failed to construct a coherent political vision of a digital century that advances democratic values, principles and government. While the Chinese have designed and deployed digital technologies to advance their system of authoritarian rule, the West has remained compromised and ambivalent.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">This failure has left a void where democracy should be, and the dangerous result has been a two-decade drift toward private systems of surveillance and behavioral control outside the constraints of democratic governance. This is the road to the final stage of the epistemic coup<em class=\"css-2fg4z9 e1gzwzxm0\">. <\/em>The result is that our democracies march naked into the third decade without the new charters of rights, legal frameworks and institutional forms necessary to ensure a digital future that is compatible with the aspirations of a democratic society.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">We are still in the early days of an information civilization. The third decade is our opportunity to match the ingenuity and determination of our 20th-century forebears by building the foundations for a democratic digital century.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">Democracy is under the kind of siege that only democracy can end. If we are to defeat the epistemic coup, then democracy must be the protagonist.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">I offer three principles that can help guide these beginnings:<\/p>\n<h3 id=\"link-3533a36d\" class=\"css-e307km e1gnsphs0\"><strong class=\"css-8qgvsz ebyp5n10\">The democratic rule of law<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">The digital must live in democracy\u2019s house, not as an arsonist but as a member of the family, subject to and thriving on its laws and values. The sleeping giant of democracy finally stirs, with important legislative and legal initiatives underway in America and Europe. In the United States, <a href=\"https:\/\/epic.org\/GradingOnACurve\/EPIC-GradingOnACurve-Apr2020.pdf\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">five comprehensive bills<\/a>, <a href=\"https:\/\/epic.org\/GradingOnACurve\/EPIC-GradingOnACurve-Apr2020.pdf\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">15 related bills,<\/a> and one <a href=\"https:\/\/www.brown.senate.gov\/newsroom\/press\/release\/brown-proposal-protect-consumers-privacy\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">important legislative proposal<\/a>, each with material significance for surveillance capitalism, were introduced in Congress from 2019 to mid-2020. Californians welcomed <a href=\"https:\/\/www.brookings.edu\/blog\/techtank\/2020\/11\/17\/by-passing-proposition-24-california-voters-up-the-ante-on-federal-privacy-law\/\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">landmark privacy legislation<\/a>. In 2020 the Congressional Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial and Administrative Law issued <a href=\"https:\/\/judiciary.house.gov\/uploadedfiles\/competition_in_digital_markets.pdf\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">a far-reaching analysis<\/a> of the antitrust case against the tech giants. In October the Department of Justice, joined by 11 states, initiated <a href=\"https:\/\/www.justice.gov\/opa\/pr\/justice-department-sues-monopolist-google-violating-antitrust-laws\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">a federal antitrust suit<\/a> against Google for abuse of its online search monopoly. By December the Federal Trade Commission filed a <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ftc.gov\/news-events\/press-releases\/2020\/12\/ftc-sues-facebook-illegal-monopolization\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">landmark lawsuit<\/a> against Facebook for anticompetitive actions, joined by <a href=\"https:\/\/www.bloomberg.com\/news\/articles\/2020-12-09\/facebook-sued-by-u-s-states-in-antitrust-case-ftc-says-kihu8t8l?utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&amp;utm_medium=social&amp;utm_content=business&amp;cmpid=socialflow-twitter-business&amp;utm_source=twitter\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">a suit<\/a> from 48 attorneys general. Those were swiftly followed by a <a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonpost.com\/technology\/2020\/12\/17\/google-search-antitrust-lawsuit\/\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">suit launched by 38 attorneys general<\/a> challenging Google\u2019s core search engine as an anticompetitive means of blocking rivals and privileging its own services.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"css-1fanzo5 StoryBodyCompanionColumn\">\n<div class=\"css-53u6y8\">\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">Antitrust arguments are important for two reasons: They signal that democracy is once again on the move, and they legitimate more regulatory attention to companies designated as market dominant. But when it comes to defeating the epistemic coup, the antitrust paradigm falls short. Here\u2019s why.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">The turn to antitrust <a href=\"https:\/\/pubs.aeaweb.org\/doi\/pdfplus\/10.1257\/jep.33.3.94\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">recalls the anticompetitive practices<\/a> and concentrations of economic power in the Gilded Age monopolies. As Tim Wu, an antitrust champion, <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2020\/12\/12\/opinion\/facebook-antitrust.html\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\" >explained<\/a> in The Times, \u201cFacebook\u2019s strategy was similar to John D. Rockefeller\u2019s at Standard Oil during the 1880s. Both companies scanned the horizon of the marketplace, searching for potential competitors, and then bought them or buried them.\u201d He added that \u201cit was precisely this business model that Congress banned in 1890\u201d with the Sherman Antitrust Act.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">It\u2019s true that Facebook, Google and Amazon, among others, are ruthless capitalists as well as ruthless surveillance capitalists, but exclusive focus on their Standard Oil-style monopoly power raises two problems. First, antitrust did not succeed that well, even on the terms of its late-19th- and early-20th-century prosecutors and their aim of ending unfair concentrations of economic power in the oil industry. In 1911 a Supreme Court decision broke up Standard Oil into 34 fossil fuel industry companies. The combined value of the companies proved greater than the original. The largest of the 34 had all the advantages of Standard Oil\u2019s infrastructure and scale and quickly moved toward mergers and acquisitions, becoming fossil fuel empires in their own right, including Exxon and Mobil (which became ExxonMobil), Amoco and Chevron.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">A second and far more significant problem with antitrust is that while it may be important to address anticompetitive practices in ruthless companies, it is not sufficient to address the harms of surveillance capitalism, any more than the 1911 decision addressed the harms of fossil fuel production and consumption. Rather than assess Facebook, Amazon or Google through a 19th-century lens, we should reinterpret the case of Standard Oil from the perspective of our century.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">Another thought experiment: Imagine that the America of 1911 understood the science of climate change. The court\u2019s breakup decision would have addressed Standard Oil\u2019s anticompetitive practices while ignoring the far more consequential case \u2014 that the extraction, refining, sale and use of fossil fuels would destroy the planet. If the jurists and lawmakers of that era had ignored these facts, we would have looked on their actions as a stain on American history.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">Indeed, the court\u2019s decision did ignore the far more pressing threats to American workers and consumers. A historian of American law, Lawrence Friedman, describes the Sherman Antitrust Act as \u201csomething of a fraud\u201d that accomplished little but to satisfy \u201cpolitical needs.\u201d He explains that Congress \u201chad to answer the call for action \u2014 some action, any action \u2014 against the trusts\u201d and the act was their answer. Then as now, people wanted a giant killer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">They turned to law as the only force that could right the balance of power. But it took decades for lawmakers to finally address the real sources of harm by codifying new rights for workers and consumers. The National Labor Relations Act, which guaranteed the right to unionize while regulating the actions of employers, wasn\u2019t enacted until 1935, 45 years after the Sherman Antitrust Act. We do not have 45 years \u2014 or 20 or 10 \u2014 to linger before we address the real harms of the epistemic coup and their causes.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"css-1fanzo5 StoryBodyCompanionColumn\">\n<div class=\"css-53u6y8\">\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">There may be sound antitrust reasons to break up the big tech empires, but carving up Facebook or any of the others into the surveillance capitalist equivalents of Exxon, Chevron and Mobil would not shield us from the clear and present dangers of surveillance capitalism. Our time demands more.<\/p>\n<h3 id=\"link-179618c\" class=\"css-e307km e1gnsphs0\">New conditions summon new rights<\/h3>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">New legal rights are crystallized in response to the changing conditions of life. Justice Louis Brandeis\u2019s commitment to privacy rights, for example, was stimulated by the spread of photography and its ability to invade and steal what was regarded as private.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">A democratic information civilization cannot progress without new charters of epistemic rights that protect citizens from the massive-scale invasion and theft compelled by surveillance economics. During most of the modern age, citizens of democratic societies have regarded a person\u2019s experience as inseparable from the individual \u2014 inalienable. It follows that the right to know about one\u2019s experience has been considered elemental, bonded to each of us like a shadow. We each decide if and how our experience is shared, with whom and for what purpose.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">Writing in 1967, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.law.cornell.edu\/supremecourt\/text\/387\/294#writing-USSC_CR_0387_0294_ZD\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">Justice William Douglas argued<\/a> that the authors of the Bill of Rights believed \u201cthe individual should have the freedom to select for himself the time and circumstances when he will share his secrets with others and decide the extent of that sharing.\u201d That \u201cfreedom to select\u201d is the elemental epistemic right to know ourselves, the cause from which all privacy flows.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">For example, as the natural bearer of such rights, I do not give <a href=\"https:\/\/aws.amazon.com\/about-aws\/whats-new\/2019\/08\/amazon-rekognition-improves-face-analysis\/\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">Amazon\u2019s facial recognition<\/a> the right to know and exploit my fear for targeting and behavioral predictions that benefit others\u2019 commercial aims. It\u2019s not simply that my feelings are not for sale, it\u2019s that my feelings are unsale-able because they are inalienable. I do not give Amazon my fear, but they take it from me anyway<strong class=\"css-8qgvsz ebyp5n10\">,<\/strong> just another data point in the trillions fed to the machines that day.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">Our elemental epistemic rights are not codified in law because they had never come under systematic threat, any more than we have laws to protect our rights to stand up or sit down or yawn.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">But the surveillance capitalists have declared their right to know our lives. Thus dawns a new age, founded on and shielded by the unwritten doctrine of surveillance exceptionalism. Now the once taken-for-granted right to know and to decide who knows about us must be codified in law and protected by democratic institutions, if it is to exist at all.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"css-1fanzo5 StoryBodyCompanionColumn\">\n<div class=\"css-53u6y8\">\n<h3 id=\"link-5a760a15\" class=\"css-e307km e1gnsphs0\">Unprecedented harms demand unprecedented solutions<\/h3>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">Just as new conditions of life reveal the need for new rights, the harms of the epistemic coup require purpose-built solutions. This is how law evolves, growing and adapting from one era to the next.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">When it comes to the new conditions imposed by surveillance capitalism, most discussions about law and regulation focus downstream on arguments about data, including its privacy, accessibility, transparency and portability, or on schemes to buy our acquiescence with (minimal) payments for data. Downstream is where we argue about content moderation and filter bubbles, where lawmakers and citizens stamp their feet at recalcitrant executives.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">Downstream is where the companies want us to be, so consumed in the details of the property contract that we forget the real issue, which is that their property claim itself is illegitimate.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">What unprecedented solutions can address the unprecedented harms of the epistemic coup? First, we go upstream to supply, and we end the data collection operations of commercial surveillance. Upstream, the license to steal works its relentless miracles, employing surveillance strategies to spin the straw of human experience \u2014 my fear, their breakfast conversation, your walk in the park \u2014 into the gold of proprietary data supplies. We need legal frameworks that interrupt and outlaw the massive-scale extraction of human experience. Laws that stop data collection would end surveillance capitalism\u2019s illegitimate supply chains. The algorithms that recommend, microtarget and manipulate, and the millions of behavioral predictions pushed out by the second cannot exist without the trillions of data points fed to them each day.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">Next, we need laws that tie data collection to fundamental rights and data use to public service, addressing the genuine needs of people and communities. Data is no longer the means of information warfare waged on the innocent.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">Third, we disrupt the financial incentives that reward surveillance economics. We can prohibit commercial practices that exert demand for rapacious data collection. Democratic societies have outlawed markets that trade in human organs and babies. Markets that trade in human beings were outlawed, even when they supported whole economies.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">These principles are already shaping democratic action. The Federal Trade Commission initiated a study of social media and video-streaming companies less than a week after filing its case against Facebook and said it intended to \u201clift the hood\u201d of internal operations \u201cto carefully study their engines.\u201d A <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ftc.gov\/system\/files\/documents\/public_statements\/1584150\/joint_statement_of_ftc_commissioners_chopra_slaughter_and_wilson_regarding_social_media_and_video.pdf\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">statement<\/a> by three commissioners took aim at tech companies \u201ccapable of surveilling and monetizing \u2026 our personal lives,\u201d adding that \u201ctoo much about the industry remains dangerously opaque.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"css-1fanzo5 StoryBodyCompanionColumn\">\n<div class=\"css-53u6y8\">\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">Groundbreaking legislative proposals in the European Union and Britain will, if passed, begin to institutionalize the three principles. The <a href=\"https:\/\/ec.europa.eu\/digital-single-market\/en\/digital-services-act-package\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">E.U. framework<\/a> would assert democratic governance over the largest platforms\u2019 black boxes of internal operations, including comprehensive audit and enforcement authority. Fundamental rights and the rule of law would no longer vaporize at the cyberborder, as lawmakers insist on \u201ca safe, predictable, and trusted online environment.\u201d In Britain the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/technology\/2020\/dec\/15\/online-harms-bill-firms-may-face-multibillion-pound-fines-for-content\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">Online Harms Bill<\/a> would establish a legal \u201cduty of care\u201d that would hold the tech companies responsible for public harms and include broad new authorities and enforcement powers.<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-axufdj evys1bk0\">Two sentences <a href=\"http:\/\/www.greenbag.org\/v16n3\/v16n3_articles_campbell.pdf\" class=\"css-1g7m0tk\" title=\"\"  target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">often attributed<\/a> to Justice Brandeis feature in the congressional subcommittee\u2019s impressive antitrust report. \u201cWe must make our choice. We may have democracy, or we may have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we cannot have both.\u201d The statement so relevant to Brandeis\u2019s time remains a pungent commentary on the old capitalism we know, but it ignores the new capitalism that knows us. Unless democracy revokes the license to steal and challenges the fundamental economics and operations of commercial surveillance, the epistemic coup will weaken and eventually transform democracy itself. We must make our choice. We may have democracy, or we may have surveillance society, but we cannot have both. We have a democratic information civilization to build, and there is no time to waste.<\/p>\n<p>_________________________________________________<\/p>\n<p class=\"css-pncxxs etfikam0\" style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><em>Shoshana Zuboff is a professor emeritus at Harvard Business School and the author of<\/em> \u201cThe Age of Surveillance Capitalism.\u201d<\/p>\n<p><em>A version of this article appears in print on <span class=\"css-1dmwf73\" data-testid=\"todays-date\">Jan. 31, 2021<\/span>, Section SR, Page 4 of the New York edition with the headline: The Knowledge Coup.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/section>\n<p><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2021\/01\/29\/opinion\/sunday\/facebook-surveillance-society-technology.html\" >Go to Original &#8211; nytimes.com<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>29 Jan 2021 &#8211; We can have democracy, or we can have a surveillance society, but we cannot have both.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":178528,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[65],"tags":[1235,910,1009,2218,276,1724,1109,911,461],"class_list":["post-178527","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-anglo-america","tag-1235","tag-big-brother","tag-big-tech","tag-brave-new-world","tag-democracy","tag-nsa","tag-spying","tag-surveillance","tag-technology"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/178527","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=178527"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/178527\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/178528"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=178527"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=178527"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=178527"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}