By: Sarish Siddiqui
Tech giants are moderating the Taliban’s social media presence and reopening the debate on what is considered the Internet and who should determine what belongs on it. Twitter and Facebook have struggled to decide what type of content they will police and remove. However, social media companies have changed their mindset since the 2016 election and President Trump’s use of social media. These instances demonstrated how damaging misinformation and conspiracy theories have become; especially in an international crisis.
In the early 1990s and 2000s, the Taliban imposed censorship on telecommunication mediums including television, Internet, and music. Since then, the organization has embraced Facebook, Twitter, and WhatsApp. In 2018, the Taliban posted Twitter messages that contained discrepancies in what the Taliban said happened on Twitter compared to what the media and protection groups stated. As of 2019, Afghanistan has become a country of ten million Internet users, twenty-three million cellphone users, and over one hundred radio stations. About three million Afghan users are active on Facebook Messenger. The Taliban likely has not posted images of its assassinations, reprisal killings, or strict enforcement of Sharia law due to its fear of being completely banned from social media. Banning the Taliban from these platforms would likely have an adverse effect on the funding it receives from international organizations, especially since seventy percent of Afghanistan’s budget comes from western governments.
Although the State Department has designated the Pakistani Taliban as a foreign terrorist organization, it has not applied the same label to the Afghan Taliban. Rather, the Treasury Department of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”) has listed the Afghan Taliban as a sanctioned entity. WhatsApp, Facebook, and YouTube have actively terminated Taliban accounts. The relationship the Taliban has with tech organizations may become even more complex. If the Taliban becomes a governing body in Afghanistan, then the Taliban could broadcast misinformation and further draw in recruits and funding. More concerning is that the Afghan government platforms could give the Taliban’s social media posts legitimacy and deceive the West.
Earlier last month, the Taliban criticized Facebook for being promoters of free speech, but not allowing them to publish its information on the platform. The Islamist extremist organization relies on American platforms like Facebook and Twitter to relay its message within and outside of Afghanistan. Organizations affiliated with the Taliban like Mujahid and Suhail Shaheen have active, unverified accounts with hundreds of thousands of followers. Facebook says that it cannot decide what to do about the Afghan government accounts until there is greater clarity on the situation in Afghanistan. Facebook and other platforms face accusations of censorship when it comes to blocking posts expressing extreme viewpoints. These companies face criticism for failing to consider the immediate and long-term effects of giving authoritarian leaders digital assets. Facebook, Youtube, and Twitter do not want to set the international precedent for recognizing or not recognizing the Taliban.
It is important to recognize that the Taliban not only wants to use technology for unregulated propaganda, but also wants to restrict Afghans access to information. The Internet illiteracy in the country only compounds the risk of misinformation being taken as fact. Another fear is that the extremist group may target Afghans who worked with the United States government or military officials. Facebook has provided Afghan users security by locking their profiles and using pop-up alerts on Instagram in Afghanistan to explain how to protect their accounts. These pop-up alerts allow Afghan users to block others from sharing or downloading their profile pictures. Similarly, Twitter has provided securityby working with users to delete old tweets, temporarily suspending their accounts, and limiting visibility of their followers. As this situation unfolds, Afghans have used Twitter to seek safety and protection. Twitter has prioritized enforcing content rules that may violate Twitter policies against glorifying violence, propaganda, and manipulation. Tech companies will likely abide by the Biden administration’s advice in whether the United States will recognize the Taliban as Afghanistan’s government. There is a possibility that the administration will negotiate economic sanctions if the Taliban ends relations with terrorist organizations and protects rather than restricts Afghans access to information on the internet.
Although the Taliban is feigning a moderate image in the media today, it is too early to know whether its new messaging tactic is just better marketing. The organization is well aware that “information war is modern warfare.” There is a serious fear that Afghans may start to lose their access to social media to speak out against their ruthless and oppressive policies. Although companies are determining how to handle this situation, the Taliban does not need to rely solely on social media to gain support within Afghanistan. During the War on Terror, the Taliban did not rely on social media networks to lure recruits because it created an organic network of support. The Taliban used blogs like WordPress sites to tackle the western media’s public narrative of the war, the United States, and its allies. It has established a number of different pathways to relay its message. As an international leader, the United States needs to continue to support human rights and our tech giants need to navigate the difficult decision of censoring the extremist organization’s promotion of free speech.
Student Bio: Sarish Siddiqui is a second-year law student at Suffolk University Law School. She serves as a Staff Member on the Journal of High Technology Law and Director of Fundraising of the Business Law Association. Sarish obtained a Bachelor’s degree in Business Law & Financial Accounting from the University of Massachusetts Amherst.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this blog are the views of the author alone and do not represent the views of JHTL or Suffolk University Law School.
