Online Repression and Self-Censorship: Evidence from Southeast Asia

Abstract

Governments around the world have crafted new laws to threaten, arrest, prosecute and incarcerate online political activists. While the primary effect of online repression is to silence criticism and forestall collective action, a secondary effect is to induce self-censorship among the masses. Yet scant research examines how self-censorship works, nor discusses its implications for entrenching authoritarianism and encouraging democratic backsliding. This article proposes a simple expected utility model of self-censorship, arguing that citizens will more likely self-censor when the expected costs of online political expression outweigh its benefits. Analysing the fourth wave of the Asian Barometer survey of 10,216 respondents across eight Southeast Asian countries, I find that higher income politically engaged social media users are indeed less likely to express their political opinions. Additionally, this correlation holds in states where online repression is most severe, but is non-existent in countries where online repression is moderate or low.

Subjective Freedom of Speech: Why Do Citizens Think They Cannot Speak Freely?

“…Because self-censorship is a strategic behavior, it is useful to model it as being based on a simple cost–benefit calculus, in which an individual would choose to express themselves if their expected benefits of doing so exceed the associated costs. Following Ong ( 2021 ), we specify a simple expected utility model as where EU express is the expected utility associated with expressing one’s views, B express is the expected benefits from this expression (e.g., a gain in reputation from peers or psychological gratification derived from authentic expression), and C express refers to the cost of expressing oneself (e.g., required knowledge or a costly medium for publishing one’s views). In addition, p sanction represents the probability of an individual to encounter “sanctions” for their expression, and C sanction is the cost associated with these sanctions.…”

“…On the one hand, social media can be viewed as a democratizing technology that allows everyone who has access to the Internet to freely share their opinion with virtually millions of other users around the globe. Social media has thus drastically cut the costs of free expression, C express (Ong 2021 ). On the other hand, the initial enthusiasm about the democratic potential of social media has considerably cooled down in recent years.…”

University autonomy under democratic backsliding: a case study of a plagiarism investigation against Serbian Minister of Finance (2014–2019)

“…In their early stages, (semi-)authoritarian regimes often resort to non-institutional forms of retaliation against 'recalcitrant' actors through smear campaigns, direct threats, and foreclosure of future career opportunities (VonDoepp & Ellett, 2011). This spreads fear, and self-censorship quickly establishes itself as the 'new normal' among observers (Ong, 2021), even when they are not directly pressed or threatened.…”

Best Privacy Practice Recommendations for Global Audio Streaming Platforms

“…Harassment is sometimes clear cut but can also sometimes be subjective with content being viewed as being protected by free speech by those who create it while being viewed as offensive, intimidating and embarrassing by those who are the subject of that content. Past literature shows that victims of harassment are often likely to self censor and not reported as such [61] [62]. Accordingly, an important part of providing people with the safety they need involves providing an environment where possible victims of harassment feel safe and comfortable enough to report it.…”