September 21, 2022 - 5:00pm
It seems that states and corporations are coalescing around the idea that, in order to censor someone, turning off their revenue is the place to start.
This week, PayPal cancelled the accounts of the Free Speech Union as well as the “lockdown sceptic” blog, The Daily Sceptic, both run by journalist and political commentator Toby Young. The financial service did not give notice of the specific violation(s) of their “Acceptable Use Policy” that allegedly caused them to cancel the accounts in question. The fact that all of these accounts were targeted in one fell swoop seems to show that PayPal designated these groups and the people behind them as non grata, because of some unidentified political transgression.
You really don’t need to be a fan of any of these groups to see how risky this flex of digital power is. Regardless of anyone’s views of these organisations, a major corporation like PayPal’s refusal to serve people and organisations associated with certain political causes is deeply concerning and dangerous for all of us who value the right to freedom of expression.
The digitalisation of our speech has resulted in a small number of social media companies holding the keys to the modern public square. This has meant that the digitalisation of our financial transactions results in a number of centralised corporations having control over some of the core means by which we exchange capital. Consequently, a vast amount of power is placed in the hands of those corporations as well as governments who may lean on them to act in a way that is beneficial to state interests. The threat that these powers may exercise the levers of financial censorship to completely cut off and shut up groups, organisations, and people, is real.
This is a tactic on the rise. In 2010, publishers at WikiLeaks found themselves subject to the same treatment by PayPal which, alongside other major corporations, exercised an extra-judicial financial blockade against the organisation. Earlier this year, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau froze the bank accounts of Canadian truckers who had protested against state-imposed vaccine mandates in a ruthless attempt to put down the movement. And in the time between, a wave of campaigners and journalists have had the financial rug pulled from under their feet for expressing their entirely lawful, albeit non-conformist, political views. Now, we can add the Daily Sceptic and the FSU to this ever-expanding list.
There is a good reason why some civil liberties campaigners are concerned about the slow march towards a cashless society. There could be no better way to surveil someone than by observing how they spend and receive money. States are already exploring a further centralisation of the financial system through the concept of officially designated central bank digital currencies. We should watch this with caution.
Big Tech executives hope that we won’t push back against their actions. If they chip away at groups and people at the fringes of popular debate, they hope nobody will oppose the political pruning that serves to keep their reputation intact. That’s because there is too little reputational damage caused now for corporate acts of censorship. We ought to remember that our reach for liberty is always curbed at the fringes. To anyone who believes in the right to freedom of speech, it is time to draw a line in the sand and say: no more.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeInteresting perspective on deafness by Mr. Hockney. I wish, though, he’d elaborated on this statement: “The one good thing about my deafness is it has made me perceive space quite differently…. And since I am deeply interested in perception and depiction, of course I’ve noticed this.”
How does an artist of his caliber perceive space differently now he’s deaf? Maybe he’ll address that question in a subsequent essay.
I enjoyed that thank you. Until I have recently lost some hearing, and for a while went completely deaf in one ear, I had greatly underestimated the condition. Sometimes I now guess at what people are saying, often I just nod and smile and hope it was just a pleasantry, God knows what I miss. The bit that doesn’t change is the company of dogs. As ever, peaceful and undemanding. And yes I enjoy my own company even more.
I’ve noticed that and it is difficult to know what to do. Sometimes repeating gets the response that they heard.
Yes this is an intriguing subject, but there is so much more to say on going deaf and how it affects a person’s view of the world, raises perceptions in other ways; and increases a sense of isolation particularly in places where the rest of the world seem so relaxed. Deafness and sight deficiency are not treated equally, as others cannot “see” or as easily comprehend the consequences of partial deafness. Two people speaking at the same time, or simply too quickly, can become create a real problem. Learning languages which I love is a much greater problem, as are understanding the languages you though you knew. Pitch too is often an issue. Hearing aids can even make this worse in certain situations. Face-masks currently make it very difficult indeed to follow conversation with a wearer. David Lodge’s book “Deaf Sentence” has lot to say, but I really want to hear an artist’s view on going deaf, and what David means about perceiving space differently. Love to hear more on this.
If you think about it, deafness (or blindness) is like being in permanent lockdown – or much worse. Many older people lose their hearing to a certain extent and it is often treated as a bit of a joke.
If we are in lockdown for a year and the world keeps talking about ‘mental problems’ what must those mental problems be like when you are cut off by deafness?
A good reminder from Mr Hockney.
Restaurant and pub noise has always been problematic for me, and I have good hearing.
Pipedown.org.uk is one organisation campaigning against recorded background noise/music..
Likewise. I often ask staff to turn down the volume. I remember being in a fairly posh restaurant in a Norfolk coastal town, all the patrons were like me of a certain age, yet the blasted sound system was playing rap. The music is chosen for the staff not the customers.
Quite. I also suspect the music is chosen BY the staff. I love finding bars and restaurants with no piped music or televisions and will always give such places my patronage. Wonderful. The one thing I will entertain, however, is a juke box in a seedy dive. At least then it’s the paying customer who decides the soundtrack.
A jukebox running vintage 45rpm singles – fine.
I can subject other customers to the joy of obscure B-sides.
A digital jukebox allowing one customer to put unlimited tracks on – no way.
Any jukebox containing Hotel California … take appropriate steely knife action!
I was totally deafened in a mountain accident in 1972. In 1991 I had a cochlear implant fitted. This enables me to talk to one person in a quiet environment, though not for too long. It is a boon – still one develops solitary pursuits.
In the later days of apartheid in SA there was something called a banning order which restricted the banned person to meeting with one person at a time. It seems Hockney, like me, has a lifetime banning order.
People think deafness = silence. It does not. One is beset by random noise generated internally – call “tinnitus”. Deafness is a noisy world.
People would like to help and be kind – but this requires communication and they can’t do that, so they retreat perplexed.
People have an erroneous view of lip-reading. With very few exceptions (usually people who went deaf slowly while they were acquiring language) lip-reading without audible clues is not possible. In the 50 odd years I have been deaf I have heard about two such people.
“Deaf” means to most hearing people “hard of hearing” so they tend to think it a mere nuisance (and shout). “Blind” is taken to mean totally blind, though few blind people are.
Maybe in twenty to thirty years there will be way to regrow a damaged hearing system. Until then cochlear implants are marvellous – and being fitted to younger people, and more quickly after trauma, they work much better.
Hockney is consistently interesting!
I often think that deafness is worse that blindness, partly because it is less obvious, but we also tend to think that people with hearing aid can hear normally which is not true as explained. I also think the deaf are being ripped off with promises that expensive private hearing aids are significantly better than the NHS aids. I only know one person who was persuaded to buy expensive hearing aids and she has gone back to the NHS. The article discusses background noise but there are also problems with telephone calls.
I agree with your first sentence. Blind people tend – quite rightly- to get a lot of sympathy. Deaf people are often seen simply as a nuisance or stupid. Humans are social animals, and deafness deprives the sufferer of human contact through conversation.
Deleted
My hearing is normally fine but I can’t pick out individual conversations in noisy places and never could.