The control of personal information is a powerful reality in 2016.
It can be used as a currency on the black market, and as an unregulated asset in shame people off the internet and drive them toward depression or worse, and with “SWAT team.
Controlling and manipulating PII can carry life-changing consequences for individuals. Just as disturbingly, controlling PII could even affect freedom of the press and the health of a democracy.
Last week, The New York Times reported on Finnish journalist Jessikka Aro. As an award-winning investigative reporter for Finland’s state broadcaster, Yle Kioski, Aro decided to cover a powerful contingent of an alleged Russian-based “troll army.” What started as a quest to find truth, turned into a personal nightmare for Aro.
“Everything in my life went to hell thanks to the trolls,” she said.
It all began when she asked her social media audience to share their experiences with this digital horde. At first, she received comments from those who have fought against the trolls, but soon, she faced a “vicious retaliatory campaign of harassment and insults” way beyond her expectations.
Russia and the Ukraine are amidst a high-stakes information war as a result of the geopolitical battles between the two nations. Both employ legions of noisy digital voices to spread misinformation and attack critics and journalists. The pro-Russian voices have become so loud and disruptive, the EU and NATO have set up units to fight back against a crumbling civil discourse and the “well-being of Europe’s democratic order and even its security.”
Finland shares an 830-mile border with Russia, and though it’s not currently in NATO, it’s so concerned about Russia’s actions in the Ukraine that it has started working more with NATO and has even considered joining the alliance.
But not everyone in the Scandanavian country agrees. As the Times reports, the division among the Finnish population makes it “a prime target” for a Russian information campaign.
The price Aro paid for reporting on the trolls was a seemingly endless stream of abusive emails, attempts to tarnish her reputation on social media, and even the posting of a satirical Youtube video in which she’s portrayed as a “delusional bimbo.” Of course, most of these attacks have been conducted under the guise of anonymity.
“There are so many levels of fakery you get lost,” she said. “They fill the information space with so much abuse and conspiracy talk that even sane people start to lose their minds.”
One of her biggest critics, however, is a pro-Putin pundit from Finland. Johan Backman, who does not hide behind anonymity, claims her reporting has benefited Russia because others see how she’s been treated and now back away from criticizing the government. "She says she's a victim, and nobody wants to be a victim," he said. "This changed the atmosphere in the journalistic community." Or in other words, Backman argues the chilling effect on journalists is a good thing.
Strong-arming journalists is nothing new – many around the world are murdered because of their reporting – but Aro’s experiences reflect the growing use of personal information online as a weapon to manipulate and intimidate individuals.
Not long after Aro reported on the Russian “troll army,” she received a call on her mobile phone. All she could hear was gunfire. She then received texts and emails calling her a “NATO whore” and a message from someone claiming to be her late father warning he was watching her.
Aro was also doxxed. Earlier this year, a Finnish-language “news” site – which often vilifies immigrants – uncovered court records that revealed Aro had been arrested in 2004 for drug use. The site falsely called her “a convicted drug dealer” and shared images of her in a Bangkok nightclub.
Though she admitted she had been arrested for drug use at the time, Aro was never convicted for dealing. “They get inside your head,” she said, “and you start thinking: If I do this, what will the trolls do next?”
No doubt privacy is personal. And it's about protecting individuals one at a time. But it's not hard to see how protecting a single person's privacy also protects society as a whole.