In days not too long ago, matters of the state had to be kept under wraps. Whether they related to individuals or governance there were always limits. In particular was the need for diplomats to speak with closed lips and on clipped tones. Bandied around were phrases and words that said one thing but meant another. "Frank discussions" meant a yelling match and ‘cordial' suggested nothing was achieved. Much was the care with which diplomatic cables were sent and meeting minutes maintained.
Partly due to the United States' constitutional requirements of releasing such sensitive information after a significant passage of time and partly due to pesky elements such as hackers and the likes of Julian Assange it has all changed. Suddenly documents were leaked, whistleblowers emerged, and apparently nothing was secret anymore. And as governments were worried, the general individual did more than just cringe.
For all the promises and "scouts' honour" pledges, their personal details were made available like dirty linen hung out to dry. Whereas some governments imposed "national security excuses" to jam-up media interest, others just went about with steamrollers on privacy and freedom of expression. Ironically, one group of nations castigated another for doing exactly what they did, albeit under different wrapping.
The UK government hushed up follow-ups to the poisoning of Sergei Skripal, the Russian double agent. The United States agreed to release convicted and notorious Russian Arms dealer Viktor Bout in a prisoner swap for Brittney Griner, the Basketball star apprehended with Hashish oil in her vape canisters. That Griner was preferred to an ex-Marine also in Russian custody for spying left his family aghast. There were obviously no follow-ups. That's the way the world is.
The essential freedom of the individual, whatever remains of it, is, on the surface at least, strongly defended. The relics of privacy among doctor-patients, lawyer-clients and heady in-court journalists' sources continues to be in vogue. Privacy, be it on social media or the internet, is a matter of the past. Buried in the fine print lies clauses few choose to go through on the issue of privacy and how much is passed on to supposed advertisers.
Nothing could be farther from the truth. Good old Facebook was caught with its pants down in passing on the details of billions of users to Cambridge Analytica. Part of this was obtained and used by hackers seeking to influence the 2016 Presidential Elections in the US. A red-faced Mark Zuckerberg faced a Senate Committee, initially denying and then begrudgingly admitting to “unintended” leakage. He promised a fix, changed branding of Facebook to Meta and went about his business. It has just been announced that the matter has been settled at $725 million. It begs the question as to how much Meta profited from it all. At the end of the day it's all about money.
Media and other journalist forums, namely International Consortium of Investigative Journalist, threw the gauntlet down first through the Pandora and then the Panama Papers -- exposing how politicians, oligarchs and even Royal families stashed guns in tax havens. One of their latest casualties was Ericsson -- found guilty of having bribed the Islamic State for smooth movement of equipment and a presence in Iraq. The impact on shareholders has been staggering as the list of criminal cases have been lined up. The company recently settled a $1 billion lawsuit with the US Department of Justice.
The sophisticated equipment of yesterday is more easily available today. For those that can afford it, newer technology is available. That is not for public consumption. For now, privacy as we know it just doesn't exist anymore. The more circumspect among us have avoided Covid vaccination on suspicion of injecting tracking devices in our blood stream or tampering with the body's immune system. There are those that choose to throw away cell phones to prevent tracking and monitoring. Even law enforcers admit to pinpointing perpetrators based on zoning of devices.
There isn't any truly reliable means of privacy protection. Meta had its hands forced but others that have their own versions, such as China, aren't up for any introspection. Information is always available at a price. Every person has a secret they wish to hide. Like it or not, the secret probably is out there somewhere.
Mahmudur Rahman is a writer, columnist, broadcaster, and communications specialist.