Supply failures, derived from infrastructure problems, point to being the cause that would explain a good part of the scenario. The proposal to block the internet as a way to control the violence derived from the protests is described by analysts and regulators as nonsense.
Days ago an intense debate started in Colombia about the idea of blocking the internet or suspending the use of social networks as a means to contain violence in social protests.
The discussion, which started as a hypothetical matter aired on the radio (widely branded by experts as “nonsense” or “delusional”), suffered a kind of forced landing in the most immediate reality on Tuesday night, when network users Socialists in Siloé widely complained about not being able to broadcast live or consult platforms (especially video content) during one more night of violence in Cali.
On Wednesday morning, the organization Netblocks (which monitors internet traffic globally) published a document detailing major failures in the internet supply in Cali, with a very pronounced peak around 4:30 pm and one more. mild and progressive over the end of the day.
These data coincide with complaints from users in Cali who were unable to fully connect to the network or who, in some cases, were able to do so only for some functions on certain platforms. “The Internet and the networks are like our umbilical cord these days,” said one of the people who reported failures and intermittence in the service.
So, has there been an internet blockage during the social outbreak derived from the national strike, particularly last night in Cali?
The first thing that experts in digital security indicate is that the Netblocks report identifies interruptions in the service, which does not necessarily equal blockages. In that vein, Movistar did report supply failures for domestic users in Cali (Aguablanca district) due to the cutting of fiber optic cables. The company explained that in a vandalism incident, copper connections were stolen from a facility on the company’s grounds and, when the copper cables were taken, the fiber optic cables were also cut.
The operator assures that since yesterday he has tried to access the area with repair crews, but it has not been possible due to the security situation. On Wednesday morning they tried to do so, even without uniforms, but people at the scene prevented access to carry out repairs.
Due to these damages, Movistar assures that there are some 7,000 users without fixed domestic broadband service. Apart from this specific impact, the company assures that it was able to find other roads for the rest of the traffic and thus maintain normal operation in the rest of the city. This part of normality covers mobile networks. This is a striking fact because, then, why were some users unable to broadcast what was happening on the street live or share videos?
Follow the news of El Espectador on Google NewsFor its part, Emcali (the other company highlighted in the Netblocks report), assured through a statement that “our fixed internet access service has been working in optimal conditions for our internet clients. Likewise, massive interruptions in the provision of public services or telecommunications are not intentionally carried out ”.
From the Communications Regulation Commission (CRC) they categorically assure that “we have no reports of blockages by the authorities, what we do know is that there have been service interruptions due to infrastructure damage that could not be solved in time or due to equipment failures, which is something normal that happens ”, says Sergio Martínez, director of the CRC.
In the next line, Martínez says that “at no time are we going to endorse or order or indicate that the internet be blocked or closed. Those are very unfortunate ideas that have come up. But we must be certain that, on the part of the CRC, we are never going to issue a mandate of this type, because that undermines freedom and democracy in Colombia ”.
And he affirms that “if there are service problems, it is because it has not been possible to make repairs and maintenance, as well as congestion. We have a very serious situation of the same affectation of public services during this conjuncture ”.
In the opinion of a communications analyst, somewhat in line with what operators and the regulator say, the evidence so far indicates that there was no central blockade, by civil entities, of internet communications for the night of this Tuesday. It is worth clarifying here that the time of Movistar’s fiber optic break coincides, according to the company, with the first peak of failures reported by Netblocks.
Also read: The ghost of shortages begins to become real
The other spike in service decline remains somewhat unexplained. User reports indicated intermittence in supply possibilities (what could be done or increased) or a total drop in it. This newspaper consulted the police about the possibility that it had deployed equipment that interferes with communications in Cali, but did not receive a response in this regard.
“Closing the internet is an irrational state of the conversation. Where it has been done are sites with authoritarian regimes, often during elections, and in some cases it has been as a form of minority control. India, for example, has done it in the north of that country. Now, that is overstudied and measured: the impacts this has on the economy are brutal, ”explains Carolina Botero, director of the Karisma Foundation, one of the leading organizations in Latin America on issues of the exercise of digital rights.
What Botero says is interesting because, without leaving aside the effects on fundamental rights (such as freedom of expression), a blockade of the internet (or social networks) ends up being another blow to the fragile situation of entrepreneurs and small businessmen who have migrated (forced or not) to digital channels to stay afloat during the pandemic. This above the rest of citizens who study and work thanks to the possibilities of virtualization.
In other words, seeking to interrupt internet traffic as a strategy to return to normalcy is just one more step in the opposite direction to economic recovery, stability and productivity, all words that operate as a mantra in the discourse of those who ask for a absurd measure.
“There can be no State control over the flow of information on the platforms. That is a standard and you have to be clear about it. If it happens, you have to call it what it is: censorship. And it seeks to limit the debate that is taking place, especially in the context of the demonstrations, ”says Jonathan Bock, director of the Foundation for Press Freedom.
Bock goes to the most macro background of the matter: the effects on freedom of expression, which have local characteristics and are more granular in Colombia. It must be understood that in the Colombian context there is very little plurality of communication media in small or intermediate cities; if there were no social networks we would have 80% less information than we have now. Sure, there is misinformation and that is part of the great discussion that there is, but that cannot be the workhorse to shut down the internet and social networks ”.
All the voices consulted agree in stating that thinking about an internet blockade is a possibility that benefits no one and assumes the matter from the wrong side: the internet is a tool that serves many things, in the same way as a hammer It is used to build a house or to smash someone else’s head. The problem is not the hammer.
The possibility of blocking the internet at a time like the one Colombia is going through is also disproportionate in terms of digital interventions.
Both nationally and internationally, there are a series of standards for when communication channels such as the network must be restricted: these interventions must have a margin of proportionality between the impact they generate against the objective pursued. As already stated, manipulating the network would bring social and economic consequences on a national scale, with possible results that are more than questionable.
Botero puts it this way: “Without a doubt in a moment of protest what you cannot forget is freedom of expression. And social media is where anyone expresses himself. What was the success in terms of internet innovation ?: It stopped being a one-to-many communication medium, like any of the previous media; what the internet achieves is to open a means of communication for everyone. For example, I do not need television or radio to speak and potentially whoever listens to me. In the end, a few years ago that was done through web pages. But web 2.0 is spoken with platforms that allow anyone to speak. And that is key in a moment with this one ”.
Also read: State of inner commotion: what it is and how to understand it
In the end, the internet (and the networks in it) are a virtual extension of the world’s problems that happen away from the keyboard. The suppression of communication aims to logistically suffocate a social phenomenon that has its seat in the tangible world, not in the virtual one. In other words, intervening the network would be something like the equivalent of destroying the mirror because the image it reflects is not convincing.
What would happen to the internet during a state of inner turmoil? Bock responds: “You have to be prepared. What is clear is that we are in a circumstance in which guarantees for the free exercise of freedom of expression cannot be taken for granted. We are in a scenario in which the Army commander is saying that the Public Force does it well, but we register that 60% of the direct attacks against the press are by the authorities: they are not attempts to control a risk scenario, but that seek to intimidate and generate fear in reporters. It seeks to control a lot the narrative and what is being told on social networks ”.
