The panopticon of your own device

While we were learning about the Shariah compliance of virtual private networks (VPNs) and how a single typo can lead to a full-blown religious edict, the world outside refused to quit. Why would it? It is a happening place. Of course, the media and punditry industry elites do not believe so. Like an ostrich that buries its head in the sand, they think that the noise within can drown and obscure the reality without. That is why, in the age of AI and social media, Pakistani media exists not as a service tailored to a consumer's needs but as a distraction or perhaps weaponised misdirection that only serves the elite. Don't allow these few English publications and outlets to fool you. Watch primetime content on any mainstream news channel and judge for yourself.

The outside world was a busy place like always. The Trump-Musk-Vance triad, Biden and Putin's rocket diplomacy, Gautam Adani's American indictment, Netanyahu's ICC troubles, and so on. In this din, two things piqued this scribe's interest. A brilliant segment on TikTok's American troubles by inimitable John Oliver and an HBO documentary presented by Ronan Farrow called Surveilled.

The TikTok story is pretty straightforward. Or at least it should be. In April this year, President Biden signed the 'Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act' into law. As is quite evident from the name, this law seeks to protect citizens' data from alleged hostile powers. TikTok's parent company, ByteDance, is thus mandated to divest its US operations by January 19, 2025, or face a nationwide ban. This is done ostensibly due to the concern that TikTok can be compelled to share user data with the Chinese government. Interestingly, the incoming Donald Trump administration could refuse to uphold the ban. Trump is a TikTok star now. So, it might turn out to be a daylong ban.

This is interesting because it was Trump's first administration which sought to ban TikTok in the first place. The intriguing thing is that while investigations were ongoing in the US, the administration did not try to ban the app until something else happened. Aap chronology samjhiye (please understand the chronology). In May 2020, violent melee and skirmishes began between China and India in Ladakh. On June 29, 2020, the Indian government banned 58 Chinese apps, including TikTok. On July 7, the then Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced that the US government was considering banning TikTok. On August 6, Trump signed the executive order promising to ban the platform in the US if ByteDance did not divest in 45 days. On August 14, he signed another order with a new deadline of 90 days. By this time, ByteDance had learned that it had not just faced a ban in the US but also other Indian allies, such as Japan, Australia and Pakistan. After trying to sell its majority shares for a short while, ByteDance then decided to enter litigation. In Pakistan, by October 9, the PTA had banned TikTok out of concerns about indecent, immoral and often religiously insensitive content. When a pushback led to the revocation, being the eternally vigilant little trooper that the PTA is, it banned TikTok again in March 2021. Notice that every time a platform deserves to be banned, it first develops the affliction of obscenity and blasphemy.

Disheartening as this chronology may sound it is not what today's piece is about. Of course, I have questions, but I will keep them for another day. What stands out in this discussion and John Oliver's story is how smart TikTok's algorithm is and what kind of location and biometric data it can collect. According to some users, the report featured that the app helped them understand their own sexuality. What that means is that based on their viewing time of each clip, the algorithm learned before them that they are bisexual, not heterosexual. I will have to take their and Oliver's word for it. Perhaps because each account's viewing experience is strictly tied to its location, my limited experience has only exposed me to substandard clips of wannabe female models, cooking, pets and tech reviews. In this brief window, I totally failed to find the alleged genius of the TikTok algorithm.

But if TikTok can collect your biometric, location and user data, shouldn't it cause concern? This is where the storytellers bury the lede. The problem is not TikTok or any other algorithm. It is the panopticon you have bought in the name of your smartphone. Perhaps Farrow's documentary will help you understand the problem a bit more.

Ronan Farrow is a well-known journalist who writes for The New Yorker and is a child of Woody Alan and Mia Farrow. His documentary is about surveillance software like the NSO Group's Pegasus malware. For the uninitiated, this software can sneak into your devices through messages, activate your cameras, use your microphone, record anything it wants, transmit your data and then disappear. The NSO Group is an Israeli company. Farrow does an excellent job of presenting the thesis. With his credentials and pedigree, he gets access to the NSO headquarters and many other places which is good. However, the whole thing only scratches the surface of the controversy, given the time limitations that come with producing a documentary film. He is most insightful, pointing out that the NSOG isn't the only company in business. By now, governments have developed their own versions. Other private companies, too. And don't forget AI.

But my concern is even simpler. In Snowden's days, the US government had found ways to hack into your devices. Only that your devices were simpler and the internet slower. You may think that the smartphone companies and app developers are on your side in this fight but they are not. Consider how effectively they have made selfie cameras a part of your touchscreens. Now if you want to cover these cameras the screen becomes unusable and you repeatedly get proximity sensor warnings. Likewise, the ability of a single device to collect your biometric, physical activity, location and usage data in such large quantity should alarm you.

If you recall, the Cambridge Analytica controversy centred around an app developed by Aleksandr Kogan called 'This is your digital life', which asked only 120 questions. Based on the data that the app collected, psychographic profiles of Facebook users were developed, which changed the electoral marketing and influence game. Imagine what the repository that your device is can do.

If big tech companies are in your corner, they should give you more customisation controls, such as physically switching off your cameras and microphones. Don't hold your breath.