The web paradox

Every day, millions of people around the world, carry out searches on search engines such as Google for free. We read millions of articles send emails and post comments on social media platforms for free... Really? The BBC documentary ‘The Cost of Free’, part of the BBC series ‘The Virtual Revolution’ sets out to dismiss this common misbelief by illustrating what the real cost of the web is.

We all see the web as a gift that has made our lives easier and convenient. Today, we are just a click away from any information we require. Years ago, when you needed expert advice you would go to a person who would have that knowledge and expertise; now, we get any information we need through the web. When we search for information on the web we do not have to pay anything, but then again if everything is free, how come Google is one of the world’s most profitable companies?

Well, Google, has figured out a way to transform our free search in a money making machine. Every time we search for something, our search terms, are gathered in Google’s databases. Google then uses this information to refine its search system to achieve targeted advertising. How does this work exactly?

When we search for something, we are telling Google our wants and desires. Basically, what marketers and advertisers search to find for years, we are giving out for free to Google, which has a system that can capture all that information and trade it with them. 

Every time we read something, a cookie tracking device which gives out information about our range of interests is planted on our computer, allowing Google to customise the adverts it gives us. We trade a lot of our privacy when we are online; the more time we spend online, the more information they can get about us, the more they can sell. It appears that the product online is not the content, but us! Every time we use Google, we help them and advertisers and marketers make money.

This process is also known as behavioural targeting and it is deeply worrying if we consider that companies now may have some intimate details of our personal lives. But we are also to blame about this because some of this information, we share willingly on social media networks like Facebook and Twitter. Our profiles and personalised status updates are kept online forever and used for any commercial purposes the social network providers fancy.

Another issue of the lack of privacy is that web content is pretty much permanent; our profiles, pictures and videos we share, will remain there forever, making it very easy for somebody to search about us.Have you ever tried ‘googling’ your name, to see what comes up? Because if you have not it is very likely that your future employer will, so be cautious when posting stuff online which you might regret later.

Unfortunately, the cost of using the web, in unclear for us and we do not realise how vulnerable we become by exposing so much information about our personal lives online. Are we walking blind into surveillance or do we realise the current position we put ourselves in and just feel that giving away all of this information is a fair exchange for what we get in return? Our privacy has become a commodity in return for a convenient and free online space. Is this a win-win situation then? 

Learn more about Google's philosophy here & more on how Google makes money here

A modern example of War Spin

Last Wednesday, on our first class in Contemporary Theory and Issues in Public Relations, we watched a documentary by BBC called ‘War Spin’. If you haven’t heard of it before, ‘War Spin’, a BBC Correspondent documentary, is about how the US and British governments and military forces mislead and misinformed the public during the 2003 Iraq war. I have to say that I’ve never had an eye for politics, but anybody who watches this video can clearly see how propaganda and ‘spin’ are used in modern time public communication. 

According to Garth S. Jowett and Victoria O'Donnell (2006), spin or news management, (which implies propaganda) refers to “a coordinated strategy to minimise negative information and present in favourable light a story that could be damaging to self- interests” (p.3). Shawn J. Parry- Giles (2002) defined propaganda as “conceived of as strategically devised messages that are disseminated to masses of people by an institution for the purpose of generating action benefiting its source” (cited in Jowett and O’Donnell, 2006, p.5). This, as you will come to realise by reading the following story, is exactly the communication strategy the allies used during the Iraq war.
 
As the public’s opposition to the war grew stronger, something had to be done in order to regain their trust and support. So, the US Government, decided to appeal to people’s emotions by staging the rescue of a young Private, named, Jessica Lynch. The only true fact about this story was that Private Lynch had been taken to a hospital after being captured by Iraqis. What followed thereafter, was a ‘Hollywood film production’ by the US government that was broadcasted by every major news channel in the US, Britain and Australia. 

Although the Pentagon was fully aware that the hospital, where Private Lynch was being kept, had been cleared from the Iraqi troops the previous day, US Army Rangers and Navy Seals forced their way in there to ‘rescue’ her, by breaking doors and restraining doctors and other patients. Later, the Pentagon ordered a press conference to present a five-minute video of the rescue. I note here that the certain video was the only source of information regarding the incident. 

At the press meetings, the US Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defence would not offer any clear answers for the questions posed by journalists or give out any specific information about the incident. Conveniently enough, Private Lynch had suffered amnesia so she could not make any statements. 

Every bit of information was ‘spun’ in order to be presented in a way that would favour the party; from lying about Lynch’s stab and shot wounds (which were non-existent), claiming that she had gone down fighting (she later stated that her gun got stuck), the (mis)treatment she had received at the hospital (she received the best treatment available).
 
This event coincided with a lot of spinning that was taking place at that time of the war. For instance, the US government had embedded with the military 600 journalists who were being fed only with information which the government wished to release. In the process, they lied about war progress; they broadcasted videos of friendly football matches between local children and soldiers and of Iraqis surrendering, to show that enemy troops were leaning. As if that wasn’t enough, when the US military fired missiles in a residential area which killed civilians, they blamed the Iraqi military. 

The fact that reality can be so distorted and that people can be so ignorant about it amazes me. Unfortunately, at that point, their tactics were successful and they managed to lure the public on their side.


This is a part from the BBC Correspondent documentary which shed light on the true story:
 

 >

References: Jowett, G. and O'Donnell, V., (2006). Propaganda and Persuasion. 4th ed. Sage Publications Inc.

To read the whole story behind  Private Lynch's rescue visit:  http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/may2003/jess-m23.shtml