Written by: Karen Suhaka | July 22, 2017

This is a guest post from Sandra. See the end of the post for more information about the author.

The first seven months of the Trump presidency have been interesting, to say the least. With so much talk about the Russia investigation and the proposed health care reform bills, many have the impression this administration is not really doing much in terms of substantial policy. However, this does not mean it is doing nothing, and it is important to monitor vigilantly what is getting done.

One accomplishment, the passing of US SJRes 34, is particularly concerning, especially for those interested in maintaining a free and open internet for all citizens.

What is US SJRes 34?

This was a joint resolution expressing Congressional disapproval of FCC rules put in place towards the tail end of Obama’s time in office. These rules were designed to help protect the information Internet Service Providers (ISPs) collect about users by requiring these companies to inform customers about their rights regarding opting-in or opting-out of information collection tactics, to notify users of data breaches, and to disclose and obtain consent for selling this information to interested third parties.

This last point is, or should be, the most concerning part of the resolution. Essentially, this turns what you do on the internet into an asset for ISPs to sell to advertisers and other interested parties, and they can do this without your consent. As more and more of our daily lives go online, there is more information available about us, and this has proven to be very valuable to a number of different industries.

What Does It Matter?

We are all aware how much information is recorded about us, whether by Google and Facebook, or the apps we use on our smartphones. Because this is such a common practice, many simply just accept this as a part of modern, digital life and employ the “I’ve got nothing to hide” logic, justifying these practices. However, this is largely because people do not understand exactly how this information is used.

Essentially, when Google, or any other internet company, tracks your data, they are creating a profile about you. Selling browser history and other information to advertisers for a high price then follows. They can say with relative certainty who you are and whether or not the advertisements will be successful. Before the internet, advertisers used to have to try and guess what TV shows their customers liked, where they got their news and what they liked to do, but the internet removes a lot of this guesswork as customer profiles are much more comprehensive.

In some respects, this is a good thing; it’s easier to learn about products and services relevant to your lifestyle. But there is also danger here: information silos and echo chambers. Every time you search for something, whether on Google, Facebook or anywhere else, these search engines attempt to return what they consider to be the most relevant results. The more information they have about you, the more specific these results become, narrowing the information you receive and creating an opportunity where we are only seeing on the web what these companies want us to see.

However, there is a big difference between what Facebook and Google do and what Congress is allowing ISPs to do. For Facebook and Google to collect this information, you need to have an account, be signed in and agree to their terms and conditions, meaning you can choose to deny them the opportunity to collect data on you and sell it to advertisers.

By allowing ISPs to do this without your permission, Congress is removing your right to choose. Every time you are using the internet in the privacy of your own home, your ISP is collecting data on you, and whether you want it to or not, it can then sell that information, producing the same damaging effect on the diversity of the information you receive, but this time without you having any say in the matter.

This should be concerning, as it poses a serious risk to freedom of speech and individual privacy, and it also creates a context for echo chambers to sound louder, which only serves to radicalize views and polarize the political climate.

What Can Be Done?

For those interested in maintaining an open and free internet, there are a few steps that can be taken. Since the resolution has already passed both the House and the Senate, contacting your representatives might not do much at this point. However, working with groups interested in internet freedom to help make this an upcoming election issue could be an effective way to reverse this move by Congress. Combining this initiative with broader issues such as net neutrality could help emphasize the defense of the internet as a key issue of our time.

In the meantime, it is important to take steps to protect yourself against unwanted information collection. For example, use and encourage others to use search engines that don’t track your history, limit yourself to encrypted sites (look for the lock next to the URL), and consider using a Virtual Private Network (VPN) to hide your IP address to operate anonymously online. As more people take these steps, it should become clear to lawmakers the internet is not for sale, tipping the scales back to consumers and away from corporations.

What do you think about US JRes 34 and ISP legislation? How do you plan to take more control over the information collected on you online? Let us know by leaving a comment below.

About the Author: Sandra is an alternative news blogger who focuses mainly on privacy and internet security. She feels the digital revolution has opened the door for people to take control of government and become more involved in social and political affairs, but she is worried surveillance and corporate interest will jeopardize this awesome opportunity.

 

About BillTrack50 – BillTrack50 offers free tools for citizens to easily research legislators and bills across all 50 states and Congress. BillTrack50 also offers professional tools to help organizations with ongoing legislative and regulatory tracking, as well as easy ways to share information both internally and with the public.