Human Security in the Digital Age
The world has transitioned from analog communication to digital communication and it has created huge, dramatic impacts to the political economic, social and technological realms. This includes the unprecedented changes in the human security landscape.
Dr. Marianne D. Sison shared that in the Philippines, around 60% are digital media users or those who use the internet, mobile smart phones and social media as channels of communications. As an implication, this means that more people have access to information which up to some extent is empowering as it democratizes the public discourses that are matters of national interest. This also means that more people generate knowledge with the propensity to overload the public with information, some being destructive. With the digital age comes quick fix solutions to many social ills. However, with speed comes issues of legitimacy, efficacy and agency.
The information that circulates in the digital world can either be a blessing or a curse. In the three cases presented including the Philippines, the digital media paved the way for the proliferation of pseudo-propaganda converting troll campaigning to a legitimate public relations mechanism in running campaigns, whether destructive or constructive. It has also been used to expose fake news in Macedonia or has assisted in tracing secret hateful and divisive campaigns stirring up racism in South Africa where social media was weaponized to antagonize businesses run by the whites. The digital media, while a powerful tool to improve our lives, is also a destructive means that threaten human security.
If human security is conceived as people-centered (ul Haq, 1994)[1], the digital media must therefore endeavor the protection of people from chronic threats like hunger, disease or unemployment at the same time the protection from disruptions in their daily lives brought about by conflict, disaster or crimes. In simple terms, digital communication must ensure people’s freedom from fear, freedom from want, freedom from shame and freedom from vulnerability (Tavanti, 2013)[2].
Trolling can create conflict amongst people. Manipulating data algorithms may even lead to world wars. Irresponsible social media posts can severe relationships or dating site-facilitated meet-ups can contribute in the spread of HIV infection. Hunger may result to displaced peoples if technology stalls relief aid or an erroneously sent file can cause one an employment. In the expanded appreciation of human security, the digital age comes as a threat to people if mishandled.
The challenge therefore that we have to take is for all ‘netizens’ or digital media users to become agents of critical conscience. We must cast upon ourselves the solemn obligation of being custodians of the communication processes. As such, we must champion critical and dialectical inquiry. In this day and age, dialogic engagement becomes an imperative so that we can freely engage and question without fear of retribution. We must evoke moral courage among institutions including the government and the individuals to cultivate reflexivity and reflectiveness in order for truth to be told in the sea of lies surrounding us. In this way, we can preserve our humanity – our common security.
Ultimately, the issue of responsibility in the digital communication reminds us of our sense of agency. The digital tools are not end in themselves but are means to more noble end. Responsible use of the digital media rests upon the character we have formed within us. For the government, it must not be used to cover and justify its malfeasance. For the general public, digital communication must help in building bridges that connect and not walls that divide.
[1] Ul Haq, Mahbub. 1994. Human Development Report. United Nations Development Programme. New York Oxford, University Press 1994. Pp 22-40.
[2] Tavanti, Marco. 2013. Frameworks of Sustainable Human Security. World Engagement Institute. http://www.weinstitute.org/human-security.html
