Public spaces are needed for democratic participation; bringing individuals together to gather, speak, and demand change. Places such as town squares or central streets. However, this is no different in the digital age, as now the idea of public space has gone beyond geography. Online platforms (e.g., Instagram, TikTok) have now become new areas of civic expression. Yet this raises the question about rights, surveillance, and control. Does AI and digital platforms allow us to voice our demands louder, or do they quietly reshape the way we participate in them?
A public space is an environment where a citizen can freely express themselves and engage with one another, whether the place is physical or digital. These spaces have been governed by laws protecting freedom of assembly and speech (outlined in Article 20 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights), but now, these rights come with restrictions, protests being limited by policing measures, surveillance, or safety concerns. Digital spaces have now become the modern ‘town square’, thus bringing people from various backgrounds and borders; nonetheless, these spaces are privately owned and algorithmically regulated, shaping digital platforms through platform policies, data collection practices, and the use of artificial intelligence systems that decide what content is amplified or suppressed.
In 2020, the # ENDSARS protest in Nigeria demonstrated how digital platforms can reshape civic participation. Sparked by the police brutality, young Nigerians started using social media (Twitter) to attract international attention to their issue. Online platforms helped enable organisation, needing no leadership, yet all were still driven by the same purpose. Using hashtags as rallying points and Bitcoins to circumvent government financial restrictions. All these challenges traditional models of protests. The accessibility of viral videos and AI-curated feeds turned local injustice into a global human rights conversation. However, the same accessibility also exposed activists to digital surveillance and misinformation. Twitter’s algorithm amplified emotional content, spreading fear and misinformation, demonstrating that a digital public space empowered by mobilisation can also be made fragile, subject to manipulation by both state and non-state individuals.
Similarly, the 2019 Hong Kong protests utilised digital tools such as Telegram and AirDrop to allow activists to coordinate without triggering surveillance. The physical geography of the city, combined with the digital infrastructure, shaped tactics such as flash mob protests. Now, using AI-driven facial recognition, authorities have implemented new controls over the public. To counter these protesters began wearing masks, using lasers, and disabling CCTV. All that reveals a paradox; the same technology that was helping citizens, which the state is now using for monitoring and suppression.
UNESCO’s (2021) Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence emphasises the importance of AI systems encouraging transparency, accountability, and inclusivity, which is yet to be fully enforced. With AI and digital platforms evolving rapidly, they are transforming the way people communicate within their own communities, while also introducing visibility and control. For SDG 16 to be achieved, digital spaces must be used ethically, fostering civic participation rather than undermining it.
References:
UNESCO. (2021). Recommendation on the ethics of artificial intelligence. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000380455
United Nations. (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights. https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights
BBC News. (2020, October 23). #EndSARS protests: What you need to know about Nigeria’s demonstrations. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-54531449
BBC News. (2019, August 21). Hong Kong protests explained. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-49317695
Grace Villagomez-Akre
RonnieSoope
узнать больше сайт kraken darknet