Orwell got his date wrong – but not much else

Orwell was right about many things, but he got the date wrong.
In an alarming, more sophisticated variant, his dark world of thought control has entered our lives digitally and stealthily with a vengeance, through the Internet.
With its vast global web of virtually instantaneous networks of connectivity, the Internet has spawned something we never expected: an uneven, often savage battleground between real people who are bound by rules of decency and fair play – and invisible, destructive, unaccountable adversaries bent on destroying what stands in their way. The weapons of the latter are hard to identify: anonymous Internet-identities plus armies of bots and trolls, which spread lies, threaten and destroy reputations and sow fear. Thus, what we see today on the Internet is a kind of Gresham’s law (“Bad money drives out good”) writ global as bad ideas and fake news drive away the good, reliable ones from e-mail, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and Google.
What began with so much enthusiasm and hope for an expanded world of knowledge, insights and freedom of expression has degenerated into a Darwinian cyberworld of unaccountable power that prizes outright lies, venom and stealth over truth, decency and human dignity.
The Internet was projected to be the new commons of humanity, a global space where the aims of the community are best served by a free, unimpeded flow of information and ideas between people. With lightning speed it replaced the old, slow ways of reaching out to friends, associates and strangers through landlines, letters and meetings. More dramatic and exhilarating for many were the virtually unlimited treasure houses of books, authoritative articles and videos available at the click of the mouse.
But those slower traditional means of personal and social communication worked well in the past because of two extremely powerful human emotions: shame and the desire to be liked. The basic rules of good manners and fair play were generally observed because the actors were real persons, with real addresses and real reputations to damage and to lose. So they were careful with their language and conduct in public spaces. Being accountable for their words had a disciplinary effect on the manner and tone of interacting people. No one wanted to be sued in court for libel. And it would have brought disgrace on one’s family, friends and peers if one sounded like a vulgar idiot or a shameless peddler of lies. Culture thus provided a strong deterrent to foul language, loutish behaviour and unfounded accusations. Nobody wanted to be known as a certified fool.
But in the new global commons, shame, accountability and decency have been thrown out the window due to technological defaults that require greater velocity of ideas and the freedom to express them. Since the modern commons has a social media audience of billions of “invisible” users, it became an easy target for predators, thieves and criminal minds, protected as they are by their identity masks and weak firewalls.
The very secrecy and unaccountability of the Internet have likewise emboldened unscrupulous governments to wage cyberwar on rival nations and even their own citizens. The recent exposure of Russia’s behind-the-scenes efforts to influence the result of the last US presidential election through the massive, systematic use of bots and trolls highlights the geopolitical games great powers play in the global commons.
More recently, Facebook and Google have been unhinged by a massive, scandalous breach of privacy involving 50 million users in the United States, a crisis of confidence that is scaring customers into deleting their Facebook accounts. These two chilling developments augur a dark age for personal privacy and human freedom.
If George Orwell were alive today, he would undoubtedly be dismayed that we learned so little from his dire warning.