Human Rights and Hacktivism
The Cases of Wikileaks and Anonymous
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12930516 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Tom Sorell (0000-0002-7175-1413, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2015 |
| Volume | 7 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 391-410 |
| Publication date | 2015-09-22 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of Human Rights Practice (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1757-9619 • E-ISSN: 1757-9627 |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1093/jhuman/huv012 |
| OpenAlex | W2180743806 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 9 |
| References cited | 19 |
Traditional human rights concepts seem to fit Internet activity when it is broadly allied to conventional political mobilization and when it occurs in human rights-violating jurisdictions. Traditional concepts are strained, however, when Internet activity takes the unconventional form of 'hacktivism', and it occurs in human-rights respecting jurisdictions. Hacktivism is still activism but not always open or democratic activism. Unlike more familiar forms of activism, hacktivism can often be anonymous, sometimes gratuitously so, and can operate with a kind of impunity that its technology seems to afford. Hacktivism is sometimes also claimed to serve interests that transcend those of particular states, that is, the interests of the global population generally. But this claim is implausible if hacktivism is not accountable to anyone. Taking the cases of Wikileaks and Anonymous, I argue that some of the activities of these groups are highly questionable, and that forms of cyberactivism more strongly connected with public displays of protest and legally accountable disclosure are morally superior and cohere better with human rights. This line of thought is, admittedly, easier to articulate in the case of Wikileaks than in the case of Anonymous, whose free-form set of causes and swarm activity are not always attributable to a stable collective entity. The activities of these two groups are chosen for four reasons: because they are both prominent in hacktivism; because they together represent quite a lot of the spectrum of hacktivism; because they have operated at times in concert, and because, in the case of Wikileaks at least, the rationale for its activity is sometimes stated in the language of human rights
Democracy · Human rights · Media studies · Political science · Politics · Sociology · The Internet · World Wide Web · Computer Science · Cybersecurity and Cyber Warfare Studies · Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection · Social Media and Politics · Law
Cień cyfrowy – „zacienione” elementy fandomów internetowych
Cultura de la participación cívica
We are all (not) Anonymous
Explaining Wikileaks and Julian Assange as structural threats to the liberal ideological hegemony of American foreign policy
I Will Not Stand Aside and Watch. I Will Not be Silent”
Four Discourses of Digital Rights
Assessing Cyberattacks in Response to Police Actions in Physical Space
The Morality Behind Supporting Crowdfunding Campaigns for Eco-Hacktivists
I Need Ammunition, Not a Ride
Hacktivism and Cyberwars
Social Movements and Their Technologies
Coding Freedom
Declaration of Independence for Cyberspace
At the margins of Internet governance
Justifying Human Rights
The Swedish Pirate Party and the 2009 European Parliament Election
Interaction between States and Citizens in the Age of the Internet
Beyond WikiLeaks
The Logic of Connective Action
A Sociology of Hackers
| Unique citing works | 9 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1,5 |
| Citation span | 2020 - 2025 (6) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 9 |