Online censorship and digital surveillance: the relationship between suppression technologies and democratization across countries

ABSTRACT

Using country- and multi-level analyses, we dissect how internet censorship and surveillance obstruct democratization, providing the first cross-national tests of online surveillance effects. Across 63 countries, online government monitoring is negatively associated with democratization, while internet censorship exhibits no additional effect. We theorize that suppression technologies erode democratic progress by thwarting collective action and examine how they affect individual-level disruptive political participation in a sub-sample of 21 countries. Together, these results suggest the need for greater scrutiny of countries that use suppression technologies. Political implications are discussed.

KEYWORDS:

• Government surveillance
• censorship
• democracy
• collective action
• disruptive participation

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes on contributors

Elizabeth Stoycheff is an assistant professor in the Department of Communication and Center for the Study of Citizenship atWayne State University. Her research focuses on the role of new media in democratic development and sustainability.

G. Scott Burgess is a former journalist and doctoral student at Wayne State University. His political communication scholarship intersects new media, incivility, andpartisanship.

Maria Clara Martucci is a doctoral student at Wayne State University. Her areas of interest include political communication, organizational communication, international studies, and new media.

Notes

1 Countries included in country-level analysis: Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Brazil, Cambodia, Canada, China, Colombia, Cuba, Ecuador, Egypt, Estonia, Ethiopia, France, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iran, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Malawi, Malaysia, Mexico, Morocco, Myanmar, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Russia, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, South Africa, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Sudan (North), Syria, Thailand, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United American Emirates, United Kingdom, United States, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Vietnam, Zambia, Zimbabwe. Libya and Iceland were excluded from analysis because Polity IV did not provide 2015 ratings.

2 Countries included in multi-level analyses: Argentina, Bangladesh, Brazil, Colombia, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Kenya, Lebanon, Malaysia, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Russia, South Africa, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Venezuela.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by Waterhouse Family Institute Villanova University.