Uzbekistan: Internet Censorship is Overrated
Media and Internet, Uzbekistan8 Comments
Internet censorship in Uzbekistan has been visibly ever-present (ENG) and, at the same time, publicly denied by the government on numerous occasions. The issue, although not as pressing as imprisonment of human rights activists, economic decline and political corruption, is undoubtedly crucial for distant perspective of democratic developments in the country and, unfortunately, is here to stay. However, it is worth to tone down emotions and ask just how effective is the Internet censorship in the country that is slowly embracing the development of new technologies.
Online censorship in the country affects only a small number of users. Let’s face it, Internet in Uzbekistan is still pretty much an attribute of a “lavish” lifestyle of local elites and expatriates. Even with the growing number of Internet cafés (mainly in the capital Tashkent) with affordable prices, only small amount of population can still be considered “wired.” Uzbek official statistics proudly claims that there are more than 2 million Internet users in the country (ENG). Two million may seem like a big – and surely exaggerated – number but in a country with 27 million people it is only 7 percent of the total population. Compare it with 25 percent of users in China, 34 in Iran and 27 in Russia and you will see that 7 percent is hardy a significant number to make any difference within a country.
A dial-up still costs a fortune (around $60 a month for unlimited access) in the country with an average salary of $200 a month. A “high-speed” access (much slower than in most of the countries) could cost more than $200 a month, which is extremely expensive even by the Western standards. In other words, one has to be pretty well-off to enjoy unlimited Internet access in the middle of Central Asia.
Like in many countries, an average Uzbek Internet user spends his/her time sending numerous e-mails, chatting with friends, uploading family photos to Odnoklassniki.ru and Vkontakte.ru (most popular social networks in many former Soviet republics) and playing online games. The majority of those users will never attempt to engage in digital activism even if given an opportunity to do so.
In his “Cute Cat Theory of Web Activism,”(ENG) Ethan Zuckerman claims that the Web mainly serves as an entertainment platform where people exchange cute photographs of their cats and watch videos of funny pets. Indeed, the most popular videos on Youtube, for example, are the ones with Avril Lavigne and a dancing guy. Those pieces of entertainment are far from politics and current issues deciding the faith of the world. Zuckerman says that only when a government blocks popular online entertainment services, do regular Internet users start to realize how oppressive their government is. Fore better or for worse, it did not happen in Uzbekistan yet. The regime briefly went overboard in February 2009 when it blocked an access to Lovejournal.com, a popular blogging platform in the country. But the government quickly backed down after a couple of days.
Internet censorship in Uzbekistan is very easy to circumvent. It becomes more and more difficult to contain information in the era of rapidly developing Internet technologies. For every blocked Web site there are hundreds of mirrors, proxies, cache services, virtual private networks or just something like SESAWE with simple handy tools to bypass any censorship online. That is why it is legitimate to claim that the Internet blockade in Uzbekistan is nothing more than just a naive attempt to stop the unstoppable. Many people motivated enough to gain an access to Ferghana.ru or, well, neweurasia.net can easily do so through numerous proxy services, RSS feeds, e-mails, etc. Local and foreign employees of numerous embassies and already-not-so-numerous international organizations and NGO in Uzbekistan certainly have more Internet freedoms than a regular citizen. Although politically sensitive Web site are also blocked in those organizations, the employees are knowledgeable enough to bypass the restrictions within the matter of seconds.
What really puts the country lagging behind many countries on information superhighway is not the almighty Internet censorship but a simple (and very often ignored) fact that the Internet access is still a luxury that many people cannot afford. Increasing the amount of people with wired laptops may not automatically lead to increased political activism but it will certainly provide an opportunity to make people interested in something more than just a cat playing piano.




“Internet in Uzbekistan is still pretty much an attribute of a ‘lavish’ lifestyle of local elites and expatriates.”
I agree. From my experience in the Eurasian region, I think that ‘word of mouth’ and, in terms of new media, parabolic antennas and mobile phones which you find all the way to the small kışlak are much more important and widespread than the Internet.
Reply
Yes, it’s my feeling, too. Word of mouth and mobile phones are so much more important than conventional Internet.
Reply
Schwartz Reply:
August 10th, 2009 at 12:45 pm
@Pravdin, this is an important question for news services like NE. Is “mobile Web” the future?
Reply
Pravdin Reply:
August 11th, 2009 at 9:10 am
@Schwartz,
Mobile Web in Uzbekistan can be and should be the future if its development is not slowed down by government regulations and, well, pure paranoia. Right now it looks like mobile Web is much less “restricted” and becoming more advanced than a regular Web in the country. The Uzbek flashmob, for example, does a lot of planning and coordination in forums and via mobiles. I am trying not to be too pessimistic, though, since Internet in Uzbekistan has been pretty much free and unregulated before 2002 and experienced harsh censorship after that time.
Reply
internetworldstats.com puts the portion of Internet users in Uzbekistan at 2.4m or 8.8% compared to the all-Asian average of 17.2% (2008). For comparison, Azerbaijan is 18.3%, Kazakhstan 12.4%, Turkmenistan 1.4%, Malaysia 62.8%.
It’s not clear to me, however, whether these stats talk about effective or about potential users, i.e. the percentage of people with reasonable possibility of access to an Internet point. They also say little about the geographic concentration and social-financial background of those who do.
I agree that the Tashkent regime, like its Soviet predecessor did, tends to inflate the stats to boost the image of a ‘developed nation’.
Reply
Pravdin Reply:
August 9th, 2009 at 9:53 pm
@Turgai Sangar,
well, internetworldstats.com had to rely on official statistics. It is very likely that we are talking about “potential” users since 8.8% of population with computers and constant Internet access sounds too optimistic.
Reply
[...] —Pravdin [...]
[...] Любой, кто действительно хочет иметь доступ к сайтам Ferghana.ru или neweurasia.net, легко может это сделать через посреднический сервер, RSS или электронную почту. Местные и иностранные сотрудники посольств и (постоянно убывающих) международных организаций, естественно, имеют больше свободы, чем простые граждане. Хотя политически опасные сайты блокируются и в этих организациях, их сотрудники могут за секунды обойти любую блокировку. —Pravdin [...]