Social Media privacy: Big Brother is watching you

Socialising or Publicising

 The world we live in has undergone a major paradigm shift, in terms of how we communicate but more importantly in terms of the level of control or the lack of it, over the content that we communicate.

We have gone from being “private-by-default, public-through-effort” to one that is “public-by-default, private-with-effort” as aptly put by Microsoft principal researcher Danah Boyd.

When people communicate with each other on Facebook for instance, what is meant to be a social interaction between the individual and a group of friends has the potential to become a form of publicity, eclipsing the lifestyle, interests, worldview and idiosyncrasies of the individual and his/her friends, depending on the privacy settings.

Therefore, it is pertinent to have control over our social media platforms, because our fundamental rights of privacy are in jeopardy more than ever before.

The illusion of control

Having a password, switching your settings to private, changing passwords regularly and not using predictable passwords like surname or date of birth and so forth, can be useful ways to prevent your account from hacking and gives you control over it.

However, it is does not necessarily prevent organisations like Facebook from having access to your data and manipulating such data as they dim fit. In fact, it is safe to say that the culture of surveillance is upon us.

Data Mining, Digital Footprint and Data Shadow

Surveillance was defined by D Lyon as any collection and processing of data, whether identifiable or not, for the purpose of influencing or managing those whose data has been garnered.

Thus, it has become very easy to identify an individual, just from his or her web browsing habits and organisations such as AOL profile millions of data containing vital information belonging to users and release these data to researchers, albeit “anonymous”.

The popular saying “on the internet, nobody knows you’re a dog” isn’t completely accurate any longer, because you live a digital footprint or “data trail” of your activities wherever you visit.

From search engine logs, to social network sites, emails, mobile phone calls, CCTV even online purchases and public transport routes are all monitored.

We are constantly being watched either by the government or state under the guise of security or by our employers under the guise of productivity, even work colleagues and friends keeping an eye on what you do and how.

In 2013, the Guardian published an article revealing how the National Security Agency NSA was evading people’s privacy in the US, monitoring Google’s user data religiously as exposed by Edward Snowden who is now wanted by the US government.

The UK as well have their own version of this, named the communications data bill a.k.a “snoopers charter”. They monitor websites we visit, our instant messages, our friends and social media interactions, even the length of internet calls.

And for places like Iran, Egypt, parts of the middle-east, China and North Korea-what you have is a complete internet censorship, underlying the statement that Government is in control of how you communicate.

Does anonymity translate to privacy?

You can make yourself anonymous and protect yourself from being tracked online by hiding your IP (internet protocol) address. 

Your IP address has the capacity to uniquely identify your internet connection and your geographical location, therefore it’s paramount to obscure your header, but it does not protect your information- that requires encrypting your data.

If you’ve got nothing to hide, you’ve got nothing to fear

The government, in an effort to justify mass surveillance have suggested it is needed to catch terrorist. 

The process may not be lawful and what is considered lawful may change from time to time, but “if you have nothing to hide, then you’ve got nothing to fear”.

But it appears the much-favoured mass surveillance doesn’t really work.

What you get is some false sense of accomplishment, possibly a positive identification of a huge number of potential threat, then another huge number of innocent people documented as potential threat, then actually missing a decent number of the real threats and so forth.

The thought that you are being constantly watched and recorded, even if you’re not committing any crime is unnerving. Worse still, the government can use this system to go into your past and accuse you based on your former interactions or indiscretions as observed by Edward Snowden.

It is safe to say, that if you have said anything on the internet that you ought not to have said, you should be worried.

Self-induced Surveillance

Unfortunately, majority of users contribute to and co-operate with the enemy in their own monitoring by participating in online survey, either in the bid to win an iPhone or download some free app.

It is shocking that a lot of people are aware of online surveillance but continue to provide personal information and perpetuate tracking through indiscriminate use of social media.

It turns out that most users are more worried about being exposed to the people that they know than having it monitored and manipulated by government agencies and corporate bodies.

The willingness to surrender personal details to web organisations, despite the dangers associated to it is a type of resignation that occurs when a person believes an undesirable outcome is inevitable and feels powerless to stop it according to Naughton.

The Facebook conspiracy theory

Facebook has been accused severally of sharing user information without their consent, a constant change in the default privacy settings and deliberately making the privacy settings complex to discourage users from protecting themselves.

It has also been alleged to have CIA links, with a centralised surveillance system which although lacked credibility, but raises serious concern.

In her defence, Facebook does appear to be doing enough to address the issues, as recent studies show that users are more privacy savvy and a lot of young users do manage their privacy settings effectively.

Frequent users are more likely to change their default settings while the least skilled are less likely to.

Africa's 'powerful' first ladies

Furtherance to the fall of Zimbabwe’s first lady from grace (no pun intended), alleged to have “usurped” constitutional powers, and aiming to succeed her ageing husband as the next president of Zimbabwe (which would later be her undoing), it’s pertinent to note that Grace Mugabe is not necessarily one of a kind.

Mrs Mugabe famously once said "they say i want to be president. Why not? am i not a Zimbabwean?", but while she may struggle to actualise that dream (at least for now) one woman is actually close to doing precisely that.

South Africa’s Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma is another powerful first lady sort of. Although divorced from President Jacob Zuma, she is a strong contender to succeed her ex-husband come 2019.

Like Grace Mugabe, her main rival too is the deputy president, and the crisis that has plagued Zimbabwe’s Zanu PF could trouble South Africa’s ANC too.

Mrs Mugabe is not the first, and probably won’t be the last first lady to have wielded so much power and influence during her husband’s government and within the ruling party and seemingly above everyone bar one.

Nigeria however is a case study when it comes to “powerful first ladies”.

The role of the first lady became quite significant in Nigeria during the military rule, starting with General Ibrahim Babangida’s government from 1985 to 1993. His late wife Maryam Babangida pioneered the era of Africa’s first ladies.

Prior to that, most wives of presidents or heads of states in Nigeria were private citizens and usually only made ceremonial appearances in the company of their husbands during national events.

But being first lady in that era, was about providing “better life for rural dwellers”- that was the toga of Maryam Babangida’s movement as first lady.

She used her influence as the wife of the head of state and commander-in-chief of the armed forces of Nigeria to gather goodwill (not that many would refuse her under the circumstance), but that was the birth of the first lady syndrome in Nigeria at least.

She even hosted the princess Diana in Lagos in 1990 and seemed to get on very well with her, being conscious of her own status as first lady of Nigeria.

Better life for women

Subsequent first ladies took advantage of this new role to establish their place and “role” in the polity, as the office of the first lady emerged. It became a real thing, a department under the “presidency”.

The wives of the state governors followed suit, each rising to the occasion in their respective states as co-captains with their husbands, with a retinue of staff, ranging from a press crew, to police escorts, ladies in waiting, protocol officers, members of the department of state etcetera, and a deployment of civil servants to “run” the office of the first lady which also became a department under “government house”.

In some cases, the entourage of the first lady has been known to account for more than six vehicles with over 30 personnel despite that most first ladies only attend social functions.

The first lady has steadily evolved into an authority figure and a key member of government, referred to as “her excellency”, no longer just the spouse of the politician, but depending on her ambition or personality, the first lady in Nigeria can make or break and can influence government activities.

In fact a Nigerian first lady can ride the cloak-tail of her husband to secure a top political spot if she so desires.

Until recently when Grace Mugabe burst onto the scene, one could argue that Nigeria has a history of some of the most powerful first ladies, who like Grace can “usurp constitutional powers” and act in multiple capacity as a party echelon, a senior civil servant and as first lady simultaneously.

Nigeria’s former first lady, Dame Patience Jonathan was a quintessential “powerful” first lady. 

Her infamous fall-out with the former governor of Rivers state, now minister for transport Rotimi Amaechi is one out of many public display of power during her husband’s time as president where Mrs Jonathan made it clear who was the boss.

In 2014, she had a public meltdown when 276 girls were abducted from their school by the Boko Haram terror group, as she summoned the school authorities to her office and demanded some explanations.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMwIkuoAMj0

One would have expected a more formal process to follow such a serious incident as the kidnap of 276 girls, probably an enquiry or a select committee of some sort to probe the matter, not a summon to the office of the first lady, but such was the depth of the powers of “her excellency”.

“First lady is calling you to help you” she famously ranted, whilst addressing the staff of Chibok secondary school where the girls were kidnapped.

One of the major criticisms levelled against Jonathan’s Government apart from allegations of embezzlement and corruption was the meddling of his wife in government and party affairs and how she appeared to have much influence.

Laying down the law

A former first lady of Nigeria once gave instructions that under no circumstance, should the wives of governors be addressed as “first ladies”, because she is the only first lady of the country.

It became official; all wives of the governors were indeed addressed as “wife of the governor” in their correspondences and when they were addressed in public.

This caused a bit of a problem, because some of the women wanted the title of first lady but didn’t want to incur the wrath of the ultimate first lady so had to settle for the less glamorous title of “wife of”.

But what exactly is the job of a first lady?

In a society where women still face gross inequality, one would think that a Grace Mugabe should be a breath of fresh air, particularly amongst other African women, so why is an ambitious woman vilified?

Why was Patience Jonathan berated and told repeatedly to stay off the spotlight?

Why is Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma referred to as Jacob Zuma’s ex-wife, without acknowledging her role in the anti-apartheid struggle or the fact that she served as minister since 1994, way before her husband became president?

Rather than view Grace Mugabe as an opportunistic former typist, how about a dogged determined woman from a humble background, who dares to believe in the impossible and could pioneer a new generation of strong African women?

Perhaps Grace Mugabe, like her counterparts, feels the need to go above and beyond to get respect having been relegated to the background for so long and possibly no longer want to be addressed as “wife of” any longer, only time will tell.

In the meantime, will “powerful women” who “usurp” their husband’s position to lord it over other people take a cue from Grace Mugabe? I’m talking our “first ladies” and “mummy GOs” and “Oga madams”.

Every first lady who feels passionate about issues in government, should get involved. Like Michelle Obama, strong and legitimate, yet never undermined nor jeopardised her husband nor came across as meddling.

Our “powerful” African first ladies need to chart a new course.

Negotiating Christianity…A Lithuania case study for Africa

A Country of Cathedrals, Monasteries and Convents

The Pensive Christ...a symbol of distress, agony and injustice

Vilnius, capital of Lithuania is one place I was looking forward to visiting not because of any recommendation I read on trip advisor or as a favourite holiday destination, but simply because I found out that one of my favourite people in the world…a certain Mr Zydrunas Savickas (four times world strongest man) could be found at his gym in Vilnius and as I packed my suitcase, I prepared for a likelihood of having a workout with “Big Z” at his gym as I have been told this is possible. After Barrack Obama and Lebron James, Savickas is one person I am desperate to meet one on one, so imagine my excitement.

Getting to Lithuania however, I was amazed at the amount of massive churches, monasteries, convents and cathedrals scattered across the major cities.

 I was attending a conference on social entrepreneurship as part of an Erasmus project, but I couldn’t ignore the magnitude of these churches. Some look like they’ve been around for a long time, some probably a few hundreds of years ago and I began to wonder if Lithuania is that religious to the point that there is a massive church in every corner…a bit like Nigeria, hence my sudden interest.

However, the purpose of this blog stem from the moment I entered into one of these churches in Druskininkai built within a monastery and whilst admiring the beautiful church, I noticed a few pagan emblems and symbols side by side the Roman catholic symbols.

Above the crucifix, was the all-seeing eye which many Nigerian Christians I know interpret as the symbol of the Illuminati or something sinister. 

I for sure know that the all-seeing eye is a pagan symbol originally meant to signify the presence of God as a constant watchful caretaker. But why are pagan symbols blatantly displayed alongside modern Catholic décor I asked and this led to an history lesson from the local priest who gave a quick explanation about the syncretism of pagan worship, Eastern orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism in what has now become a hybrid Christian identity of modern Lithuania.

Syncretism at it's finest

Doing a bit of reading, I realised that in fact, Lithuania was the very last Pagan country in Europe to be converted to Christianity and it was not a walk in the park at all, as Lithuanians resisted the new religion and even after their founding fathers did accept Christianity in some form, they carried on practising their indigenous pagan worship openly side by side the new one.

It was Pope Innocent IV that declared Lithuania as a Christian state under the jurisdiction of Rome in 1251 but despite their king Mindaugas being baptised, he carried on worshiping his pagan gods and according to the study, Lithuanians stood firmly behind their ancestral religion and lost their status as officially a Christian state for a long time.

Vytatus the Great church

They would later eventually become a Roman Catholic state under Pope Urban VI in 1389 after years of hard  work by two of their founding fathers Jogaila and Vytautas and some of these churches I visited are built in the memory of these two gentlemen.

But just as Lithuanians refused to quit their ancestral practices centuries ago, it appears old habits die hard, because few kilometres to the monastery is a religious grove where adherents come to pray and make supplication to God, except this is not a church. 

It is a cyclical dome with some symbols…not Christian, but it is a prayer sanctuary and on one side you had an angel with water flowing from a tap and this water is holy water depending on your faith, but the idea is for you to pray to the angel or via the angel, then collect some water and have quiet times in the hilly picturesque grove with beautiful trees creating a perfect ambience.

It was a beautiful experience. It reminded me of Osun Osogbo sacred grove in Osun State, southwest Nigeria, with the sacred image of Osun in the background and the water which is supposed to have healing powers for those who believe, except the water from Drunskininkai is from a tap attached to the angel and seemed safer to drink in comparison to the free-flowing river of Osun where people have been known to swim in and bath in during their prayer sessions.

The figurine of Osun at the Osun grove

What I find striking in all of this, is Lithuania’s unapologetic nature of holding firm to her ancestry even though it embraced the new age religion of Christianity. I also find it fascinating that it even syncretised it to the new religion and preserved her ancient symbols whilst embracing the new one and did it all on her own terms.

 History has it that Lithuania used the promises of conversion to tease the Roman Catholic and the Eastern Orthodox brands of Christianity and used same promise to broker deals amongst these two groups and their allies before eventually choosing to go with the Catholics.

So why did Christianity come to Africa and swallow up the culture and religion? Why did the Yorubas not defend Orisa worship or syncretise Obatala, Osun and Ogun to Peter, Moses and Elijah or as arch-angels too like Gabriel and Michael.

Why did the African gods suddenly become the “fallen angels” of Lucifer? Why did Esu…the messenger of Eledumare suddenly become interpreted as Satan? Why is the narrative of Christian history in Africa overshadowed by colonisation and slavery? Why such disrespect to our own ancestral religion.

I put these two pictures below on my Facebook page and ironically my Nigerian/Yoruba friends liked the one I took in Lithuania with Jesus image but berated the one I took in Osogbo next to Sango image and some called it "Devil worship"

The statue of Jesus in Drunskininkai

The figurine of Sango in Osun grove, Nigeria

I left Lithuania with questions of why this and why that. A work out with Savickas was the last thing on my mind as I feel like Africa has been short-changed and it has become imperative to re-address the narratives surrounding African traditional religion. 

The culture of self-hate is rife in Africa when it comes to ancestral cultural practices and I feel intellectual conversation needs to be ignited immediately where we can address the history of Christianity in Africa and how it affects the heritage of Africans.

This is important to set the records straight and hopefully undo some of the harm that such negative miss-interpretation of the culture and religion of a people has done to the psyche of their generation in what is appearing to be a never-ending circle.

Vilnius Cathedral

 Vytatus the great Church in Kaunus

From Nigeria to Niger…the quest for a new frontline

Since the inception of the Buhari led government of Nigeria, the Zambisa forest infamous for being the fortress and hiding place for the terror group Boko Haram has been reported to have been systematically combed and occupied by the Nigerian Army, which meant that the terror group has fled the area and peace has returned to the Northeast of Nigeria.

Varying reports suggest that the battle against Boko Haram in Nigeria has been won and the previously incessant mass killings and bombings in the northeast region have come to an end and no longer would Nigerians deal with videos of Abubakar Shekau, his AK 47 and chewing stick posing in front of heavy military artillery and taunting the authorities and threatening mass killings and striking terror in the hearts of Nigerians.

However, the presence of Boko Haram is “alive and kicking” figuratively in the South-eastern region of neighbouring Niger-Republic, a country who have shared the horrors of Boko Haram with Nigeria since the emergence of the terror group. Boko Haram has been known to shuttle between the borders of Niger-Republic to the south-east and Nigeria to the north-east.

It appears that there is a quest for the terror group to find a new base in Niger-Republic from where it can establish itself and launch terror across the Chad basin and Nigeria on a systematic and sophisticated manner. A “safe-haven” that can serve as their new frontline, since Zambisa has been taken off them, it appears that the town of Bosso is the favoured “hot spot”.