What is it about?
• Control of the Internet is largely spatial: territory defines the extent to which states can exercise such control. • WikiLeaks exemplifies how different spatial scales and relations—territory and place—interplay for controlling the Internet. • A place is a portion of space where control is targeted to, but also a centre of commandment or a site of resistance. • The Internet is bound not only to territories, but also to places.
Featured Image
Why is it important?
Modern states can and do exercise their sovereignty upon a rather precisely delimited portion of land, while a variety of actions performed on the Internet remain rather hard to be associated with a single location on Earth. We use here a variety of spatial concepts, but in particular territory (and jurisdiction) and place as parameters for understanding the link between sovereignty (and, more precisely, control), resistance, and the Internet. This article demonstrates the importance of these spatial scales for the policy and practice of Internet governance.
Perspectives
This article provides an open interdisciplinary view of space and control of information flows on the Internet, using the controversies involving WikiLeaks and its director, Julian Assange, as examples. Many important issues are at stake, and I hope readers understand our principal intentions in discussing spatialities related to whistle-blowing and Internet activities rather than claiming any novel knowledge on WikiLeaks and Julian Assange themselves.
Dr Rodrigo José Firmino
Pontificia Universidade Catolica do Parana
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: The spatial bonds of WikiLeaks, Government Information Quarterly, September 2018, Elsevier,
DOI: 10.1016/j.giq.2018.05.005.
You can read the full text:
Resources
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
