2017-gebhart-internet
findings extracted from this paper
-
Approximately 10% of respondents (n=23) held uncertain or incorrect beliefs about which actor was responsible for a given block, systematically conflating government censorship with geoblocking, paywalls, and platform-side restrictions. This misidentification cascaded into inappropriate tool selection and inaccurate risk assessment: users who could not distinguish state blocking from licensing restrictions could neither choose the right circumvention tool nor accurately gauge the legal jeopardy of accessing the content. Respondents specifically requested a pre-visit blocking-actor classification tool.
-
Nearly 70% (n=160) of respondents reported self-censoring online for fear of the law. Frequency of exposure to blocked content was a statistically significant, ordered predictor of self-censorship (Goodman-Kruskal's gamma = 0.421, 95% CI [0.247, 0.595], p < 0.05), with self-censorship increasing monotonically as exposure to blocked content increased. Notably, self-censorship rates did not differ significantly between respondents inside and outside Thailand, suggesting the chilling effect extends beyond the reach of domestic ISP-level blocking.
-
Of 229 Thai Internet users surveyed, 63% (n=144) had attempted to circumvent censorship, and of those, roughly 90% (n=132) reported success using VPNs (32.64%), proxies (32.64%), or Tor (23.61%). Failures were isolated to proxies (n=2), VPNs (n=2), and alternative searches (n=3), indicating that existing circumvention tools were technically adequate but that availability and comprehensibility—not raw capability—were the binding constraints on user success.
-
Users in Thailand relied on incident-driven tool selection—running a fresh Google search for a proxy or VPN each time they hit a block—which the paper identifies as a systematic vulnerability: the Thai Royal Police exploited this pattern after the 2014 coup by linking a phishing application to a government block page, harvesting email addresses and gaining application-level access to Facebook profile information. The paper further notes that orchestrated stricter censorship could drive users to a government-operated malicious tool.
-
Social media—primarily Facebook—was the dominant venue for direct, experienced threats: 9 of 15 respondents who had content blocked reported being censored on Facebook, and respondents observed that government censorship was shifting away from website blocking toward social media surveillance precisely because social media platforms are 'hard to block.' Respondents lacked any effective technical defenses against peer reporting, group-administrator censorship, and intermediary liability; they relied instead on social management strategies such as abbreviating references to royalty, running 'trial posts,' and self-censoring likes and shares.