It was a weekend when Mariam*, a 24-year-old social media influencer with over a million followers online, woke up to find her pictures in a swimsuit all over the internet. She had just returned from a vacation to the Maldives after taking a 10-day “social media detox” and was excited to interact with her “fans” again. However, with her pictures out now, the people who once worshipped the ground Mariam walked on, had bombarded her inbox with profanities.
The Instagram starlet was, at first, confused and then furious. An online blog had posted pictures of her vacationing at the beach with friends on their pages without her permission. Just like any other person her age, Marium was being goofy and funny in the photos, but, unfortunately, that was not how her followers viewed it.
Hours after they were posted, the pictures had comments calling the influencer a “whore”, some people said she was “using her body to increase her followers”, while others hurled curses at her in the comments.
But Mariam was not angry at that. She was instead enraged at the idea of her pictures being taken off accounts of her friends and used as a random blog’s everyday entertainment fix. In the next few hours, she wrote long posts addressed to the account, threatened to file a complaint with the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA), and cried. In the end, the page did end up taking down her pictures, but by then the damage was irreparable as the photos had reached almost a hundred different online accounts and were practically circulating everywhere.
Eventually, the influencer quit the social media platform – this time, forever.
What happened with Mariam is not an isolated incident. Celebrities and social media stars brave experiences like these on an everyday basis as the growth of digital media blurs boundaries of consent and privacy in online spaces.
In another incident, Asfandyar Kohati, who runs a photography blog on Instagram, found himself in a similar situation when his work was taken from his profile by other lifestyle media accounts, and used without permission.
“When I reached out, the media outlet disregarded my concern saying that it wasn’t that big a deal,” he said. That, precisely, represents what most people on the internet think about consent: it is not a big deal.
As data consumption widens, the concept of consent in the context of digital media remains vague and complicated as social media has given both celebrities a way to control the information they share and people the freedom to spread images and videos taken without consent freely.
Online Consent: Permission, Decision And Choice
Literally, consent is when someone gives permission for something to happen or agrees to do something. When asking for consent, the person in front of you needs to specifically know what they are signing up for or agreeing to. In its most raw sense, consent needs to be voluntary and enthusiastic, which means 100 percent acceptance and concurrence, without any pressure or guilt.
On the internet too, consent holds the same idea as it does anywhere else. It is about three things: permission, decision, and choice. Hence, the right to online consent means that it should only be you who gets to decide what to share about yourself online, how much, and in what context. This means that taking a photo of someone or recording a video of them, in a compromising position or otherwise, and sharing it online without permission is considered a violation of consent.
But the concept does not seem to fit into the world of social media and viral content. Even paparazzi photos, secretly filmed videos, and memes probably would not get as many hits if everyone involved had given permission.
That said, the right to online privacy, personal information and data is not a recent phenomenon, according to the European Union’s data protection policy.
“After World War II, the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights included a right to freedom from ‘arbitrary interference with… privacy, family, home or correspondence’, while the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights included a right to respect for private and family life,” it stated.
The study added that the volume of data being produced worldwide is growing rapidly. It is expected to grow from 33 zettabytes, i.e., 1021 bytes or one thousand billion gigabytes, in 2018, to 175 zettabytes in 2025, which increases the need for protecting data online.
Therefore, the right to privacy is also recognised as fundamental under most countries’ local laws and international treaties. In Pakistan, it is protected under Article 14 of the Constitution and is also interpreted in cases related to digital privacy by the Supreme Court in multiple instances.
Consent And Our Obsession With Celebrities
A professor associated with the Media Science department at a university in Karachi blames the subcontinent’s decades-old obsession with celebrities and media persons for the violation of their privacy, both online and off.
“Movies, dramas and theatre have always played an active part in our society and lives,” she told DRM on the condition of anonymity. “For people who work 12 hours a day to make ends meet, the TV screen is their only source out from their mundane lives. It gives them a break from the hard work they are doing every day and lets them fly to the land of their dreams, even if it is just for two hours.”
It is no wonder, she continued, that they feel a fervid bond with these onscreen characters and the people who play them. “They attach emotions with them and eventually, these characters become a part of their everyday lives.”
It is no surprise that these people will go to every extent to reach out to their reel heroes in real. This is one of the primary reasons why hundreds of people gather outside the houses of Bollywood superstars Shah Rukh Khan and Amitabh Bachchan every month, or why paparazzi stalk Kareena Kapoor’s son, Taimur, almost every day. And with technology, the connectivity between the masses and celebrities has become more immediate and instantaneous.
A research paper titled “Transforming celebrities through social media: the role of authenticity and emotional attachment” reveals that the transition from celebrity-focused television programmes and magazines to websites and social media profiles allows people to more intimately explore “engagement” with celebrities. On social media sites such as Twitter, Instagram and Facebook, information about celebrities is abundant and readily available.
Moreover, it said that the masses are increasingly interested in “personal information” regarding the celebrity’s lives in terms of their relationships, family, style and hobbies. This flow of information also makes people develop an emotional attachment, stronger than before, with their favourites.
Sharing personal information about a celebrity via social media creates a sense of intimacy between the celebrity and the follower. Therefore, instead of relying on the traditional media outlets that focus on celebrities, celebrities are now the reporters of their personal lives and can share daily information about their personal lives with their fan bases, the study added.
However, the ugly side of this connectivity and bond is consent, and we have seen instances of this time and again. In 2017, Pakistani heartthrob Mahira Khan faced severe backlash on social media after a picture of her smoking on the streets of New York with Indian actor Ranbir Kapoor went viral. Within hours, people turned up on the internet accusing Khan of “betraying Pakistan”. Several others, including journalists and fellow actors, came out in Khan’s defence too. However, no one asked if the actor’s pictures were uploaded with consent.
Recently, a similar video of Pakistani TV actor Alizeh Shah was uploaded on social media in which she could be seen smoking. What followed was the same – a string of accusations with a pinch of double standards.
Recalling the incidents, the professor asserted that the media outlets that shared these videos and photos should equally be charged for cybercrime – violation of online privacy. “Did they take permission before using the content?” she reiterated.
Consent In Evolving Newsrooms
There are no doubts when it is said that news organisations, especially those covering lifestyle and entertainment, have immense access to digital content these days. While this increases flow of information online, it also means more violations when it comes to consent and privacy. In these circumstances, the responsibility on the shoulders of news outlets increases.
Siham Basir, Managing Editor at Dawn Images, is of the opinion that it is generally assumed online that a public figure posting something, be it a picture or a piece of information, on a public account makes it fair game. “I believe that in a way, social media has given celebrities and other public figures more control over what information they release, thereby ensuring their consent in what information is being shared.”
She said that at Images, the policy is based on common sense. “If a celebrity has posted it themselves, then it’s okay to take. If a celebrity hasn’t posted it, we confirm with them or their team.”
The issue here, she explained, is also the information that the public needs to know. “We don’t cater to what the public wants to know, because I believe if given the chance, the public would want to know everything about a celebrity, from the way they take their tea to the colour of their underwear on any given day.”
“So, there’s a fine line between what needs to be reported and what doesn’t if a celebrity hasn’t shared the news themselves,” Basir emphasised.
When it comes to a celebrity getting engaged or married but not wanting to share the news, Images tries its level best to ensure that they have their consent to post this news, she assured, sharing two recent examples where the organisation approached celebrities after seeing photos of their weddings circulating online, and were told they did not feel comfortable sharing the news just yet and that their consent had been violated when those pictures were shared.
“In both cases we wished them well and didn’t post the news. Our job is not to violate people’s privacy and share intimate details of their lives that they don’t want made public,” Basir said, adding, “On the flip side, if a celebrity is involved in a criminal case or a harassment case, that is something the public should know. That leads back to my point about what the public needs to know and what they want to know.”
Talking about a recent change at her organisation, Basir shared that most outlets – whether linked to a newspaper or not – were involved in the practice of sharing tweets or videos created by other people.
“Initially, we thought it was sufficient that we tagged the people whose content we were resharing and credited them,” said Basir. “However, we were soon educated on the concept that though these people shared this content on public forums, they don’t always consent to having it reshared by another page. So now we’ve developed a new policy – nothing goes on our social media pages without express consent.”
Basir added that consent is not a complicated concept, but many people seem to see it as such.
Meanwhile, News Editor of SAMAA English, Ismail Sheikh, regarded consent as a “very tricky” subject. He said that a celebrity or someone who has a public account directly comes under the public domain.
“But at times, as an editor/reporter, it’s better to be mindful of the circumstances and context of a post. If you know that someone is going through troubled times, it’s best to practise restraint. However, with digital outlets popping up like mushrooms, it is becoming increasingly difficult to do that, because if you don’t publish, someone else does,” he said, adding that here a war of consent, rating and views ensues.
To prevent this quagmire, Images’ Basir stressed the need for more discussion in the newsroom.
“Each individual, be it an editor or reporter or subeditor, brings a new perspective and I think we need to encourage conversations so that we share our perspectives on issues.”
“In a general sense, the media is supposed to be the filter, ensuring people get the right information. Just because there’s an unfiltered flow of content or information available doesn’t mean we as journalists need to repeat it,” she highlighted, adding that another big issue she saw was that entertainment journalists were inexplicably not held to the same standard as journalists from hard news beats.
“The principle of journalism remains the same, regardless of the news you’re reporting on, and journalists need to remember that.”
Data Ownership And Protection In A Broader Perspective
Presently, the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, 2016 (PECA) is the primary legislation that provides a legal framework dealing with multiple kinds of electronic crimes and authorised access to personal data.
To be specific, Section 21 pertaining to cyberstalking deals with online consent and provides a modicum of protection in terms of privacy. It also discusses non-consensual use of images or videos that “harms” a person or causes them “distress”. PECA, however, remains one of the most controversial pieces of legislation due to its vague content and potential to be weaponised against victims themselves.
According to Farieha Aziz, a digital rights activist and co-founder of Bolo Bhi – an advocacy organisation – for celebrities and public figures, there was a lot of “fair play” involved when it came to online consent.
“Often we come across this question of why privacy is even needed online and why spaces need to be protected,” she said.
Why? Because it is often believed that just because celebrities have public accounts, consent does not really matter when it comes to them, Aziz continued. “But that doesn’t mean that public figures don’t go through bullying.”
She stated that what happens in the digital world is a mirror to everything happening in the real world. “In our everyday lives, the boundaries of consent and privacy are very blurred and that is exactly the case with one. But, at the same time, the reality is that you don’t live in a glass house, do you? Then why not those protections online?”
In response to a question on hierarchy of offences, Aziz said that even a complaint of hateful comments is to be dealt with under the law. Unfortunately, she lamented, the proceedings after the registration of complaints at the FIA usually stall because the cases never reach stages of conviction.
Here, an HRCP study titled “Rethinking PECA: How cybercrime laws are weaponised against women” gives the example of one of the first cases registered under PECA where morphed images of a woman instructor teaching at both public and private universities were posted on social media pages through an anonymous Facebook account.
The instructor lodged multiple complaints with the FIA. It was after her third complaint that the FIA took action. An FIR was registered in October 2016 under Section 21, one of the three cognisable sections of PECA. Four years and eight months, and 141 hearings later, the verdict was announced in June 2021 and the accused – an assistant professor at the University of Karachi’s Psychology Department – was convicted.
However, the study calls this conviction “no achievement” because of the FIA’s unresponsiveness towards the complainant.
Meanwhile, over the years, with awareness and increased access to technology, people have found easier ways to reach out to the agency as claimed in a report released by FIA earlier this year.
The authority said that it received over 100,000 complaints pertaining to cybercrime in 2021. According to the authority’s chief, Sanaullah Abbasi, in 23 percent of the complaints, Facebook was the primary medium.
On the other hand, in another step towards personal data, the Ministry of Information Technology and Telecommunications (MoITT) last year introduced the Personal Data Protection Bill 2021 which is yet to be promulgated into a law. Once enacted, it will be the primary legislation regulating controllers and processors of personal data in the country. It will apply to any person who processes, controls, or authorises the process of personal data. Once this goes into effect, it can be expected that the law will also be applicable on registered media outlets who process individuals’ data without their consent.
A Dawn editorial called the bill one of its kind in Pakistan as it proposed a strong reign over data processing entities i.e., private companies over the protection of consumers’ personal data. The bill also lays out the requirement of consent for a person’s data to be processed.
While some considered it a welcome step by the government, others called it unclear. The Asia Internet Coalition (AIC), in a letter to the IT ministry, said that the bill was vague in several aspects and suggested it be amended according to world standards.
“We are concerned that the Draft Bill’s extraterritorial application is based on provisions that are too wide and vague, which would even bring within scope foreign companies that neither operate in Pakistan nor process data collected in Pakistan,” the letter written by Jeff Paine, AIC Managing Director, said.
On the other hand, in response to the call for feedback on the bill, members of civil society organisations pointed out that the law would “give open access to the authorities to infringe on citizens’ right to privacy and freedom of expression”.
As for copying people’s posts and amplifying them for public or media content – be it belonging to a celebrity or otherwise, Basir of Dawn Images remarked that journalists, in particular, need to exercise caution when it comes to reporting.
“Just because we have this content online doesn’t mean it’s okay to use it. Just because there’s a rumour online about a celebrity divorce doesn’t give us the right to post about it until the celebrity comments.”
