BART stifles protest by cutting cell service, sparking new challenges for activism

    In what’s believed to be a first for any United States government agency, San Francisco’s Bay Area Rapid Transit forestalled a planned protest on Thursday against the latest police shooting of an unarmed man by cutting cellphone service. The action has raised all sorts of questions regarding free speech and the right to assemble peaceably. As Gene Policinski, executive director of the First Amendment Center at Vanderbilt University told the Christian Science Monitor:

    “I think you can on the one hand argue it was a momentary discomfort for somebody who has other means of communication,” says Professor Policinski. “On the other hand, it’s a very disquieting development. Here you have a government agency indiscriminately closing down all kinds of speech in order to prevent a perceived possibility of violence.”

    The hacktivist group Anonymous has certainly sided with the latter opinion. On Sunday they broke into a BART’s website and posted company contact information for more than 2,000 customers. The group also urged its members and followers to bombard BART with emails and faxes, as well as file complaints with the FCC. A physical protest is also being planned for later this afternoon at the Civic Center BART station.

    It will be interesting to see how BART responds to all this. It claims to have shut down cell service because July protests against BART police shootings had turned violent. But doesn’t that sound like a convenient excuse to snuff out any and all protest—the majority of which are peaceful? Do Americans, as some have argued, want to see their government go down the same road as Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak or other authoritarian leaders who have attempted to squash dissent by cutting communication services?

    Ultimately, though, the bigger question on activists’ minds should be how to get around this kind of suppression. While it’s important to challenge the legitimacy of such action, activists shouldn’t expect to rely on government benevolency in order to be effective. Nor can they rely on technology alone. Systems and strategies need to be developed in order to anticipate crackdowns and enact workarounds that allow for protest to go on unimpeded.

    Recent Stories

    • Analysis

    Lessons for nonviolent activism in an era of digital authoritarianism

    May 17, 2022

    As autocrats become savvier in using technology to repress dissent, activists are striving to preserve the benefits of digital activism and mitigate the risks.

    • Q&A

    ‘Poison for the people’ — How an exiled activist is countering Russia’s propaganda machine

    May 12, 2022

    Environmental activist Evgeniya Chirikova once helped save a forest in Moscow. Now she’s trying to give voice to Russian activists and journalists resisting Putin’s regime.

    • Feature

    A rural protest for accountability and transparency brews in India

    May 10, 2022

    Facing extreme poverty and a lack of basic services, a movement in Rajasthan is renewing its push for an ambitious law to hold officials accountable.