J’accuse, the well-known French phrase, which translates to “I accuse” in English, is noted for its historic newspaper reference. It was the bold title of an open letter by novelist Émile Zola, published by L’Aurore newspaper on January 13, 1898, accusing the French army of covering up its error in the court-martial of an officer accused of treason. That officer, Alfred Dreyfuss, was sentenced to life imprisonment and sent to Devil’s Island off the coast of French Guiana to serve his time. Though Zola was subsequently found guilty of libel and jailed for a year, his letter was part of the activism and catalyst that later saw Dreyfuss ultimately exonerated and returned to his post in the French army.
Today, the Oxford Dictionary tells us that j’accuse has evolved to mean an accusation or public denunciation in response to any perceived injustice. It is fitting then to use it in the context of technology-facilitated gender-based violence (TFGBV) and its consequences. It is particularly apt when one considers the poor to zero accountability from those who invented the apps and platforms being used to violate women and girls. Frustratingly, online safety for users was either not seen as important or was set aside given that profitability was at the top of the agenda. While TFGBV also affects men and boys, like its counterpart gender-based violence, its main target group is women and girls. They are disproportionately attacked and TFGBV is well on its way to becoming a scourge.
According to publicly available data, 85% of women worldwide have witnessed online violence against other women, 73% of women journalists have experienced online violence and 58% of adolescent girls and young women have experienced some form of online harassment; most report their first experience between the ages of 14 and 16. The significance of these numbers should not be lost on any of us. Clearly patriarchal in its outlook, TFGBV is being employed to define the boundaries within which women and girls operate and to shut down any dissenting voices.
It takes many forms, including scathing verbal and written attacks – usually untrue – against the intended target from fake accounts and profiles, the non-consensual sharing of private or intimate photos, videos and information, and with the recent advent of artificial intelligence, the faking of pornographic materials. Horrifi-cally, in several instances, these acts have led to mental health health issues, some of which have had fatal results.
The common knee-jerk reaction has been to blame “the internet”. However, aside from it being a huge wedge of our present and future, the internet itself cannot be considered bad and is not to blame. Nor for that matter is social media. For the most part, the internet and social media have been forces for good. As a case in point, baby boomers, and generations x and y, many of whom watched the technology come into being and grow, now use it to reconnect with long lost friends and family, and for education and research. Many would not have imagined these innovations were possible.
Furthermore, many people reading this column today are doing so online, some in other countries. In effect, internet connectivity has removed the phrase ‘small world’ from the list of oxymorons.
In shrinking the world, technology has also provided another outlet for the voices of women and girls, in a way, advancing gender equality. It has also allowed the expansion of horizons; girls in remote towns and villages can dream of and pursue careers they never heard of before, and have only seen online; they can have role models they may never meet in person; they can aspire to be enough or more.
As part of the future, access to and use of the internet is a right that cuts across class, race, and gender. The instances in which smartphones have saved lives are too numerous to mention, nearly everyone has such a story or has heard one. Therefore, the argument that going offline protects girls and women is in itself patriarchal as it seeks to limit their empowerment, freedom of expression, development, and full enjoyment of human rights.
While parents should be doing all they can to protect their children while they are online and governments ought to do more legislatively, ultimately, the responsibility lies with the app developers and owners to spend money on safety regulations and to make ethical design a priority. Now that we all know how the harm can and is being done, it is time to use innovation to halt it. A viral mea culpa and a chastening experience before the US Congress is no longer going to cut it.
