Like everything else in the world, the (at least short-term) future of elections has been significantly shook by COVID-19. Alaska and Wyoming have shifted their primary and caucus, respectively, to be entirely by mail. South Korea has mandated all voters wear gloves and masks, get their temperature checked, and be “sprayed with hand sanitizer” before casting their ballot on April 15th. Singapore, preparing for the possibility that this may continue into next year, has tabled a new bill accommodating voters and candidates who are sick or subject to stay-at-home orders. Amidst all of this, Wisconsin proceeded with their primary elections today (based on one viral picture, I don’t think people were too happy about it).

The Wisconsin primary brought not only long lines and many homemade masks, but also a controversial Supreme Court decision. The Court’s 5 conservative-leaning justices determined the narrow question of whether mail-in ballots postmarked after April 7th could count. Their answer: no. This modified U.S. District Judge Conley’s decision that extended the deadline for receipt of mail-in ballots to April 13th, specifying that all valid ballots received by that date would be counted, regardless of when they were postmarked. Queen of Dissent, RBG, highlights the exceptional circumstances which have caused backlogs in delivering the requested ballots, resulting in potentially thousands of Wisconsinites having to decide whether to brave the crowds or forfeit their vote entirely. Obviously, voter disenfranchisement has been an issue that the United States and other countries have struggled with, and a global pandemic adds a new dimension to this problem.

It’s impossible to say yet how future elections should be handled, but it seems abundantly clear that it cannot just be business as usual. Whatever your stance on absentee voting, I think most people will concede that there must be alternatives that take into account the current health risks. Does technology have a role to play here, or will we have to rely on the postman? American elections’ most recent brush with technology (hello, Iowa Caucus) didn’t instill too much confidence in anyone. I think there would have to be a major jump in cyber-security capabilities, and equally importantly, a shift in people’s perspectives, in order for online voting to even be a possibility. The democratic process is fundamental to so many societies that any change, though not substantive, would be viewed with suspicion nearing fear. Yet we have seen that elections are not immune to cyber attacks. Perhaps if technology were to be fully embraced as part of the process, more attention would be given to security, thus eliminating some of the unknown vulnerabilities? I do not have a good answer to the question I posed with the title of this post, but I am keen to see what plays out.

Sources:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/19a1016_o759.pdf
https://www.ft.com/content/a1206bd6-28e2-4020-a4fb-fa4e8ce99da0
https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/04/07/828002736/south-koreans-will-vote-in-election-in-masks-and-gloves-have-temperature-checked
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/02/04/us/politics/iowa-democratic-caucus-explained.html

Let’s face it: the human race has become entirely dependent on our various internet devices. My days recently have consisted of going on my smart phone to read the news, going on my laptop to do schoolwork and “attend class”, watching Netflix on my smart TV, going for a run and tracking it with my Apple watch, playing online video games, and drinking the occasional at-home-happy-hour beer (note: not internet-related). I will be the first to admit, I would be lost without a fast, reliable internet connection, both at home and on the go. To situate this a little closer to home, this year at Allard, you will not be able to take your exams without an internet connection.

The future depends on connectivity, and specifically, high-speed, always-on internet connections. To keep up with the explosion of the “internet of things”, the mobile industry has been working on rolling out ultra-fast 5G networks. The promise is that, eventually, 5G will bring speeds of around 10 gigabytes per second to your phone, which is approximately 600 times faster than the typical 4G speeds on today’s phones and 10 times faster than most home internet connections.

In the US, the four main carriers now offer 5G connectivity, but they are mainly available in major US cities, such as Chicago, Los Angeles, Atlanta and Dallas. Similarly, in the UK, 5G networks have reached cities and townships but have not blanketed the majority of the country. Countries like Australia, South Korea, Switzerland and China have also rolled out 5G networks.

However, the first 5G networks won’t be nearly so fast, and arguably, 5G is still in its nascent stages despite being offered in many countries around the world. There are a number of barriers to implementing 5G on a large scale, such as the lack of availability or understanding of radio frequencies to deliver 5G services, the lack of phones that can support 5G and the lack of infrastructure to support the new 5G network. In sum, the world is still running in 4G, which makes it difficult to upgrade to 5G all at once. This means that mobile networks that may deliver the fastest 5G networks won’t be widely available for years.

This seemingly innocuous story takes an odd turn, however. Recently, a conspiracy theory has been circulating that says 5G networks caused COVID-19. These theories have spread on social media and claim that COVID-19 is actually due to the effects of radiation from 5G networks. This is partially due to the fact that 5G networks were introduced in China in November 2019, where shortly thereafter, a novel coronavirus was discovered. In the most strange turn of events, the 5G-COVID 19 conspiracy theory may be the cause of recent arson attacks against UK 5G phone towers (https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/apr/04/uk-phone-masts-attacked-amid-5g-coronavirus-conspiracy-theory). This conspiracy theory has been rebutted as ridiculous by scientists and fact-checkers alike, who claim that it “is straight from the most dangerous depths of tin foil hat land”. What can be definitively stated is that 5G does not cause or spread a virus.

5G networks have also come under fire due to health concerns, which posit that since 5G networks run on high-frequency radio waves, they can produce harmful radiation leading to brain cancer, reduced fertility and other illnesses. The FDA and FCC have said that there is nothing to worry about as studies haven’t found a link between radio frequency from cellphones or cell towers and disease.

The COVID-19 conspiracy theory and 5G health concerns highlight one of the major themes that has been discussed throughout the term. Namely, the above theories show that social media is a place where misinformation runs rampant, and fake news influences people in a real way. According to FDA, the FCC, the WHO and other international agencies, there is nothing to worry about with respect to 5G, and certainly no need to worry that it caused COVID-19. However, this has not stopped the spread of these ideas on social media. This highlights another major theme in the course, which is the inability of private corporations and government entities to stop the spread of fake news. So, here is a friendly reminder to not believe everything that you read on the internet, and to try your best to curb the spread of misinformation.

This post is based on the following articles:
https://www.wired.com/story/wired-guide-5g/
https://www.wired.com/story/slow-rollout-super-fast-5g/
https://www.cnet.com/news/no-5g-didnt-cause-the-coronavirus-pandemic/

On March 16, Netflix Stock closed at $298.84. The same day the S&P500 Index closed at 2,368.13 – down almost 400 from the previous day close. Tough day for the economy. But, if we look today – a different story is painted. Netflix opened at $376; the S&P at a meager $2,498.08. Markets up ~5%; Netflix? ~26%.

We all knew that Netflix was a phenomenal service provider for all its flaws, but I ask whether this paints a future picture of our economy. Whilst everything else shuts down, tech companies seem to (mostly) be flourishing. I say no. I think what we have seen is a short-term response, and one that points to the fact that the industry itself is not untouchable and remains hampered by the same risks that other entertainment industries have felt.
Netflix has built its new image on building content. No longer merely licensing, but vertically integrating. House of Cards, Ozark (Season 3 came out last week.. its great). Tiger King… which has become an internet sensation overnight. However, I chalk a great deal of this up to good timing. As the COVID-19 horizon continues on and production of entertainment media grinds to a halt, Netflix will not escape unscathed. As their content begins to dry up, subscriber base will fall and people will continue to hop around to the next free trial they can find (Crave currently has one if you’re looking for your HBO fix – if you haven’t watched the Wire… now is the time). Netflix is simply delaying the inevitable. Tech remains grounded by the requirements of human interaction that have hampered all business, they just haven’t felt it yet.

Netflix is obviously not the only example here, Amazon Prime, Hulu, Crave, etc., I think are all in similar boats (albeit Amazon and Crave are more diversified in terms of their companies). A great deal of focus has been put on how they have had to reduce streaming service quality to support the amount of content, and the other immediate impacts (the crashing of servers for some online Board Games) but less attention has been paid their longevity – something I see as being limited.

*Incase my embedded links don’t work:

Netflix Stock: https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/nflx/history/

S&P Stock: https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/%5EGSPC/history/

Crave Link: https://www.crave.ca/en/subscribe?cid=ps:CraveTV:google:searchad:AvailableNow:Brand&&cid=ps:CraveTV:google:searchad:AvailableNow:Brand&gclid=Cj0KCQjwmpb0BRCBARIsAG7y4zZX2_hjRx9GW3BY4m9-TtGejN_KcKhphG1xNSjp7Jht2pwarMq9eOQaAt7gEALw_wcB

Netflix Quality Link: https://techhq.com/2020/04/why-netflix-is-reducing-the-quality-of-video-streaming/