Headline: Millions of Ugandans quit internet after introduction of social media tax

In this article, Rebecca Ratcliffe and Samuel Okiror examine the effect of a tax levied by the Uganda government. This tax was put on social media use and money transactions via mobile phones. Instead of paying the taxes like the government expect, many people have abandoned the internet all together. The point of the tax was to slow down “gossip” on more than 60 platforms that have been categorized as ‘Over the Top’. The number of internet subscriptions fell by more than 2.5 million people. Many people criticize the tax and say that it is an attempt to restrict free speech. They also point out the detriment to economy. Many people have had to cut staff and are losing money. 

I chose this article because I thought that it brings up several interesting points. One point that I think it brings up is the right to free speech. I think it’s interesting because social media existed after the concept of free speech. Yet, we see social media as such an integral part of the way we communicate today. I think it comes into question the evolution of free speech. With the platforms we have today, is it possible for people to have free speech when the platforms we use today are restricted even when free speech existed before social media did? I think its normally easy to assume that free speech is a universal thing, but it is not something that is common around the world. 

I think that the article works because the authors write with clarity. There are a lot of intricacies in reading about government’s separate from one’s own. The authors describe the situation and quantify it in terms of the Ugandan government system. For example, the article explains that there is “A lack of formal banking services in Uganda means many people rely on mobile phone companies to send money by text message.” 

I think that the article could be more impactful with graphics, charts and graphs. It is hard to understand what the impact is of “pay a tax of 200 Ugandan shillings a day.” I don’t know how that impacts the average citizen. I think that if their is some visual way of depicting the impact of this policy then it would be more digestible.