Everything Online is Public

By Mika Horelli, BRUSSELS  

In recent weeks, communication practices within the U.S. government have sparked both concern and astonishment. Donald Trump's administration officials have used commercial messaging apps like Signal to discuss decisions critical to national security. These discussions have included individuals with no role in government decision-making. For instance, a Signal group chat discussing military operations in Yemen mistakenly added Jeffrey Goldberg, editor-in-chief of The Atlantic. Similar incidents involving other Signal groups have since come to light.  

The inclusion of external Trump supporters and MAGA loyalists in these communication channels highlights not only the administration's questionable practices but also a lack of professionalism. As is often the case with populist politics, mistakes are denied or ignored, ensuring they remain uncorrected.  

Ironically, Trump himself demanded Hillary Clinton's imprisonment during the 2016 presidential campaign for using a personal Gmail account for work-related emails as Secretary of State. Now, he defends his officials who have committed far more severe breaches.   

While we may criticise the Trump administration’s amateurish errors, it is essential to remember some key points: the security of social media and messaging apps varies widely. For example, WhatsApp and Signal use end-to-end encryption, which purportedly protects messages from third parties. Apple claims it does not store users' communications on its servers; instead, data remains encrypted on devices and cannot be accessed without the owner's permission. However, apps like Facebook Messenger collect user data for targeted advertising.  

Despite varying levels of security, no information shared online is entirely private. Users must understand that anything uploaded to the internet can become public. Posts shared privately or as direct messages can be captured, stored, and redistributed without consent.  

Since joining Facebook in 2007, I have adhered to a simple principle: I never post anything that should remain secret. This approach ensures I never fear blackmail or exposure to sensitive information. My social media accounts represent only the part of my thoughts I am willing to share publicly; everything else stays offline.  

This caution has become even more critical as U.S. immigration authorities now demand access to social media accounts as a condition for entry into the country—a practice that has spread to nations like Australia and Canada. These inspections do not focus solely on what you post but also analyse your connections and interactions through algorithms. The criteria for denying entry remain opaque, adding to the sense of unease surrounding these practices.  

We all know—or should know—that social media giants like Meta and Google do not prioritise user privacy. Their terms of service treat user data as a commodity to be sold to the highest bidder. These companies reserve broad rights to exploit collected data from advertising to political profiling.  

The European Union has taken steps to protect citizens' privacy through regulations like the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which grants individuals control over their data. However, compliance with these rules is far from universal—even within Europe. Globally, the more authoritarian a regime becomes, the weaker privacy protections tend to be.  

Social media and digital communication are not purely personal matters but integral to global politics and power dynamics. Everyone—including Trump's inner circle—should grasp this reality and act accordingly. Nothing online is private; this fundamental truth should guide all digital communication practices.