Kristen Gyles | What buys your silence?

On June 18, an advisory appeared on the US Department of State’s website, regarding the new expanded screening and vetting of US visa applicants. Here is an excerpt from the advisory:

“We use all available information in our visa screening and vetting to identify visa applicants who are inadmissible to the United States, including those who pose a threat to U.S. national security. Under new guidance, we will conduct a comprehensive and thorough vetting, including online presence, of all student and exchange visitor applicants in the F, M, and J nonimmigrant classifications.

To facilitate this vetting, all applicants for F, M, and J nonimmigrant visas will be instructed to adjust the privacy settings on all of their social media profiles to ‘public’.”

US immigration has been soliciting the social media handles of visa applicants for some time now. However, it seems quite a few social media users had discovered how to adjust privacy settings to their advantage, posing problems for the inquisitive mind of US immigration. The advisory now forces visa applicants to make their social media accounts public. It therefore means applicants no longer have the privilege of private posting.

This is a multifaceted issue. There are many controversial issues of moral significance that bear on the world that we live in today. Currently, there is an ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinian people that has resulted in the death of close to 90,000 people. It is also reported that people in the Gaza strip are literally being starved to death. The United States and other geopolitical actors have positioned themselves in support of Israel, while many other countries have opposed this stance.

OWN STANCE

The US also has its own stance on the war between Russia and the Ukraine which is estimated to have claimed more than 250,000 lives.

We don’t even need to look that far. Within US borders, as elsewhere, many injustices have taken place. The US has been accused of systemic racial bias, given the current social climate in which disproportionate numbers of black men are injured and killed during interactions with armed forces.

What recent developments with regard to US immigration really mean, is that when one takes to social media to voice their concerns about any of the various geopolitical or intergovernmental issues at play, which may or may not be affected by US foreign policy, they endanger their own ability to travel freely to and around the US.

Let’s face it. In requesting social media handles, it becomes clear to the applicant that their social media is likely to be vetted. Furthermore, the request for social media accounts to be made public is yet another hint that the individual’s social media activity is about to be put under the microscope. It is obvious then, that individuals are likely to alter their social media conduct, when they are seeking a US visa.

Whatever the intention behind the new screening and vetting policy, the effect is unquestionable. Many people, out of fear of losing out on their aspirations to travel to the US and live the American dream, will wipe their minds clean of any thoughts on happenings in the US, whether social or political. As of the publication of the advisory, they will likely have uncomfortable opinions only of their own Jamaican political leaders. Many will not say much of what ought to be said on global issues, out of fear that they will lose the personal benefit of being able to travel to the US. In this regard, The US wins.

NOT THE SAME PRICE

They say everyone can be bought but not everyone has the same price. A visitor’s visa will buy the silence of many, but not all. Fortunately, throughout history, there have always been people, though few in number, who choose to speak against injustices even at the cost of social and political approval. Due to some of those same sacrifices, we enjoy certain privileges and freedoms today. As Desmond Tutu is quoted as saying, if you are neutral in any situation of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.

None of this is to dispute the fact that social media has, in many ways, become a cesspool of libelous, slanderous and nasty comments. It has become extremely easy for the crass and the careless to speak their depraved minds either through insults or outright threats. However, is US immigration looking to identify the crass and the careless or simply those who hold views and beliefs that do not align with US nationalist sentiments?

Unfortunately, many of us have unbridled social media alter egos that we allow to post all the nasty and vitriolic things we would distance ourselves from in professional spaces. If you wouldn’t say something in front of an individual, don’t say it to or about them online. And if you wouldn’t say something in front of a US immigration officer, perhaps you shouldn’t post it – not because you are seeking a US visa and fear the potential consequences, but because if something is not worth standing by, then it is probably not worth being said.

Kristen Gyles is a free-thinking public affairs opinionator. Send feedback to kristengyles@gmail.com and columns@gleanerjm.com