At a time when we think everything can be made visible, how do we know that what we see is true? Satellite imagery has indeed enabled greater transparency and accountability in our globalized world, especially in understanding extreme climate events, humanitarian crises and armed conflicts. However, there are also challenges and questions that we need to ask ourselves when looking at these satellite images, such as: Who has access to these images? Who decides where to look? Who has the authority to speak about what is seen in these images?
On 11 July 2024, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Alison Killing kicked off the afternoon with a keynote on the opportunities and challenges of using satellite imagery. Alison Killing, a British architect and urban planner, uses satellite imagery and architectural techniques to investigate pressing social issues. Killing, who currently heads the Visual Investigations team at the Financial Times, gave insight into her current research on Xinjiang in China, a region that has recently been incorporated into China and is home to several ethnic minorities, mainly Muslims. Xinjiang is a very resource-rich area, especially in with a oil and coal, and since 1949, Xinjiang’s relationship with the Chinese government has increasingly become difficult, especially due to discrimination in education, language, religion, and employment. The region is very difficult to travel to, but in 2017 information began to emerge that hundreds of thousands of people were being detained in the area. A colleague of Allison Killing who was working in China at that time spoke to former detainees who confirmed the location of the camps. In order to investigate this further, the use of satellite imagery seemed particularly wise, as many journalists in the region faced being followed by police, being forced to delete photographs and intimidation. Additionally, Xinjiang is about four times the size of Germany, an investigation on site would have been time-consuming and likely dangerous. The satellite imagery in question had another advantage: The Chinese government has been known to photoshop images of industrial areas, so Alison Killing wondered if the same was being done with the camps in Xinjiang. The imagery being used was mainly from European and American sources which the Chinese government had no control over. Therefore, Killing mainly used sources that were already readily available. With the help of a Shanghai photographer, she discovered that images of real estate in China had also been tempered with, consequently, Killing assumed the same was highly likely happening to the camps in Xinjiang.
Killing looked at the satellite images and found about six camps that had definitely been identified as camps by other journalists who had visited them. Therefore, she looked at the satellite imagery of Xinjiang, paying particular attention to industrial buildings and areas. The first camps had been schools and hospitals and were quickly converted – within a matter of weeks – into detention centers by putting up cell walls in the buildings and a barbed wire fence around the whole complex. Later, larger prisons were built, as some eyewitnesses or journalists confirmed; sometimes media reports were found, or former hostages confirmed the locations of the camps. In a later step, these satellite images were confirmed by a Chinese who subsequently went undercover and published a YouTube video after leaving China. This was essential research, especially as the Chinese government initially denied the existence of such camps, later claiming and still claiming, that they are being used as ‘integration mechanisms’ to teach Chinese to people in Xinjiang and provide them with jobs. In 2019 the Chinese government then falsely claimed they had put an end to the program. Although some of the first camps have indeed been closed, most camps do still exist.
After her keynote, Alison Killing is joined on stage by Anne Pellegrino, Media Programs Lead at Planet Labs, and Dr. Jeffrey Lewis, Director of the East Asia Nonproliferation Program at the Center for Nonproliferation Studies in Monterey, USA. Both use satellite imagery for their work aswell. Henrietta Wilson, Research Associate at King’s College London, moderates the panel and asks the panelists about their motivation to work with satellite imagery. Alison Killing explains that one of her main goals is to reduce human rights abuses and that “feeling an unease towards the situation in Xinjiang” motivated her to start this research project. For her, there is a difference between “being able to make a determination about what is actually in the image and understanding what you potentially might or might not be able to discover from the satellite image itself”, this particularly motivates her. Jeffrey Lewis is looking for ‘the truth’ when it comes to the production and testing of nuclear weapons and missiles. Anne Pellegrino, who works at Planet Labs, a commercial satellite provider, states that what makes her work so fulfilling is that “satellite imagery analysis is a process which involves building up a mosaic of evidence.” Planet Labs does not just sell satellite imagery, it also provides NGOs with imagery free of charge. She explains that in her work it is important whether the data receiving party is acting responsibly and will do justice to the satellite images.
Making satellite imagery is a crucial step, however, journalists also need to be able to analyze them and draw the right conclusions. Wilson therefore asks how Alison Killing learned to look at satellite imagery, as she has an architectural background: “As an architect who is very used to looking at 2D-representations of dimensional objects, moving from looking at plans and sections and elevations to looking at satellite imagery and understanding what that probably looks like on the ground is something that comes very naturally. The hardest thing for me was building up the contextual knowledge about Xinjiang”, Killing explains. In addition, Alison Killing and her colleagues also looked at the Chinese prison building regulations: “That was also very helpful in our research and getting these was also easier than you might think because these regulations tend to be online. Countries usually want them to be accessible because they want people in the country to follow the law.” Jeffrey Lewis agrees, explaining that these building patterns can make it easier to interpret satellite images.
For Anne Pellegrino the real issue is not whether you can verify the data but the fact that it is already out there – even if it is false. For her, the first narrative out there is the hardest to dispel, even if it's false. “So it's like a first-mover advantage”, Pellegrino adds. Jeffrey agrees that there's a lot of bad open-source work out there which may not be malicious but incompetent, leading to misinformation.
The participating panelists agree that getting to the truth is difficult but, after all, possible, especially with the help of satellite imagery. “It’s difficult, it takes hours, it takes expertise, it takes eyesight, but it is possible. It’s a representation of digital data that’s been scrunched through a bunch of processes, and then needs to be interpreted. And so, there’s a responsibility on the analyst for that. There’s also a responsibility on consumers of news and truth” summarizes Wilson. “It also gives a responsibility on us as providers” Pellegrino adds. She wants the audience to understand that “satellite imagery is just one tool amongst a larger toolkit for people to understand what’s happening in the world.” Finally, Jeffrey Lewis emphasizes “the importance of transparency, being careful in making judgements and always being truthful in your work”.
The whole event was jointly organized by ECDF-Professor Felix Biessmann and ECDF-Associate researchers Rebecca D. Frank and Alex Glaser. The event is sponsored by the Berliner Hochschule für Technik (BHT), Princeton's Program on Science and Global Security (SGS), and the Einstein Center Digital Future (ECDF), with generous support by the German Foundation for Peace Research (DSF).