If you ever want to find out who is in charge, you need to find out what you arent allowed to criticize. Or, in the case of China, find out what words they end up removing so the extremely sensitive politicians running the eastern nation into the ground dont get their delicate feelings hurt.

It was recently revealed thatPaper Mario: The Origami King has bizarre phrases censored out in the Chinese release that is removing the fundamentals driving idea behind Paper Mario, and to a greater extent, theMario franchise as a whole.

The two words that have been revealed thus far to be removed from the Chinese edition are human rights and freedom, as Toad requests the help from the derring-do plumber to release the citizens of the world from a sudden oppressive dictatorship that is pushed by The Origami King.

The irony is rich enough to taste.

In multiple releases ofPaper Mario: The Origami King, Toad states Toads have rights, Toads want freedom.

In the Chinese release, Toad states Toads want peaceful lives.

Here, we have the scenes in 4 languages.

In Japanese and English it clearly says "Toads have rights, Toads want freedom."In both Chinese version, it says "Toads want peaceful lives."

We may want to have more context behind the scene. But we clearly see the differences here. pic.twitter.com/kljHBjgm30

ShawTim (@ShawTim) July 24, 2020

An interesting look at the overall ideal that is guiding China at the moment, where freedom and personal rights are expected to be exchanged for the citizens to live in what the Chinese government presumes to be peace.

Well bypass the low-hanging fruit of China running slave camps and committing genocide against hundreds of thousands indigenous peoples while forcing them to work in labor camps that multiple corporations allegedly directly benefit from, and instead focus on the amount of power that China is rapidly gaining over video games and media as a whole.

InTotal War: Three Kingdoms, a title by Creative Assembly that focuses on the Romance of the Three Kingdoms which was a fourteenth century novel by Luo Guanzhong which focuses on the Han Dynasty and China being ripped apart as three kingdoms vie for power, multiple phrases were censored out by Creative Assembly; a move that many note smells of the Chinese government directly controlling what is allowed.

Devotion was a Taiwanese psychological-horror title that was almost impeccable in delivery and performance; then China found out that it referenced the amusing Chinese President Xi Jinping as Winnie the Pooh, and Steam quickly removed the title a mere seven days after it was released to critical acclaim.

Steam themselves, while the darling of the PC gaming industry, have shown themselves to be more than complicit in censoring works coming from Hong Kong developers that paint Chinas political corruption and acts against humanity in a negative light; while they continue to publish titles that depict children in sexual situations.

Blizzard has also been in hot water with the Blitzchung controversy; a Hong Kong resident won aHearthstone tournament and offered a message of solidarity to the Hong Kong protestors; he was quickly removed from professional play and his winnings were not going to be delivered until internet outcry proved to be a formidable force.

The underlying issue it that we have a massive number of companies that directly influence the gaming industry, and theyre all more than eager to kowtow for Chinas absurd requests, as though removing the possibility to name a land Tibet inThree Kingdoms means that Tibet doesnt exist, or that rephrasing Toads plea for help means that Chinese citizens wont have a deeply-rooted fundamental desire for freedom.

Without any of the companies willing to take a stand against the censorship that China is levying, while Tencent wraps its arms around an ever-increasing number of developers, this is only the beginning. Its becoming an out of control issue that is white-washing severe social issues, all to the tune of a few extra dollars for the corporations complicit in the censorship. Seeing all of these brave acts of solidarity as these studios attempt to side with the BLM, while clearly positing that no one matters except for profits, leaves a poor taste in the mouth.

More:

Paper Mario: The Origami King Censors The Words Human Rights And Freedom... - Happy Gamer

Parler CEO John Matze on offering a Twitter app alternative which allows users to express free speech and engage in discussions without censorship.

Some users have become frustrated with the most mainstream social media sites, like Facebook and Twitter, over alleged conservative censorship, data security issues and other concerns.

They're creating accounts on sites like Gab, 4chan and the newly minted Parler however, it's unclear whether these companies will ever take significant market share away from today'ssocial media giants.

WHO IS PARLER CEO JOHN MATZE?

Some sites, like 4chan,have reputations as gathering places for extremists since the site isloath to censor offensive posts.

Meanwhile, sites like Parler are marketing to conservatives who think that companies like Twitter and Facebook are censoring right-of-center viewpoints.

Parler's homepage. (Screenshot)

"I think they are censoring," Parler CEO John Matze Jr. told FOX Business' "Mornings with Maria." "I don't think they believe they are. I don't know that they would admitthey are, but it is pretty clear that they're behaving like publications. ... They're telling you they're an open community forum for people behaving like publications, choosing what gets to reach its audience, what doesn't."

WHO IS TWITTER CEO JACK DORSEY?

Here are some alternative social media sites trying to grow their platforms or rehab their images:

Imageboard 4chan, a weird and often lewd corner of the internet,was founded by 15-year-old Christopher Poole in 2003. The site allows users to post anonymously on topic boards that range from politics to anime.

WHICH SOCIAL MEDIA SITE HAS THE MOST USERS?

Poole left 4chan and is now a product manager at Google. 4chan has grown to more than22 million monthly visitors worldwide.

Christopher Poole, founder of 4chan, speaks during the TechCrunch Disrupt conference in New York, on Tuesday, May 25, 2010. (Ramin Talaie/Corbis via Getty Images)

4chan has also faced serious criticism for its lack of controls after killers posted gory photos of their victims, including in the case of slain teen Bianca Devins.

Andrew Torba foundedGab.comin 2016,nearly 15 years after 4chan was created, and Gabhas a much smaller user base than 4chan's. Gab's interface is similar to Twitter's, but it is banned by both the Apple App Store and Google Play Store because of its content.

WHAT IS SECTION 230?

Gab insisted it has "zero tolerance" for racism and terrorism after facing backlash when it was revealed that the Pittsburgh synagogue shooter had posted anti-Semitic messages on the website.

The site had more than 1.1 million registered users as of April.

In June, alternativesocial mediasite Parler seemedto have sprung up overnight after fed-upconservativesannouncedthey were making accounts because of Twitter's censorship policies.

But the sitehas been around since 2018 and was founded by John Matze Jr. and Jared Thomson. Both studied computer science at the University of Denver.

Conservative pundit Dan Bongino ispushing Parler afterannouncingearlier in June that he had taken an ownership stake in the platform.

GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE

Ello now describes itself as a network for "creators" after starting out as an ad-free Facebook alternative in 2014. The site was not user-friendly and therefore unable to retain a solid user base, according to TechCrunch. Its reinvention focuses on connecting artists with partnership opportunities and allowing them to share their work with the wider world.

Ello's homepage. (Screenshot)

The site had about 625,000 artists as of 2017, according to TechCrunch.

A lot of people thought we died and went away and the whole time weve been cultivating a really niche and creative community thats gotten more focused as Ive been able to enact my vision," CEO Todd Berger told TechCrunch.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE ON FOX BUSINESS

See the article here:

What alternative social media sites are there? - Fox Business

As it rounds the corner toward next months milestone 300th issue, Heavy Metal magazine for decades the go-to destination for some of fans edgiest and wildest comic book rides closed ranks at Comic-Con@Home to take a look at how the seminal magazine will carry the torch in the years to come.

Coming together for a birds-eye view of the magazines place in a changing world, CEO Matthew Medney emceed an online chat with partner, publisher, and creative chief David Erwin, along with Dylan Sprouse (Sun Eater), George C. Romero (The Rise, Cold Dead War), Brendan Columbus (Savage Circus), and Dan Fogler (Fishkill, Brooklyn Gladiator, Moon Lake) all for a deep talk that veered hilariously between big-picture issues like censorship and the magazines punk-rock soul; and silly diversions (like Columbus fascination with man-eating giraffes).

First things first: everyone in the Heavy Metal family planted their flag as die-hard lovers of artistic freedom and following their creative impulses to the ends of the Earth even as the larger creative world, in Erwins word, grows more vanilla and risk-averse. Were the Ben & Jerrys, he joked, noting that his background with big-budget DC productions like Christopher Nolans Batman movies taught him the value of system-bucking artists, toiling away on far less bankable comic book ideas.

This is what I think makes Heavy Metal exciting, he explained bringing in these different personalities and taking risks and taking chances.

Not everything needs to be for everyone, Medney agreed. That idea thats kind of infected our society, that everything should be palatable for everyone, is kind of as dangerous as misinformation.

Heavy Metal was born in an era of immense social and artistic ferment, and thats exactly what Romero who said he tried for years to get his famous, zombie film-pioneering father to work with the magazine back when horror and sci-fi didnt often cross paths said he values about being a part of it.

Growing up, Romerosaid, the magazine inspired him with its willingness to go against the cultural grain and engage all kinds of artistic visions. It was an opportunity for writers to put characters into world views that everybody, kids and grown ups, could identify with, he said. By putting messaging into characters that I think we looked to almost as role models growing up, one way or another, it formed our ability as a generation to have what our parents mightve called'dangerous' thoughts

What could be more dangerous than ravenous giraffes? Everyone roasted Columbus for the insane sights that await readers of Savage Circus when HM Issue #300 arrives next month. But Columbus confessed he wasnt trying to challenge prevailing values when he came up with the idea nope; he simply wanted to have a comic where crazy, zany stuff would be the rule, rather than the exception.

I wanted to see people get torn apart by animals, he joked. Thats the why. When I opened a comic book as a kid, it was to see the things [adults didnt want you to see] so I made Savage Circus a throwback to sort of the emotional stories of the 80s for fans of all the hard-edged violence and pulpy humor the eras creators playfully engaged.

Fogler said thats the idea he was going for with Moon Lake, the Hitchcock on acid 2010 graphic novel anthology that put the current Walking Dead star on comic book fans radar. Moon Lake is an homage to everything I was not supposed to see as a kid; everything I stayed up late to watch, he said, adding that Heavy Metals 300th issue marks an important testimony to the unfettered artistic spirit.

History is repeating itself man; it feels like the 60s all over again, and Heavy Metal was birthed out of that, he reflected. What a perfect voice. [The magazine] is not going to censor us and theres so much censoring going on right now.

Featuring an English-language debut of a Moebius short story, with work from Medney, Erwin, Sprouse, Columbus, Richard Corben, Liberatore, Vaughan Bode, Stephanie Phillips, Justin Jordan, Blake Northcott, and more, Issue #300 of Heavy Metal is set to arrive on Aug. 19.

Click here for SYFY WIRE's full coverage of Comic-Con@Home 2020.

Original post:

Zombies, censorship, & killer giraffes: Heavy Metal reflects on making it to issue #300 - SYFY WIRE

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) introduced a bill that would strip big tech companies of their Section 230 immunity if they use or enable manipulative, behavioral advertising.

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act currently protects tech companies from liability for unlawful content that users post on their platforms. But the Behavioral Advertising Decisions Are Downgrading Services (BAD ADS) Act, which Hawley announced on Tuesday, would remove that protection for large platforms that use tactics like tracking users past location or creating personal psychological profiles to target them with ads that match their online behavior and history.

Big techs manipulative advertising regime comes with a massive hidden price tag for consumers while providing almost no return to anyone but themselves, Hawley said. From privacy violations to harming children to suppression of speech, the ramifications are very real.

This isnt the first time Hawley has gone after big tech. In June, he introduced a bill that would enable users to sue platforms for selectively censoring political speech.

In August 2019, Hawley also proposed a bill, the Social Media Addiction Reduction Technology (SMART) Act, that would prohibit social media platforms from using infinite scroll or auto refill and engagement-related awards, in an effort to combat excessive use of social media.

Two months before that, Hawley introduced the Ending Support for Internet Censorship Act, which would only grant Section 230 immunity to big tech companies that could show their content moderating practices were not politically biased.

Hawley isnt the only lawmaker critical of Section 230. Republican Sen. Kelly Loeffler introduced a bill in June that would remove liability protections for platforms that censor free speech. Sens. Ted Cruz and Lindsey Graham have also indicated that they would support pulling back some of the protections for big tech companies if censorship continues.

Meanwhile, the House Antitrust Subcommittee will hear from the heads of Amazon, Facebook, Google, and Apple on Wednesday. Conservatives expect the hearing to be an opportunity to discuss growing concerns about censorship by social media platforms.

Elle Reynolds is an intern at the Federalist, and a senior at Patrick Henry College studying government and journalism. You can follow her work on Twitter at @_etreynolds.

Read this article:

New Bill Would Punish Tech Companies That Use Behavioral Ads To Collect Your Information - The Federalist

NEW YORK (AP) So youve probably read a lot about cancel culture. Or know about a new poll that shows a plurality of Americans disapproving of it. Or you may have heard about a letter in Harpers Magazine condemning censorship and intolerance.

But can you say exactly what cancel culture is? Some takes:

It seems like a buzzword that creates more confusion than clarity, says the author and journalist George Packer, who went on to call it a mechanism where a chorus of voices, amplified on social media, tries to silence a point of view that they find offensive by trying to damage or destroy the reputation of the person who has given offense.

I dont think its real. But there are reasonable people who believe in it, says the author, educator and sociologist Tressie McMillan Cottom. From my perspective, accountability has always existed. But some people are being held accountable in ways that are new to them. We didnt talk about cancel culture when someone was charged with a crime and had to stay in jail because they couldnt afford the bail.

Cancel culture tacitly attempts to disable the ability of a person with whom you disagree to ever again be taken seriously as a writer/editor/speaker/activist/intellectual, or in the extreme, to be hired or employed in their field of work, says Letty Cottin Pogrebin, the author, activist and founding editor of Ms. magazine.

It means different things to different people, says Ben Wizner, director of the ACLUs Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project.

In tweets, online letters, opinion pieces and books, conservatives, centrists and liberals continue to denounce what they call growing intolerance for opposing viewpoints and the needless ruining of lives and careers. A Politico/Morning Consult poll released last week shows 44% of Americans disapprove of it, 32% approve and the remaining 24% had no opinion or didnt know what it was.

For some, cancel culture is the coming of the thought police. For others, it contains important chances to be heard that didnt exist before.

Recent examples of unpopular cancellations include the owner of a chain of food stores in Minneapolis whose business faced eviction and calls for boycotts because of racist social media posts by his then-teenage daughter, and a data analyst fired by the progressive firm Civis Analytics after he tweeted a study finding that nonviolent protests increase support for Democratic candidates and violent protests decrease it. Civis Analytics has denied he was fired for the tweet.

These incidents damage the lives of innocent people without achieving any noble purpose, Yascha Mounk wrote in The Atlantic last month. Mounk himself has been criticized for alleging that an astonishing number of academics and journalists proudly proclaim that it is time to abandon values like due process and free speech.

Debates can be circular and confusing, with those objecting to intolerance sometimes openly uncomfortable with those who dont share their views. A few weeks ago, more than 100 artists and thinkers endorsed a letter co-written by Packer and published by Harpers. It warned against a new set of moral attitudes and political commitments that tend to weaken our norms of open debate and toleration of differences in favor of ideological conformity.

The letter drew signatories from many backgrounds and political points of view, ranging from the far-left Noam Chomsky to the conservative David Frum, and was a starting point for contradiction.

The writer and trans activist Jennifer Finney Boylan, who signed the letter, quickly disowned it because she did not know who else had attached their names. Although endorsers included Salman Rushdie, who in 1989 was forced into hiding over death threats from Iranian Islamic leaders because of his novel The Satanic Verses, numerous online critics dismissed the letter as a product of elitists who knew nothing about censorship.

One of the organizers of the letter, the writer Thomas Chatterton Williams, later announced on Twitter that he had thrown a guest out of his home over criticisms of letter-supporter Bari Weiss, the New York Times columnist who recently quit over what she called a Twitter-driven culture of political correctness. Another endorser, Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling, threatened legal action against a British news site that suggested she was transphobic after referring to controversial tweets that she has written in recent months.

The only speech these powerful people seem to care about is their own, the author and feminist Jessica Valenti wrote in response to the Harpers letter. (Cancel culture ) is certainly not about free speech: After all, an arrested journalist is never referred to as canceled, nor is a woman who has been frozen out of an industry after complaining about sexual harassment. Canceled is a label we all understand to mean a powerful person whos been held to account.

Cancel culture is hard to define, in part because there is nothing confined about it no single cause, no single ideology, no single fate for those allegedly canceled.

Harvey Weinstein and Bill Cosby, convicted sex offenders, are in prison. Former television personality Charlie Rose has been unemployable since allegations of sexual abuse and harassment were published in 2017-18. Oscar winner Kevin Spacey has made no films since he faced allegations of harassment and assault and saw his performance in All the Money in the World replaced by Christopher Plummers.

Others are only partially canceled. Woody Allen, accused by daughter Dylan Farrow of molesting her when she was 7, was dropped by Amazon, his U.S. film distributor, but continues to release movies overseas. His memoir was canceled by Hachette Book Group, but soon acquired by Skyhorse Publishing, which also has a deal with the previously canceled Garrison Keillor. Sirius XM announced last week that the late Michael Jackson, who seemed to face posthumous cancellation after the 2019 documentary Leaving Neverland presented extensive allegations that he sexually abused boys, would have a channel dedicated to his music.

Cancellation in one subculture can lead to elevation in others. Former San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick has not played an NFL game since 2016 and has been condemned by President Donald Trump and many others on the right after he began kneeling during the National Anthem to protest a country that oppresses black people and people of color. But he has appeared in Nike advertisements, been honored by the ACLU and Amnesty International and reached an agreement with the Walt Disney Co. for a series about his life.

You can say the NFL canceled Colin Kaepernick as a quarterback and that he was resurrected as a cultural hero, says Julius Bailey, an associate professor of philosophy at Wittenberg University who writes about Kaepernick in his book Racism, Hypocrisy and Bad Faith.

In politics, Virginia Governor Ralph Northam, a Democrat, remains in his job 1 1/2 years after acknowledging he appeared in a racist yearbook picture while in college. Sen. Al Franken, a Democrat from Minnesota, resigned after multiple women alleged he had sexually harassed them, but Lt. Governor Justin Fairfax of Virginia defied orders to quit after two women accused him of sexual assault.

Sometimes even multiple allegations of sexual assault, countless racist remarks and the disparagement of wounded military veterans arent enough to induce cancellation. Trump, a Republican, has labeled cancel culture far-left fascism and the very definition of totalitarianism while so far proving immune to it.

Politicians can ride this out because they were hired by the public. And if the public is willing to go along, then they can sometimes survive things perhaps they shouldnt survive, Packer says.

I think you can say that Trumps rhetoric has had a boomerang effect on the rest of our society, says PEN America CEO Suzanne Nossel, who addresses free expression in her book Dare to Speak, which comes out next week. People on the left feel that he can get away with anything, so they do all they can to contain it elsewhere.

More here:

Everywhere and nowhere: The many layers of 'cancel culture' - Associated Press

ISTANBUL: A proposed law that Turkey says will make social media companies more accountable to local regulations will rather increase censorship and accelerate a trend of authorities silencing dissent, critics including a UN body said this week.The Turkish parliament was to begin debate on Tuesday on the bill that is backed by President Tayyip Erdogans ruling AK Party, which has a majority with an allied nationalist party. It is expected to pass this week.As an overwhelming majority of the countrys mainstream media has come under government control over the last decade, Turks have taken to social media and smaller online news outlets for critical voices and independent news.Turks are already heavily policed on social media and many have been charged with insulting Erdogan or his ministers, or criticism related to foreign military incursions and the handling of the coronavirus pandemic.The law would require foreign social media sites to appoint Turkish-based representatives to address authorities concerns over content and includes deadlines for its removal.Companies could face fines, blocked advertisements or have bandwidth slashed by up to 90%, essentially blocking access.Social media is a lifeline... to access news, so this law signals a new dark era of online censorship, said Tom Porteous, Human Rights Watch deputy program director. It would damage free speech in Turkey where an autocracy is being constructed by silencing media and all critical voices, he added.Presidential spokesman Ibrahim Kalin said the bill would not lead to censorship but would establish commercial and legal ties with platforms.What is a crime in the real world is also crime in the digital world, he said on CNN Turk, adding that these included terrorism propaganda, insults and violation of personal rights.Turkey was second globally in Twitter-related court orders in the first six months of 2019, according to the company, and it had the highest number of other legal demands from Twitter.Erdogan has repeatedly criticized social media and said a rise of immoral acts online in recent years was due to lack of regulations.A spokesperson for the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights said the draft law would give the state powerful tools for asserting even more control over the media landscape.It would further undermine the right of people in Turkey to freedom of expression, to obtain information and to participate in public and political life, said spokeswoman Liz Throsell.

More here:

Lebanese PM urges caution amid heightened border tensions with Israel - Arab News

In the weeks since Beijing passed the Hong Kong national security law, political titles have been pulled from public library shelves, a protest slogan has been banned and students have been prohibited from political activities in schools. With lawyers, academics, and journalists expressing concern over the laws vague wording, the future of free speech and expression in the city is uncertain.

Booksellers, like the citys librarians and publishers, fear stricter regulations on the titles they are allowed to offer, creating a chilling effect among institutions which traditionally uphold and safeguard the free flow of ideas, information, and narratives.

Fears for the independent bookselling arena in Hong Kong first arose in 2015, when five staff members of Causeway Bay Books which sold political gossip titles disappeared. Then, in mid-2018, it was revealed that the China Liaison Office in Hong Kong owned the company controlling Sino United Publishing (SUP), which in turn controlled more than half the citys bookstores.

But there are still booksellers in Hong Kong who continue to safeguard against Chinese influence. Albert Wan of Bleak House Books, a local English-language bookstore at the heart of a tight-knit reading community, is committed to resisting any changes in how he runs his business. This includes continuing to stock sensitive political titles that could potentially contravene the law: [These titles] mostly would be books that are not published by large presses. Books that relate specifically to Hong Kong and the law, the Umbrella Movement, or protests from last summer these are obviously the most sensitive books, he told HKFP.

He now wonders whether previously unproblematic titles will become contraband: Under the new law, and based on what we know happens in mainland China, would it be a problem to stock 1984, Animal Farm, or On Tyranny? [What about] general theory-based books [or] academic texts about revolutionary movements that have taken place in China in the past? Who knows?

As a former US lawyer before running his own bookshop, Wan is sceptical about the legal validity of recent government-issued statements about what may or may not be acceptable: Its hard to tell where the red-lines are. Everyones saying it, but its true. It doesnt help when the government willy-nilly comes out and makes statements about the law or how people might be violating it. Theres no official interpretation. What the government says, at least in my understanding of how things work their statements are not the law, he said.

Wan is not the only independent bookstore owner frustrated by the legislation. May Fung of ACO Book a local bookstore specialising in arts and culture also expressed concern: Every publication on any subject is now subject to this national security law. I think it is dangerous and I am somewhat worried, she told HKFP.

If we still lived in a society with rule of law and a legal system we can trust, we can go to court and the court will fairly decide whether or not a certain title contravenes the law. But this new national security agency is outside of the government, so thats not necessarily the case now; we dont know whether or not they will be fair.

However, Fung, like Wan, is committed to business as usual, unless forced to do otherwise. I wont stop operations because [the government] may or may not ban certain titles. We will keep doing what we are doing until we are forced into a corner, she said.

Since the anti-extradition law protests started last June, Wan and his store have taken a clear stance in support of the pro-democracy movement. He says that, especially for indie bookstores like Bleak House, it is difficult to stay apolitical.

I dont think theres anything wrong with being apolitical, its really up to the person who runs the bookshop. I think its a problem to not have a stance personally, but it doesnt necessarily have to translate into what you do for work, he said. [But] its a little hard to do that when youre selling books the books you stock reflect the perspectives and the ideologies of the person or people running the bookshop its harder for smaller bookshops to be in the middle and not take a side.

When asked whether he will obey orders to pull books off his shelves for the sake of national security, Wan gave a tentative answer: We would not go and start pulling books off our shelves just because we receive [an order to do so]. It depends on the nature of the order and what itll look like.

We are very hesitant to go down the path of any kind of censorship, whether its self-imposed or whether its imposed from outside because if we go down that road theres really no turning back.

Fung echoed the sentiment: I dont want to go to prison but I will not self-censor until I absolutely have no other choice, she said.

Despite their commitment to resisting self-censorship, both Wan and Fung said they have to weigh the risks to their livelihoods and the safety of those around them.

My initial reaction will be to tell them to f-off, but I also have a bookstore to run I have responsibilities as a husband and father, Wan said. Its a matter of how muchI feel like I can keep doing [what Im doing] and not be a burden and compromise the safety of my family.

If they do come and tell us certain books can no longer be sold like we saw with Causeway Books, then I will have to stop selling the titles to protect my colleagues from being arrested, Fung said.

Elsewhere in the city, international bookstores are adopting a more cautious approach under the new law. The manager of a bookstore selling books by a German publisher, who requested to remain anonymous, told HKFP their brand has had to self-censor for the sake of business.

Following the passing of the national security law, we do feel that the freedom that once existed has been curtailed. he said. For example, we used to be very carefree and bold in our displays in art fairs in the city, we even put on display a book about Tibet in recent years.

This year, however, the new law has forced them to rein in their displays. We sell lots of books on very diverse subjects. But there is definitely more self-censorship now. At the end of the day, we are a business entity, he said.

This doesnt necessarily mean the international brand will steer clear of every potentially problematic title in Hong Kong: In our shop, we are still selling books by Ai Wei Wei. Its just for higher-profile events, we now have to be less bold.

Under the security law, the company is approaching bookselling in Hong Kong with lessons learnt from its operations on the mainland. While we have healthy business relations on the mainland, we have been careful about the types of books we sell in the mainland Chinese market. For example, we stay away from selling more sensitive books such as those depicting maps or dealing with religion. the manager said.

Beyond preemptive self-censorship, international bookshops in the city may encounter direct censorship as the laws implementation unfolds. If told to remove certain titles from their catalogue, the brand would have to comply: We are a business in Hong Kong and have no choice but to follow the law.

This, however, is a marked change from the companys original intentions when setting up operations in the city more than ten years ago: Its not necessarily what we want since we set up our regional office in Hong Kong as it was a free city and one of Asias capitals with the freedom of publication, the manager added.

We can still run a healthy business even with the tighter controls and with more titles becoming more sensitive. However, we will have to see how the new law unfolds to see if we will further expand in the city.

HKFP also approached other large book chains in the city, including Swindon Books, Bookazine, and HKMoAs TheBookshop, but did not receive any response.

In spite of the rapidly changing political landscape, booklovers are still carrying on as before. Commenting on whether he has seen a change in his bookstores community, Wan was surprised at the lack of immediate change: We thought that people were going to change their book-buying habits after they passed the law because we have books and literature at the bookshop that some people might deem problematic, he said. But people are still buying the same books they were buying before the law was passed.

The manager for the German-based retailer suggested that customers themselves still had the agency to resist censorship and the curtailing of freedoms through their spending: Our customers are using their purchasing power in the same way, they are buying the same titles they did before.

Likewise, despite the pressures, Wan said he believes bookstores too must continue to play their quiet yet crucial rolein facilitating access to knowledge: [Our] duty is just to keep the flow of information going. To keep it as open and as wide and as free as possible. Theres nothing special they have to do. Its not like they have to fight back or say anything thats especially incendiary or provocative, he said.

He said he has this hope for other bookstores: Just [keep] doing business the way they used to before the law was passed. Just maintaining that sense of freedom that is a trademark of Hong Kong society. This is what sets it apart from the mainland. To maintain that atmosphere and that culture is important.

For Fung, keeping her store open and uncensored is a question of keeping knowledge accessible for all.

I think bookstores play an important role in providing access to knowledge in the community. Not everybody has access to an official education so its vital to keep providing a channel of knowledge to society, she said. This is important for me, and I think lots of people also believe in this.

And the future for Hong Kong bookstores? The fate of bookstores is sort of tied to [Hong Kong] as a society thats rooted in law and free expression and transparency. You cannot run a bookstore without those core principles in place, Wan said.

The way Hong Kong goes, bookshops will go. Right now it doesnt look good, but who knows? We just have to stay hopeful and keep doing what were doing.

SIGN UP to HKFP Dim Sum a weekly summary of our best content

Emails are sent every Friday. Unsubscribe at any time. HKFP will not share your details with third parties.

Success! You've joined the HKFP Dim Sum mailing list

Whoops! There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Please reload the page and try again.

More:

I will continue until I have no other choice: The art of bookselling under Hong Kongs national security law - Hong Kong Free Press

(Getty)

But there is no question that weve got some major issues, and free speech is so dependent these days on these big tech companies, so they have to be very careful that free speech is protected. And, of course, theres a pattern now that shows otherwise

On July 21st, Merion West editor Erich Prince was joined by Rep. Jody Hice, a Republican who represents Georgias 10th congressional district in the U.S. House of Representatives. (Rep. Hice has also joined Merion Westfor previous discussions in 2018 and 2019.) In this conversation, Mr. Prince and Rep. Hice discuss recent unrest in the country, including the Defund the Police movement, which has gained particular inroads recently in cities such as New York and Minneapolis. Rep. Hice then also weighs in on recent concerns about free speech, including allegations that various technology companies have an anti-conservative bias.

Good morning, Congressman. Nice to talk to you again and thanks so much for your time. I want to start off by quickly saying that I understand the President was in Atlanta last weekand that you had the chance to fly with him on Air Force One. How was that experience?

Great experienceits always wonderful to be with the president, but to be on Air Force One is just icing on the cake to be with him in that environmentjust an amazing experience all the way around.

I saw a video you posted on Twitter showing your constituents the conference room [on board], and you shared with them a message about getting involved in politics.

Yeah, you know we are a country of We the People; our voice matters. I feel like Im an example of that myself; [I] never dreamed Id be in a place like this. And I just want to encourage other people that their voices matter; their votes matter; and to step up to the plate in whatever capacity they can and to be involved. I thought the place, the conference room on Air Force One, was appropriate for getting that message out on.

Jumping ahead, I read your June op-ed in The Daily Caller End RacismNot the Police, as well as your recent letters co-signed with a few other colleagues to the mayors of New York, Los Angeles, and Minneapolis. Obviously, this anti-police moment is gaining a lot of traction. What do you think is the best way to turn the tide against this from your perspective?

I think, in fact, Americans in generalin every polltheyre opposed to defunding the police or eradicating police departments. People understand that its impossible to have law and order if you dont have law enforcement in the mix. And this attempt to remove all law enforcement in their capacity to maintain law and order is only going to create further chaos and more crime. And, of course, thats what were seeing in all of those three cities that you mentioned: Crime is up; violent crime is up. Its ludicrous to think that we can maintain a civil society without police departments and law enforcement.

And closer to home for youobviously, Atlantas not your districtbut that was an area that was hit pretty hard by things. And there were reports about morale suffering within law enforcement, such as reports of walkouts by police in Atlantas Zone 6 in particular.What are you hearing around the state of Georgiawhether in your district or around the statefrom law enforcement?

As you mention, Atlanta is not in my district, but I have spoken to many law enforcement individuals in the 10th district of Georgia, and its a difficult time. We are not seeing the same type of protests as have happened in Atlanta and some other major cities. What protests there have been in our district have been peaceful and that type of thing, but the overarching question that you bring up is: How is the Defund the Police movement impacting these various departments, sheriff departments, police departments?

And it is impacting them. They are having great difficulty in hiring people, even receiving applications from individuals who are interested in law enforcement. And thats been an area in the past that people have been proud to be in law enforcement, to be public servants in that capacity, but now its a different scenario. And even in rural parts of our nation, that is having an impact.

On the flip side, one does see some of this effort to show extra support for police. I saw a weekend or two ago in Queens [New York] that there was a very sizable pro-police march, so perhaps some of the people on the other side [of this debate] are also trying to make their voices heard.

Yes, and I think youre going to see more of that because, again, the vast majority of Americans understand that the vast majority of police officers are great people, and theyre public servants. Are there bad actors? Of course, there are, and those are the individuals we need to go after. Thats where the problems that exist need to be dealt with and eradicated. But to punish entire departments is doing nothing other than punishing entire communities and cities. Its just the wrong way to go about it, and I think the majority of Americans are keenly aware of that, and they will be supporting the police departments.

So, yesterday when I was getting together this interview discussion, I was planning to ask you about free speech in a number of places, and one of the places was big tech. Then I saw your letter that you tweeted this morning about free speech, Twitter, big tech, and potential censorship. I know the Tom Cotton Twitter controversy a couple of weeks ago received a lot of attention. So, in the aftermath of recent events and free speech being arguably very much in the crosshairs, what is your thinking about the path forward as far as big tech?

Actually, there is going to be a hearing in judiciary with the big four big tech companies next week, so we will have a better feel next week as to where this whole thing is going to go. But there is no question that weve got some major issues, and free speech is so dependent these days on these big tech companies, so they have to be very careful that free speech is protected. And, of course, theres a pattern now that shows otherwise, and we want to stop that before it becomes a serious infringement upon peoples right to speak.

And I know a lot of people were concerned in particular with this perception that Twitter was employing its new fact-check feature disproportionately against conservatives, for example.

Yes, theres multiple examples of that, and, of course, there have been hearings trying to deal with those issues in the past during which [these companies] have assured us that their algorithms do not show bias towards conservative groupsbut its not just about algorithms. Its about the individuals who are working there, meaning those employees who do, in fact, carry biases, and they are able to override the algorithms. So, its a little disingenuous for these companies to say that our algorithms do not show any bias because thats not the only problem thats involved in this. And I think that issue has now come to light, and now well have to approach it from not only the systems themselves but also the people who are working those systems.

Lastly, college campuses have been a major discussion point when it comes to free speech. What are you seeing in Georgia [on this front]? Are you thinking about if this becomes an issue at various Georgia universities how to ensure free speech is taken care of there?

Right now, the big issue is if were even going to have college campuses and people meeting on those campuses, obviously. But, in the past, there have definitely been some issues in Georgia and across the country. And we are going to continue to keep a close pulse on that everywhere in this country, including college campuses. They should be the place where people have the right to express their ideas in the public square without fear of intimidation, or harassment, or punishment.

Unfortunately, that has not always been the case on college campuses, and there have been multiple lawsuits, and most of those lawsuits come out favorably. And, yet, the problem continues, so we will continue fighting and keeping a pulse on it here from the federal level as best as we can. Many of us up here at least have that as a major, important issue, and we will continue protecting the free rights of these students.

I appreciate your time, Congressman. Always nice to touch basethank you.

Always nice to talk with you. Thank you, Erich.

Erich J. Prince is the editor at Merion West. Erichhas contributed to a variety of publications includingThe Philadelphia Inquirer,the Hartford Courant,The News & Observer, the Orlando Sentinel, andThe Hill. His opinion writing has been honored with two awards from the Columbia University School of Journalism. He studied political science at Yale, completing his thesis on the history of polarization in the United States Congress.

Read the original:

Interview: Rep. Jody Hice on Defund the Police and Big Tech Censorship - Merion West