Poets are a big deal in Iran, and Forugh Farrokhzad was one of the biggest. In the 1960s, her modern, highly personal work won wide acclaim and brought her the poetry equivalent of rock stardom she cut records, made films, and even today is known popularly by her first name.

When Farrokhzad was killed in a car crash in 1967, thousands of fans thronged to her funeral. But after the 1979 Islamic Revolution, her work vanished, banned for a decade, and since then heavily censored by the government.

Bijan Khalili knows plenty aboutFarrokhzadand Iranian censorship. Banned books are a specialty of his. For 36 years he has owned Ketab Corporation, a Persian bookstorein Los Angeles. It started as a simple service to exiles who had fled Iran's revolution, leaving their books behind. But as post-revolutionary censorship took hold in Iran, selling books untouched by Iran's censors became a daily act of defiance.

Reading books is a human right, he says.

No book, songor film gets legally published in Iranwithout permission from Iran's Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance. Government censors have the power to demand changes or major cuts or to ban works outright.Among taboo topics are criticism of Islam or Iran's Islamic regime, acknowledging the Holocaust, and interactions between unmarried and unrelated men and women. Kissing and dancing scenes in the Harry Potter books were changed or excised in Iranian editions. Khalili says censors force cookbook writers to remove references to wine, or adapt the recipe for a nonalcoholic ingredient.

George Orwell's 1984 is a book Khalili knows well. When he fled Iran, he took a suitcase stuffed with books, among them the classic Orwell dystopia, as well as books by Dostoevsky, Victor Hugo,and the Persian poets Hafez and Omar Khayyam. In 1981, when Khalili opened Ketab, which means book in Persian, his suitcase full of books stocked the store's first shelf.

Today, it's much bigger, but the store on busy Westwood Boulevard, in theIranian exile neighborhood known as Persian Square, still has an old-time feeling. The spacious, quiet rooms are filled with tall stacks of books on spirituality, sociology, politics, history there's even a shelf marked books prohibited in Iran. And between the stacks, people are reading whatever they want.

For Iranians raised with censorship, it's amazing. Browsing in the business section, I meet Ali, who recently moved to the US from Iran.

This ...just blows your mind, because you do not expect such a thing to be here. You can find the most illegal books in the bookshelves here, he says.

Ali asked me to use only his first name over fear of retaliation against his family back home for talking openly with a reporter about books.If you know more about what's going on around you you will have more knowledge, he says. The knowledge is the power.

If knowledge and power are a tug-of-war in Iran, books are a rope. But Iranian readers are pulling hard on their end, with the help of exiles like Khalili. Because Ketab isn'tjusta bookstore. It's also one of nearly a dozen Persian publishersoutside Iran helping writers bypass censorship to get their books out to the world. (See below for a list oftop-selling titles at Ketab Corporation.)

Some writers secretly publish uncensored books inside Iran, but it's risky. Often, writers in Iran will contact publishing houses abroad instead. Iranian readers who can crack the government firewall can access e-books online. There's also a thriving black market in pirated books published abroad.

Khalili says he's pleased his books are smuggled into Iran and reproduced, even if it takes a big bite out of sales. But Khalili is proud of his contribution to the fight against censorship. I'm proud that I help some Iranian to beknowledgeable about whatever happened, or whatever is close to truth, he says.

The truth, he believes, could someday set Iran free. If we are being successful to break that ban, and that censorship, I believe the Islamic regime era will be ended very soon, he says.

Ending censorship for good still feels a long way off. But Ketab books havereached at least one unexpected bookworm: Iran's government.

Ketab books on taboo topics like gender equalityand political prisoners have somehow, mysteriously,made it from Los Angeles to the collection of Iran's National Library.

And who knows? Maybe someone is reading them.

Here isa selection of top-selling titles at Ketab Corporation in Los Angeles:

See the rest here:

Step inside a Los Angeles bookstore that takes on Iran's censors ... - PRI

Trump supporters Lynnette Hardaway and Rochelle Richardson better known as Diamond and Silk took to Twitter on Thursday to accuse YouTube of censorship and a violation of their 1st Amendment rights (yeah, we know) after the company demonetized a reported 95% of the duos videos:

The pair thinks it might have something to do with their being Trump supporters and conservatives:

YouTube responded with instructions the pair could follow to appeal the decision:

Coincidentally, Hardaway and Richardson met with officials at the Commerce Department on Monday to discuss ways in which to grow their business and build their brand. From Gizmodo:

YouTube stars Lynnette Hardaway and Rochelle Richardsonbetter known as Diamond and Silk, respectivelywere invited to the Commerce Departments headquarters this week, apparently to discuss ways in which they could expand their business. The pair runs a political blog aimed at promoting President Trump and denigrating his critics.

The Commerce Department revealed Diamond and Silks visit in a photo posted on the departments official Twitter account, which said the duo had met with the Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA) to discuss how to grow their business and build their brand.

A spokesperson for the department later told Gizmodo that the tweet was deleted out of an abundance of caution as the department was not clear it had received permission to post the photo:

***

Read the original:

Diamond and Silk accuse YouTube of 'censorship' after company demonetized '95%' of their videos - Twitchy

Goodbye, old friend.

This is a big moment for Indian cinema, and for me personally. If youve been following along these last two years, you might recall the Central Board of Film Certifications decisions about the length of the kiss in Spectre, censoring drugs and the state of Punjab in a film about the drug crisis in Punjab, banning a feminist film for being lady oriented, among a whole host of other decisions that range from silly to outright homophobic. You may also recall my bizarre interview with CBFC chairperson Pahlaj Nihalani in January, which ended with me being kicked out of his office. Hes been a thorn in my side and in the side of artistic expression here in India. Heheld the word "intercourse"ransom, claiming he would only restore it to the film Jab Harry Met Sejal if 100,000 married people above the age of 36 voted for it on his Twitter poll (after a poll open to everyone was cleared with ease), and he even recentlyannounced cigarettes and liquor would be blurred out of movies entirely, in addition to the recent blackening out of partially nude bodies.

So it is with great pleasure that I now report Pahlaj Nihalani just been fired and replaced as the head of the CBFC.

The news broke on Times Now earlier today, but its been a long time coming. Once Udta Punjab beat an 89-cut mandate in the courts last year, and once Alankrita Srivastavas Lipstick Under My Burkha made it to Indian cinemas last month after being banned entirely, the writing seemed to be on the wall for Nihalani. Nothings a sure thing until its a sure thing, so the months worth of rumblings about him losing his job didnt necessarily inspire confidence (nothing eventually became of that parallel certification committee proposed in 2016 either), but here we are. Hes gone, and hopefully the boards regressive attitude will follow.

Nihalajis successor is Prasoon Joshi, lyricist, poet, screenwriter,CEO of McCann World Group India and Asia Pacific chairman of McCann Erickson. Its hard to say whether or not things will improve under him just yet; he was, after all, a communications manager for Prime Minister Narendra Modis campaign, and you may recall what silliness Nihalanis affection for Modi, whom he once called his action hero, eventually resulted in. Pragmatically speaking though, so long as Joshi doesnt want to try and ban the word lesbian and censor any and all forms of sexual content even from films rated A (Adult), its a step up.

Joshi is notably forward-thinking when it comes to depictions of women in cinema. Whether that manifests as artistic dialogue or restriction remains to be seen, but by all accounts, things look good. Its worth noting that Joshi was involved with the film Aarakshan, which was banned in several states back in 2011. Hes also worked on several films (like the anti-authoritarian Rang De Basanti) with actor Aamir Khan and an ad with Udta Punjab producer Anurag Kashyap, both strong vocal opponents of censorship, and according to filmmaker Mukesh Bhatt, whos been publicly embroiled in censorship debates since things began to worsen, Joshi understands the necessity of creative freedom.

Given that Nihalanis term was set to end in January 2018, his early removal feels like a positive sign. The problem as a whole isnt going to go away overnight, since its a combination of the widespread social inability to disagree on art and the continued ability of the Government to make these decisions for cinema via the Cinematograph Act of 1952, but this feels like a step in the right direction. The general attitude towards censorship as a means of cultural preservation can best be summed up in this exchange from my interview with Nihalani:

PN: As a filmmaker youre protected, I will say the certificate is very important for the movie, and its the responsibility of the filmmaker when we are projecting heritage property.

SA: Sorry?

The government protects heritage property, the Red Fort and other things. So isnt it the Governments job to protect Indian culture? Which is also heritage?

It is, but if were talking about specific monuments versus this nebulous idea of Indian culture

No, no, see, its life! When there is nothing, its only the heritage property which supports Indian culture.

So are we talking just about physical monuments, or

Im talking about when its the responsibility of the government to protect them! So the same way, its the governments job to protect our Indian culture.

And who defines what Indian culture is?

Thats the government.

And if someone disagrees with that stance

No, no, no, no, no. Thats not my-- then go and fight with the Parliament. Fight with the government. Ive got the duty to go according to the Act. If they want changes, Ill go with the changes.

Given the way the Indian film industry has vocally opposed every censorship controversy, replacing Nihalani with a seasoned Industry regular feels like something of a victory. Hopefully it means a more positive environment when it comes to art and artistic discourse too.

Now if youll excuse me, Im going to go do this for a while:

Originally posted here:

The Head Of Indian Film Censorship Has Been Fired - Birth.Movies.Death.

While much of the media obsesses over a pointless debateabout whether free speech should protect an employee who abuses his co-workers with outrageous claims masquerading as science (the answer is no), theres a serious assault on real science underway. Conservatives, including those in the Trump administration, are now trying to undermine the ability of scientists and activists to communicate ideas to the public. Climate change, unlike the supposed intellectual inferiority of women, is a genuine scientific finding with a strong consensus behind it. Thats likely why the right is increasingly looking to McCarthyite tactics to demonize and suppress information about it.

On Tuesday, Jane Mayer of The New Yorker reported that James OKeefe, the notorious right-wing hoaxer who tries to pass off his disinformation campaigns as investigative journalism, may have been caught trying to run one of his scams on the League of Conservation Voters. League officials have filed a complaint alleging that OKeefes team at the Veritas Project created an elaborate scheme to ingratiate themselves with the organization, in hopes of baiting someone who works there into saying something that could be taken out of context and used to demonize the group.

That has been the principal and indeed only tactic employed byOKeefe and his comrades since his glory days of 2009, when he successfully hoodwinked both media and elected officials with a hoax video falsely alleging that workersat ACORN were aiding and abetting sex traffickers.OKeefe and his colleagues, includingDavid Daleiden or Lila Rose, have a standard M.O.: Put out a video, using undercover footage taken out of context, to make false claims against progressive organizations or activists, with the hope that the lie spreads faster and farther than the inevitable debunking ever could.

OKeefe and his cronies usually go for targets that play off the Breitbart bases racist and sexist anxieties, so its a bit surprising to see them target a group that does the unsexy work of using electoral politics to advocate for reducing pollution and protecting public lands. But this all fits into what appears to be a growing strategy, empowered by Trumps election, of right-wingers seeking to intimidate and silence those who want to educate the public about the reality of climate change.

Also on Tuesday, Breitbart News published a straight-up bonkers piece by Matthew Boylebased on the premise that there is something deeply sinister or even illegal about reporters contacting EPAemployees to ask them how Trump appointee Scott Pruitt a noted climate-change skeptic is handling his job as head of the agency.Boyle was roundly mocked on social media for trying to put an alarmist spin on standard journalistic practice: Trying to inform the public about what their presidents appointees are doing with taxpayer money. But as Matt Gertz at Media Matters has pointed out, there may be something more disturbing here than the usual Breitbart nonsense.

Boyle apparently got his hands on an email exchange between EPA union representativeJohn OGrady and New York Times reporter Coral Davenport, who asked whom she could speak to in order to verify rumors about Pruitts behavior at the EPA. At the end of the article, Boyle published a list of the 34 employees to whom OGrady forwarded the request.

In so doing, Breitbart is serving as the Trump administrations pawn, giving it a roadmap it can use to ferret out potential leakers, Gertz writes, noting that those employees could face recriminations from the Trump administration simply for being perceived as someone who might suggest Pruitt is bad at his job.

Trumps administration loves throwing the word leaker around, equating every bad story shared by a government employee with the release of classified information that threatens national security. In reality, however, EPA employees exposing malfeasance at their agency are protecting national security, which most experts believe is in imperiled by climate change and endangered by Trump and Pruitts efforts to hide the scientific realities.

Despite all the squawking from the right about free speech whenever someone faces social (but not legal) consequences for saying bigotedthings in public, this is what a real attack on free speech looks like. Journalists, activists and government employees are being intimidated, harassed and subtly threatened for trying to get out the truth about climate change and expose the way taxpayer money is being misused by people who want to deny its reality.

There were reasons to worry that the effects are being felt in federal agencies, even before Boyle published his blacklist. On Monday,the Guardian published a report showing that officials at the U.S. Department of Agriculture had sent emails to staffers telling them to stop using terms like climate change, greenhouse gases and even sequester carbon. This follows a similar story published by Politico in Marchthatexposed how officials at the Department of Energy were also instructed not to use the termsclimate change, emissions reduction or Paris Agreement.

Under the circumstances, its no surprisethat someone sharedwith The New York Times a draft reportwritten by scientists at 13 federal agencies that chronicles the current not future, but current problems faced by Americans due to rising global temperatures. The leakers, the Times reported, were afraid their higher-ups in the Trump administration would take measures to censor, alter or suppress the findings.

As David Roberts at Vox points out, theres no evidence so far that Trump intended to suppress the report. He may have been planning on doing what he usually does, which is to ignore and/or lie about information that he finds displeasing. But in this environment, there is clearly reason to believe that conservatives have escalated past trying to deny the facts and are moving toward actively suppressing information.

Simply by becoming president, Trump has empowered and energized the most authoritarian tendencies, including bullying and a desire for censorship, found among many on the right. This new report from the government scientists, however, points to another reason: Climate change is no longer some abstractproblem that conservatives can dismiss as hypothetical. People, particularly in rural areas that tend to vote Republican, are starting to see and feel evidence of rising temperatures and the effects they have on weather and agriculture. That might make them more open to hearing a truth that was easier to deny in the past. Under those circumstances, theres good reason to suspect were seeing the beginning of a shift away from straightforward denial of climate change to more aggressive efforts to suppress the truth.

View post:

Anti-environment right shifts tactics: From climate-change denial to censorship and intimidation - Salon

WATCH LIVE

A Lyft car in San Francisco is seen in this file image.

Lyft apparently doesn't agree with the adage, "Any publicity is good publicity."

In an email, the San Francisco-based ride-sharing giant asked its drivers to pump the brakes before speaking with the press, and instead check in with Lyft officials first, according to the San Francisco Examiner.

The July note states: Email press@lyft.com if youre ever contacted by a reporter. Speaking of Lyft in the news: Were here to help if you get approached for an interview. Shoot a note to our communications team and theyll make sure youre prepared for any questions.

The message has created a stir, raising concerns about censorship.

Some drivers have taken to online message boards, calling it a scare tactic. Others say this is Lyfts way of trying to get in front of bad publicity, which has plagued its biggest competitor, Uber, according to the SF Examiner.

Drivers also wrote that they are independent contractors, not employees, so Lyft cannot restrict their actions.

Scott Coriell, a Lyft spokesperson, provided a comment to the SF Examiner, which read in part that censoring its drivers wasnt the intent, and thats not something we would ever do. Its not a requirement simply a reminder that were here as a resource, Coriell told the publication.

Published 31 minutes ago

See original here:

Lyft Sparks Censorship Fears With Email Asking Drivers to Speak to Company Before Media - NBC Bay Area

Published time: 9 Aug, 2017 22:53 Edited time: 10 Aug, 2017 08:55

Julian Assange is offering the Google engineer fired over a controversial memo, deemed to be in breach of the companys diversity code, a job at WikiLeaks.

The WikiLeaks founder and chief tweeted, Censorship is for losers, before adding that there was a job for fired Google software engineer James Damore at his whistleblowing organization.

Damore came under fire after an internal memo he wrote, arguing that women are underrepresented in tech not due to bias, but because of inherent psychological differences from men, was published online.

EntitledGoogles Ideological Echo Chamber,it suggests that the companys political bias has created the effect of shaming into silence.

This silencing has created an ideological echo chamber where some ideas are too sacred to be honestly discussed, and the lack of discussion brings about the most extreme and authoritarian elements of this ideology, the memo says.

We need to stop assuming that gender gaps imply sexism, Damore adds, suggesting that men have a higher drive for status and women have a higher agreeableness, leading to difficulties in salary negotiation.

READ MORE: Gender gap is natural, Google employee says in 10-page internally viral memo

The memo caused a media storm over the weekend with many branding it sexist.

On Tuesday, Damore confirmedhe had been let go by the company in an email which stated the reason for dismissal was perpetuating gender stereotypes.

Google CEO Sundar Pichai told employees Monday that parts of Damore's memo "violate our Code of Conduct and cross the line by advancing harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace."

Assange posted a series of tweets criticizing Google for firing someone for politely expressing their ideas.

He included a link to an extract from his 2014 book, When Google met WikiLeaks, in the tweets.

The excerpt, entitled, Google is not what it seems, outlines Assanges understanding of the relationship between Google and the US State Department.

READ MORE: Putting people at risk': Assanges lawyer criticizes new documentary on WikiLeaks founder

Read more from the original source:

'Censorship is for losers': Assange offers fired Google engineer job at WikiLeaks - RT

San Francisco Examiner

Lyft drivers fear censorship after internal email about speaking to press San Francisco Examiner Scott Coriell, a Lyft spokesperson, wrote that censorship wasn't the intent, and that's not something we would ever do. In a statement Coriell forwarded from Lyft, the company said drivers are free to speak to the press, and there are no ... and more »

Read more here:

Lyft drivers fear censorship after internal email about speaking to press - San Francisco Examiner

Sen. Debbie Stabenow(Photo: Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images)

Washington Michigan Sen. Debbie Stabenow, ranking Democrat on the Senate Agriculture Committee, wrote Tuesday to Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue demanding an explanation for news reports that agency officials had instructed staff to use weather extremes instead of the term climate change.

The Guardian reported on a series of emails among staff at the USDAs Natural Resources Conservation Service that also suggested avoiding the phrase reduce greenhouse gases in favor of build soil organic matter or increase nutrient use efficiency.

Censoring the agencys scientists and natural resource professionals as they try to communicate these risks and help producers adapt to a changing climate does a great disservice to the men and women who grow the food, fuel, and fiber that drive our economy, not to mention the agencys civil servants themselves, Stabenow wrote to Perdue.

This censorship makes the United States less competitive, less food secure, and puts our rural families and their communities at risk.

The USDA did not immediately respond to a request for comment Tuesday but has pushed back against the news reports, telling POLITICO that there was never a directive from the Natural Resources Conservation Service that using climate change was prohibited, and indicating it was unclear why the officials who wrote the memos had brought up the issue with staff.

Stabenow in her letter asks Perdue whether other USDA officials have issued directives regarding the removal of climate change and related terms.

She also wants to know what impact the terminology change could have on implementation of USDA programs and activities, and whether USDA intends to pursue a formal rule-making or other process to accompany the policy change. She asked for a response by Aug. 23.

As a firm believer in the science that underpins the urgent imperative to address climate change, the content of these emails is of great concern to me, Stabenow wrote.

USDA ought to be unequivocal in pursuing polices that uphold scientific integrity, yet these emails from senior USDA staff appear to run directly counter to such a pursuit. USDA should be open and transparent regarding the findings of agency research and the components of agency program activities that involve the topic of climate change.

President Donald Trump has questioned the whether climate change exists and has not said whether he believes it is caused by human activity.

mburke@detroitnews.com

Read or Share this story: http://detne.ws/2vL9qXL

Read more:

Stabenow questions 'censorship' of 'climate change' - The Detroit News

By Jonathan Zimmerman

Hey, check out those yahoos in Florida! Theyre censoring textbooks!

My fellow progressives have worked themselves into a good liberal lather over a new law in Florida that allows citizens to object to books assigned in the public schools. Promoted by conservative activists, who accused textbooks of fostering left-wing propaganda, the measure lets anyone in the state raise concerns about teaching materials and entitles those who object to a public hearing of their complaints.

Liberals immediately raised the specter of censorship, worrying that schools would purge information about sex, evolution and climate change.

But we should applaud rather than resist the popular scrutiny of textbooks, which has been a force for social justice and equality in other key moments in our past.

If you think otherwise, Ive got three words for you: Little Black Sambo.

Remember Sambo? He was the jolly, ostensibly Indian figure who dotted the pages of elementary school readers and spellers for much of American history.

Sambo became racist shorthand for a docile and childlike African-American who cheerily accepted his subjugation to the white master.

Hes gone from our textbooks, thankfully. And the reason is you guessed it citizen pressure on the schools. Starting in the 1940s, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and other African-American organizations issued a steady drumbeat of protest against Little Black Sambo and other types of racism in textbooks.

History books valorized the Ku Klux Klan. Music books featured the original lyrics of Stephen Foster songs, including the N-word and darky. Geography books described Africa as a dark continent of barbarity and superstition.

And in New York City, home to millions of Jews and African-Americans, schools taught an anti-Semitic and racist play called The Kings English.

It told the story of a boat shipwrecked on an island where a black cannibal Kawa Koo threatens to eat all 20 of the survivors.

Eventually, Kawa agrees to let a single passenger survive. The boats white captain, Ripley ORannigan, decides to select the person who speaks the best English. That draws gripes from the boats lone Jewish passenger, Perlheimer, who talks with both hands as he denounces Ripley.

Inklish? Vat for I speak Inklish? Perlheimer asks. I read Yiddische papers. I talk Yiddish mit mein friends. Ripley cuts him off. You may have him, Kawa! he tells the cannibal. America doesnt want him. Hes indigestible.

Black and Jewish protests led the New York schools to drop The Kings English in the early 1950s. Little Black Sambo held on a bit longer, but he mostly disappeared from our textbooks by the late 1960s.

Does that mean racism has been purged from school materials? Of course not. Just two years ago, a Texas citizen discovered that her sons history textbook described slaves as workers who came from Africa to America to work on agricultural plantations.

She objected, of course, and the publisher agreed to revise the offending passage. And that provided an object lesson in American democracy, which is always enhanced by citizen participation.

That doesnt mean every objection is valid, of course. Supporters of the new Florida law took aim at biology books describing evolution and human-made climate change, although both concepts are embraced by almost every informed scientist.

Others condemned history textbooks that allegedly praised government services at the expense of individual initiative and self-reliance.

But the answer to this challenge isnt to cut off citizen challenges, which would also prevent complaints of the sort that the Texas mom made. Nor should we squawk about censorship, which is the ultimate red herring in these debates. Im glad Little Black Sambo and The Kings English were censored, if by that term we mean their removal from the official curriculum. Arent you?

Instead, we liberals should use this occasion to call for more public engagement not less in school affairs. The Florida measure specifies that school boards must conduct an open public hearing about every citizen complaint before an unbiased and qualified hearing officer.

Theres our opening. When conservatives move to eliminate material about climate change or evolution, we need to flood these hearings to defend it. Weve got knowledge on our side, just as we did in the case of Little Black Sambo.

Depictions of slavery as a benign institution werent simply racist or offensive, although they were surely that. They were false.

Condemning the new Florida measure, one Democratic state legislator warned it could let anybody come in and complain about the history of slavery, or the fact that maybe we shouldnt have evolution in our textbooks. He was right, but it would be wrong to prevent that.

If you dont like what the schools are teaching, raise your voice. In America, thats the only way we get closer to the truth.

Jonathan Zimmerman, who teaches education and history at the University of Pennsylvania, is the author (with Emily Robertson) of The Case for Contention: Teaching Controversial Issues in American Schools (University of Chicago Press, 2017). Email at jlzimm@aol.com.

2017, The Philadelphia Inquirer

Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Go here to read the rest:

Jonathan Zimmerman column: Liberals worried about censorship forget about Sambo and the KKK - Richmond.com

WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange has offered a job to James Damore, a Google employee who was fired after he wrote a scathing internal memo criticizing the company's diversity policies .

"Censorship is for losers, WikiLeaks is offering a job to fired Google engineer James Damore," Assange wrote on Twitter Tuesday. In the same post, Assange also linked to a WikiLeaks article he wrote called "Google Is Not What It Seems."

Damore, a now-former engineer at Google, accused the Silicon Valley web giant of suppressing conservative voices in a 10-page memo called Googles Ideological Echo Chamber ," which was circulated over the weekend.

[W]hen it comes to diversity and inclusion, Googles left bias has created a politically correct monoculture that maintains its hold by shaming dissenters into silence," the memo, which was initially published anonymously, said. He later confirmed in an email to Bloomberg that he had been dismissed for "perpetuating gender stereotypes."

Google CEO Sundar Pichai told employees on Monday that parts of Damore's memo "violate our Code of Conduct and cross the line by advancing harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace."

View original post here:

Wikileaks' Julian Assange Just Offered Google's Fired Anti-Diversity Employee a Job - Fortune

Julian Assange has reached out to James Damore, the software engineer fired by Google for publishing an "anti-diversity manifesto." The WikiLeaks founder used his Twitter account (currently sporting a fake "verified" badge) to offer him a job.

Linking to an article entitled "Google Is Not What It Seems" about his book When Google Met Wikileaks, Assange said: "Censorship is for losers. @WikiLeaks is offering a job to fired Google engineer James Damore."

As well as the offer of a job for Damore, Assange criticized Google for what he sees as censorship, suggesting that employees should not be fired for "politely expressing ideas." The response on Twitter was not particularly positive, with many people calling out Assange for his definition of censorship and calling for him to vacate the Ecuadorian embassy where he remains holed up.

Assange posted a series of five tweets:

With no details given of what the job offer entails, the Twitter rant seems more like an excuse for Assange to revisit a favorite topic of his and sound off at the expense of Google. As for Damore -- from whom little has been heard -- the chances are he will not be short of job offers.

The rest is here:

'Censorship is for losers': WikiLeaks offers fired Google engineer a job - BetaNews

Common Dreams

Fearing Trump Censorship, Govt. Scientists Leak Alarming Climate Report Common Dreams Fearing Trump Censorship, Govt. Scientists Leak Alarming Climate Report. Published on. Tuesday, August 08, 2017. by. Common Dreams. Fearing Trump Censorship, Govt. Scientists Leak Alarming Climate Report. Scientists at 13 federal agencies released ... ANOTHER leak hits Trump as official climate change report is released by scientists who fear its warning that ...Daily Mail Scientists Fear Trump Will Dismiss Blunt Climate ReportNew York Times Read the Draft of the Climate Change Report - The New York TimesNew York Times The Guardian all 415 news articles »

See the rest here:

Fearing Trump Censorship, Govt. Scientists Leak Alarming Climate Report - Common Dreams

Among the intense weather events qualifying as climate change under the advice in the email chain is drought. Photograph: David Mcnew/AFP/Getty Images

Staff at the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) have been told to avoid using the term climate change in their work, with the officials instructed to reference weather extremes instead.

A series of emails obtained by the Guardian between staff at the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), a USDA unit that oversees farmers land conservation, show that the incoming Trump administration has had a stark impact on the language used by some federal employees around climate change.

A missive from Bianca Moebius-Clune, director of soil health, lists terms that should be avoided by staff and those that should replace them. Climate change is in the avoid category, to be replaced by weather extremes. Instead of climate change adaption, staff are asked to use resilience to weather extremes.

The primary cause of human-driven climate change is also targeted, with the term reduce greenhouse gases blacklisted in favor of build soil organic matter, increase nutrient use efficiency. Meanwhile, sequester carbon is ruled out and replaced by build soil organic matter.

In her email to staff, dated 16 February this year, Moebius-Clune said the new language was given to her staff and suggests it be passed on. She writes that we wont change the modeling, just how we talk about it there are a lot of benefits to putting carbon back in the sail [sic], climate mitigation is just one of them, and that a colleague from USDAs public affairs team gave advice to tamp down on discretionary messaging right now.

In contrast to these newly contentious climate terms, Moebius-Clune wrote that references to economic growth, emerging business opportunities in the rural US, agro-tourism and improved aesthetics should be tolerated if not appreciated by all.

In a separate email to senior employees on 24 January, just days after Trumps inauguration, Jimmy Bramblett, deputy chief for programs at the NRCS, said: It has become clear one of the previous administrations priority is not consistent with that of the incoming administration. Namely, that priority is climate change. Please visit with your staff and make them aware of this shift in perspective within the executive branch.

Bramblett added that prudence should be used when discussing greenhouse gases and said the agencys work on air quality regarding these gases could be discontinued.

Other emails show the often agonized discussions between staff unsure of what is forbidden. On 16 February, a staffer named Tim Hafner write to Bramblett: I would like to know correct terms I should use instead of climate changes and anything to do with carbon ... I want to ensure to incorporate correct terminology that the agency has approved to use.

On 5 April, Suzanne Baker, a New York-based NRCS employee, emailed a query as to whether staff are allowed to publish work from outside the USDA that use climate change. A colleague advises that the issue be determined in a phone call.

Some staff werent enamored with the new regime, with one employee stating on an email on 5 July that we would prefer to keep the language as is and stressing the need to maintain the scientific integrity of the work.

In a statement, USDA said that on 23 January it had issued interim operating procedures outlining procedures to ensure the new policy team has an opportunity to review policy-related statements, legislation, budgets and regulations prior to issuance.

The statement added: This guidance, similar to procedures issued by previous administrations, was misinterpreted by some to cover data and scientific publications. This was never the case and USDA interim procedures will allow complete, objective information for the new policy staff reviewing policy decisions.

Kaveh Sadeghzadeh of the Natural Resources Conservation Service added that his organisation has not received direction from USDA or the administration to modify its communications on climate change or any other topic.

Trump has repeatedly questioned the veracity of climate change research, infamously suggesting that it is part of an elaborate Chinese hoax. The president has started the process of withdrawing the US from the Paris climate agreement, has instructed the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to scrap or amend various regulations aimed at cutting greenhouse gases, and has moved to open up more public land and waters to fossil fuel activity.

The nomenclature of the federal government has also shifted as these new priorities have taken hold. Mentions of the dangers of climate change have been removed from the websites of the White House and the Department of the Interior, while the EPA scrapped its entire online climate section in April pending a review that will be updating language to reflect the approach of new leadership.

These records reveal Trumps active censorship of science in the name of his political agenda, said Meg Townsend, open government attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity.

To think that federal agency staff who report about the air, water and soil that sustains the health of our nation must conform their reporting with the Trump administrations anti-science rhetoric is appalling and dangerous for America and the greater global community.

The Center for Biological Diversity is currently suing several government agencies, including the EPA and state department, to force them to release information on the censoring of climate change verbiage.

While some of the changes to government websites may have occurred anyway, the emails from within the USDA are the clearest indication yet that staff have been instructed to steer clear of acknowledging climate change or its myriad consequences.

US agriculture is a major source of heat-trapping gases, with 15% of the countrys emissions deriving from farming practices. A USDA plan to address the far reaching impacts of climate change is still online.

However, Sam Clovis, Trumps nomination to be the USDAs chief scientist, has labeled climate research junk science.

Last week it was revealed that Clovis, who is not a scientist, once ran a blog where he called progressives race traders and race traitors and likened Barack Obama to a communist.

Go here to read the rest:

US federal department is censoring use of term 'climate change ... - The Guardian

Ever since the censorship debate caught fire, several names from Bollywood have voiced their views against how the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), informally called the Censor Board, stifles creativity. The latest to speak on this is actor Randeep Hooda, whose film Jism 2, completed five years of its release on August 3, 2017. Jism 2, which was the Bollywood debut vehicle of former adult film star Sunny Leone, was almost derailed by the Censor Board, which refused to certify it unless director Pooja Bhatt made the changes demanded by the Board.

Randeep says, Youngsters the people youre trying to prevent from watching [a films] content are the ones who are mostly on the Internet. And whatever youre censoring is actually generating more curiosity and, at the end of the day, everything is easily is available on the Internet, which remains uncensored.

Like many other actors and filmmakers, Randeep asserts that the CBFC should only certify what kind of content is appropriate for which age group, and not demand cuts. This is what has also been recommended by a committee led by filmmaker Shyam Benegal. The committee submitted its report in 2016, and Benegal met officials at the Information & Broadcasting Ministry in July 2017 to follow up on this. [The CBFC] asking for cuts or censoring scenes makes no sense to me, says Randeep.

The actor points out a rather interesting fact: how the whole censorship issue eventually benefits a film. Look how censorship is being used to create hype around a film, and it clearly has become a great promotional tool [in the hands of filmmakers], and I suspect if Mr Pahlaj Nihalani [CBFC Chairman] is getting paid, jokes the actor.

However, Randeep adds that its unwise for anyone to fall for the hype created through a censorship controversy. I recently watched a film that was very talked about [for] censorship; when I actually watched it, it was a bloody bore. A lot of people had gone to watch it only because it was hyped so much about scenes being censored, shares the actor, adding that it was much later that he found out it was all planned.

I had read this films script as well I figured out that the film reached multiplexes because it was sensationally promoted. It wasnt a very interesting movie to watch in the first place, and it used censorship as a promotional thing, adds Randeep, clarifying that he is not referring to Lipstick Under My Burkha, directed by Alankrita Srivastava, who fought for months to get her film certified and released.

Follow @htshowbiz for more

See the original post here:

Censorship has become a promotional tool in the hands of filmmakers: Randeep Hooda - Hindustan Times

Censorship is never a good idea, Apatow wrote on Twitter of the forthcoming drama fromGame of Thronescreators David Benioff and D.B. Weiss.

They havent even written a word, he added. Seems a tad early to judge their work and intentions.

Despite the prospect of a diverse cast, including, presumably, several characters of color, social media users filled the Internet with outrage in protest of the premise of the show.

Some of the criticism on social media revolved around claims that Benioff and Weiss already under fire from social justice advocates for a lack of minority representation on Game of Thrones are white, and therefore are not qualified to make a television series about modern slavery.

Others wrote that the series was ill-timed for todays contentious political climate.

The outrage over Confederate hit its peak during the premiere of the third episode of Game of Thrones seventh season this month, with fans taking to Twitter to share the hashtag #NoConfederate. The hashtag campaign led in part by #OscarsSoWhite creator April Reign briefly became one of the top trends on Twitter that night.

Benioff and Weiss responded to the PR nightmare around Confederate, explaining thatthe plot for the showis one they had been thinking about for a long time.

We have discussedConfederatefor years, originally as a concept for a feature film, Benioff and Weiss said in a statement. But our experience onThroneshas convinced us that no one provides a bigger, better storytelling canvas than HBO. There wont be dragons or White Walkers in this series, but we are creating a world, and we couldnt imagine better partners in world-building than [executive producers] Nichelle [Tramble Spellman] and Malcolm [Spellman], who have impressed us for a long time with their wit, their imagination and their Scrabble-playing skills.

Apatow, a vocal critic of President Donald Trump, had previously spoken out to apparently defend far-left protesters who were demonstrating against free speech in February.TheTrainwreckdirectorwarnedin a since-deleted tweet that it was just the beginningafter so-called anti-fascist riotersassaultednumerousattendees,started fires,smashed up shops and ATMs, and attacked peoples carsat Milo Yiannopouloss UC Berkeley speaking engagement in February.

The director later said he deleted the tweet because it was vague.

I never support violence, he said. I do support peaceful protest against hateful people and awful ideas.

FollowJerome Hudsonon Twitter@jeromeehudson

P.S. DO YOU WANT MORE ARTICLES LIKE THIS ONE DELIVERED RIGHT TO YOUR INBOX?SIGN UP FOR THE DAILY BREITBART NEWSLETTER.

Here is the original post:

No 'Censorship': Judd Apatow Defends HBO Drama 'Confederate' from SJWs - Breitbart News

I REMEMBER having my mother once buying me books to cultivate my reading habit when I was a child. It started off with Enid Blyton, Edgar Allen Poe, Arthur Conan Doyle. This was the 1990s, when such hardcover books were priced at a mere RM9.90.

Looking at book prices now God, I feel old.

But one book I read during this period was apparently a controversial one for a standard three pupil. It was Enid Blyton's The Land of Far Beyond, which told of a bunch of children and adults suddenly having their burden of sin appearing on their backs, and having to find Jesus to remove it.

Now, I am sure we can all admit that standard three is a young age to suddenly be exposed to the concept of Christ being the son of God and the bearer of the entire world's sins through a fictitious book. But then again, Christianity was also the basis for the entire Narnia series as well.

Not that everyone gets it, or bothers reading books. I'd wager most people just fawn over the movie renditions of Prince Caspian and stop there.

Did any of these confuse me, convert me, perhaps nudge me into a church to attend a service? Nope.

Because books are only as influential as long as people who read them don't ask questions, or can't tell the difference between fiction and reality.

Thus, why should the government fear access to books and any media items that it deems unworthy?

If people are easily confused, is it not the role of the public, the government and academicians to publish their books to counter it, rather than stop people from reading a separate point of view? In other words, shouldn't more books be the answer to create a learned society, rather than a ban?

At the same time, I am curious about the speed at which censors read books. In 2014, an Ultraman comic book translated to Bahasa Malaysia was banned immediately upon publishing.

And yet, with the recent announcement of Farish A Noor's book published in 2008, it seems that censors struggled to finish his book by taking nearly a decade to ban it.

I'm guessing non-fiction reading, especially academic content, can be a struggle for some. Seems to be the same thought with the banning of the book on moderation by the G25 group of eminent citizens.

But it does raise this question as well why don't those who believe these books are against established thought, just publish a book decrying the misinformation and setting people to read their own written book?

Surely in this day and age of writers galore, every government official and right-wing group should be able to find ghost writers to do their work for them for a price?

It would be hard to imagine that we are reaching a point where there is not enough to pay people to write what they don't believe for a five-figure value.

Censorship of books and movies is an extension of laziness from the highest levels down to the basic family structure. It is the government taking over the role of parents to somehow limit access to adult content even when parents themselves are adults. But then again, we have adults who believe in beheadings as a suitable punishment for loudmouth lawyers. We have adults who believe fondling a cutout is acceptable. We have adults who cannot see beyond the need for a headscarf and dress codes when congratulating someone winning a scholarship or a gymnastic gold medal.

So when someone censors a media item saying that such things do not portray the Malaysian people, I beg to differ. We do have such Malaysians, which is shameful but should be embraced as what I would call "having a brain fart" moment. Happens to all of us, and we should embrace it.

But all in all, we need to be open about ourselves as Malaysians not all of us are living a perfect Malaysian life. We are diverse in so many ways and dysfunctional in so many ways as individuals. We have those living in poverty, adultery, entire secret families, child abuse, husband and wife abuse.

Let's open up the conversations, open up the talks, write the books, watch the movies, and not censor anyone's point of view.

If not, well, there will always be Piratebay.

Hafidz Baharom is a public relations practitioner. Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Read more here:

Censorship doesn't help - The Sun Daily

Israels communications minister, Ayoub Kara, is moving forward with a plan to ban Qatari state-funded broadcaster Al Jazeera throughout the country.

According to Al Jazeera, the plan would revoke the credentials of all journalists working for the broadcasters Arabic and English credentials, shut down its cable and satellite transmissions, and evict staff from their Jerusalem headquarters. Kara would need approval from the Knesset to move forward with some elements of the plan.

All journalists working within Israel must be accredited by the government, and both civilian and military authorities have wide latitude to censor print and broadcast publications, according to the US State Department. Its unclear whether Israeli authorities will order access to Al Jazeeras web content cut off, though just weeks ago the Knesset approved a law allowing the censorship of content deemed criminal or tied to terror groups.

We have based our decision on the move by Sunni Arab states to close the Al Jazeera offices and prohibiting their work, Kara said.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has previously threatened Al Jazeera over its coverage of violence and security measures at the Temple Mount-Noble Sanctuary compound. One of two police investigations against Netanyahu, both of which appear to be nearing indictments, concerns allegations he secretly held negotiations with an Israeli paper in exchange for good coverage.

In the past few years, Sunni Arab states have accused Qatar of funding extremist groups like al-Qaeda, Hamas and Iranian-backed Houthi rebels, though the Qatari government insists it is being scapegoated. Theres some evidence foreign hackers, possibly from the UAE, have deliberately sought to inflame tensions by posting fake articles to the Qatari foreign ministrys web sites.

Months ago, the same governments accusing Qatar of funding terror put in place a regional trade blockade on its land and sea borders, a move enthusiastically backed by President Donald Trump, though said blockade does not seem to be working.

The Committee to Protect Journalists urged Israel to abandon the plan to block the network, with Middle East and North Africa Program Coordinator Sherif Mansour issuing a statement saying Censoring Al-Jazeera or closing its offices will not bring stability to the region, but it would put Israel firmly in the camp of some of the regions worst enemies of press freedom.

Regimes that want to control power will almost always go after two targetsthe media and the foreigners, the American University in Beiruts Rami Khouri told Al Jazeera. Everybody goes after the media.

As the Guardian noted, Al Jazeera has faced crackdowns in Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Bahrain, with the latter four countries blocking its channel and affiliate sites.

[Al Jazeera]

See the rest here:

Israel Will Ban Al Jazeera and Censor Its Cable and Satellite Transmissions, Comms Ministry Says - Gizmodo

Tencent, Microsoft MSFT and Action Alerts PLUScharity portfolio holding Apple (AAPL) have all in the last five days learned the hard way that in China, software is power.

Tech companies that might put up a fight elsewhere over content restrictions or access to their products crumble in the face of the Communist Party. With Web restrictions tightening in China, the issue is only going to gain in prominence, and the ranks of companies caving are likely to grow.

Comically, Tencent (TCEHY) has removed chatbots developed by Microsoft and Beijing-based Turing Robot after they started giving so-called unpatriotic answers.

The BabyQ bot co-developed by Beijing-based Turing Robot answered the question "Do you love the Communist Party?" with "No," the Financial Times reports. The XiaoBing bot from Microsoft (MSFT) reportedly told users: "My China dream is go to America."

On a more serious note, Applecame under fire for removing VPN-related apps from its app store. VPNs, or Virtual Private Networks, can help Chinese citizens get around the stringent governmentcontrols of Web content to access overseas information.

Apple says it was merely complying with tightened Chinese regulations. But there was none of the defiance that Apple showed when it fought back on home soil against a court order to help the FBI unlock an iPhone, as the agency investigated the San Bernardino terrorist attack.

The president of Golden Frog, which saw its privacy software VyprVPN knocked off the Apple app tree in China, said it was "disappointed" Apple bowed to pressure from Beijing, without even citing the specific law that makes a VPN illegal.

"We view access to Internet in China as a human rights issue, and I would expect Apple to value human rights over profits," Sunday Yokubaitis told The New York Times. Golden Frog filed an amicus brief in support of Apple's action against the FBI.

The pulling of the chatbots is no surprise. They were likely tricked into giving their answers by users, just as provocative Twitter comments helped swindle Microsoft's Tay bot into making anti-Semitic and offensive comments such as "feminism is cancer."

But online access is a mounting concern.

Amazon.com (AMZN) , too, appears to be under pressure in China over its cloud computing services. One of Amazon's operators in China has told its customers to stop using software that would let someone get around China's controls.

Cloud computing is an increasingly thorny issue for the Chinese government, since it raises the potential for controversial content to be held outside China. In response, China is insisting that companies operating data services store the data within China's borders, ostensibly on public safety grounds. Banking data, for instance, could go missing.

But we know the real reason. It's so China can regulate what its citizens see, in a bid to control what they think, particularly on issues concerning the Communist Party and its unelected authority to govern.

The perils of operating in China are many, but top among them would be running afoul of the Communist Party. Bloomberg has given in by suppressing touchy news stories about Chinese officials, such as this non-working link to its own story once about the wealth of the family Chinese President Xi Jinping. Most companies capitulate. Chinese yuan are too good to give up.

Google, and now its parent Alphabet (GOOGL) , has been the only major company that springs to mind that has taken a stand against Chinese censorship. It pulled its search engine from China, redirecting traffic to its uncensored Hong Kong engine, in 2010 in a fight over China's censorship rules. The company is reportedly in talks to get access in China for some of its offerings, such as Google Scholar.

There are plenty of sites you can't access in China, including Facebook , Pinterest and Snapchat. But many would like to get in, given the chance. For instance, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg has been happy to chat with Chinese president Xi Jinping in Mandarin and post this Facebook photo of the two together.

You'd think online censorship is a battle destined to fail. Web access only grows with the production of every new digital site, app and device, while content proliferates faster exponentially.

But the Chinese government fights hard. And while they may know they're not getting the full truth, many of China's citizens believe a large amount of what they're told.

The Chinese government orchestrates 488 million fake social-media posts every year, according to a study led by Harvard University data scientist Gary King. In many cases, the government pays the equivalent of $0.08 for people who post comments cheer-leading for China, talking about the Communist Party's revolutionary history, or supporting the regime.

The first thing I do every time I visit mainland China is to log in to the hotel's WiFi and search for "Tiananmen Square." Here in Hong Kong, the Chinese government's 1989 massacre of students protesting in favor of democracy pops right up. It's appeared at a couple of Chinese hotels, too, presumably because the Chinese government hadn't yet paid them a digital visit.

Hong Kong and Macau are the only parts of China with their own rules on issues like censorship. Macau, relying on Beijing's approval of mainland travel visas to prop up its casino business, toes the party line. For now, I'm free to say what I want from my base in Hong Kong, but that freedom of expression is also disappearing, and fast.

The new administration of Chief Executive Carrie Lam, known for her stubborn streak and devotion to Beijing in equal parts, is under pressure to resurrect a highly unpopular "national education" curriculum, viewed by many teachers as patriotic airbrushing and brainwashing. It is also likely to attempt to introduce a "security" law, which by outlawing "sedition and subversion" will obliterate that theoretical freedom of speech.

It would certainly make it illegal for Hong Kong politicians to suggest that they support autonomy or independence for Hong Kong. To "challenge the power of the central government" or "endanger China's sovereignty," both terms that can and will be interpreted broadly, "crosses a red line."

That's what Chinese President Xi Jinping told Hong Kongers on his July 1 visit to "celebrate" the 20thanniversary of Hong Kong's reversion to China. Freedom of speech only allows you to say, it seems, what the Communists want you to say.

In China, it determines what you can read, see and hear online. Don't question authority, and don't get any upstart ideas.

That applies as much at the corporate level as the personal. Even providing the platform, the software, on which to express controversial sentiments crosses a very ill-defined line.

Will other companies take a stand like Google? Or will they all cave?

More here:

Comic Chatbot Errors in China Mask Serious Corporate Caving on Censorship - TheStreet.com

Tech giant Facebook has issued an apology to a Black activist and writer who claims the social media site suspended her account for bringing attention to racism, USA Today reports.

According to the outlet, Ijeoma Oluos visit to Cracker Barrel with her two children sparked the controversy. During her visit, she jokingly tweeted At Cracker Barrel 4 the 1st time. Looking at the sea of white folk in cowboy hats & wondering will they let my black ass walk out of here?'

Her tweet prompted several racist attacks on both Twitter and Facebook. Twitter swiftly removed the hateful posts and suspended the accounts associated with them, the outlet reports. After Oluo posted images of the derogatory tweets on her Facebook page, her account was suspended.

I write and speak about race in America because I already see this hate every day, Oluo wrote, according to USA Today. Its the complicity of one of the few platforms that people of color have to speak out about this hate that gets me.

Facebook issued a statement extending an apology to Oluo; claiming that suspending her account was a mistake and that they are working on ways to maneuver through these important issues. According to the outlet, an apology wasnt enough for Oluo who claims that her online incident wasnt isolated and that shes witnessed other Black activists have their accounts suspended for calling out racism.

The only reason my ban was reversed was because of the outrage it generated, but so many other marginalized people in similar situations are simply forced out, she said.

The censorship of Blacks has been an ongoing issue on the social platform. USA Today reports that civil rights groups have called out Facebook for being racially biased with their targeting and removing posts and temporarily suspending the accounts of Black activists like Shaun King.

According to the outlet, the social networking site removes thousands of posts that evoke hate each week.

SOURCE: USA Today

SEE ALSO:

Louisiana Assistant Police Chief Resigns After Racist Facebook Post

Republican Leader Apologizes For Offensive Facebook Attack On Keith Ellison

Go here to read the rest:

Facebook Apologizes To Black Activist For Censorship - News One

Beijing appeared to have doubled down on its crackdown of the internet in China, with news emerging that over the weekend, Apple pulled several virtual private network (VPN) services from the local version of the App Store.

Multiple VPN service providers, affected by the decision, slammed the move online, calling it a "dangerous precedent" set by Apple, which governments in other countries may follow.

VPN service providers received notification from Apple on July 29 that their apps were removed from the China App Store for including "content that is illegal" in the mainland, according to a screenshot posted by ExpressVPN.

VPNs let users in China bypass the country's famous "Great Firewall" that heavily restricts internet access to foreign sites. It also allows for privacy by hiding browsing activities from internet service providers.

Manjunath Bhat, a research director at Gartner, told CNBC that a VPN could circumvent government censorship.

"VPN creates a private tunnel between you (the user) and the service you want to consume," Bhat said, explaining that such a connection escapes government censorship, hiding a user's true origin. It also encrypts communications so that users can be confident others aren't reading their information when connected to public internet services.

Data on GreatFire.org, a site that monitors censorship activity in the mainland, showed 167 of the top 1000 domains are blocked in China. Those include YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Google and Instagram among others.

Golden Frog said its VyprVPN service is still accessible in China, despite the app's removal from the App Store. ExpressVPN said users can stay connected to the open internet with the company's apps for Windows, Mac, Android and other platforms.

Apple has recently stepped up business efforts in China. Earlier this month, the company announced the appointment of Isabel Ge Mahe in a new role of vice president and managing director of Greater China to provide leadership and coordination across Apple's China-based team. Apple is also setting up its first data center in the mainland by partnering with a local company, in order to comply with tougher cybersecurity laws in China.

In a blog post, ExpressVPN said it was "disappointed" with Apple's decision. It "represents the most drastic measure the Chinese government has taken to block the use of VPNs to date, and we are troubled to see Apple aiding China's censorship efforts," the post read.

Golden Frog also said in a blog post that it was "extremely disappointed" in Apple's decision. It added, "If Apple views accessibility as a human right, we would hope Apple will likewise recognize internet access as a human right (the UN has even ruled it as such) and would choose human rights over profits."

The move was also criticized by others, including U.S. whistle-blower Edward Snowden in a tweet.

"Earlier this year China's (Ministry of Industry and Information Technology) announced that all developers offering VPNs must obtain a license from the government," an Apple spokesperson told CNBC. "We have been required to remove some VPN apps in China that do not meet the new regulations. These apps remain available in all other markets where they do business."

On Tuesday, during Apple's earnings call, CEO Tim Cook added, "We would obviously rather not remove the apps, but like we do in other countries we follow the law wherever we do business. We strongly believe participating in markets and bringing benefits to customers is in the best interest of the folks there and in other countries as well."

Apple's decision to remove the apps comes at a time when businesses and individuals inside the mainland are finding it harder to connect to the so-called open internet outside China via VPN. A business executive told CNBC that connecting through VPN in cities like Hangzhou is becoming far more difficult, as compared to bigger places such as Beijing and Shanghai. People using an international SIM card or apps downloaded from App Stores outside China are still able to use VPNs on the mainland, according to the executive.

Some of the remaining VPN companies that have yet to face Beijing's crackdown could end up collaborating with the authorities, according to Martin Johnson (a pseudonym) from GreatFire.org. He told CNBC that some of those companies may hand over user data when requested and be allowed to operate without restrictions. "Those that protect their users security will be removed."

Johnson added, "Apple is now an integral part of China's censorship apparatus, helping the government expand it's control to a global scale."

To be sure, Apple's removal of those apps is not the first time Beijing's cyber regulators have gone after VPN providers. Recent reports said two popular providers GreenVPN and Haibei VPN stopped their services following a notice from the regulators. In fact, a number of VPN apps are still available on the local App Store as of Monday.

In January, the MIIT embarked on a 14-month campaign to "clean up" China's internet connections by March 31, 2018. In a notice, the ministry said that, while China's internet access service market is facing "a rare opportunity for development," there are also signs of "disorderly development" needing to be rectified.

Among other services, the move also affected VPNs: The Ministry said those connections cannot be created without the approval of the relevant telecommunications authorities.

State-owned news outlet Global Times reported that a spokesperson for MIIT said at a press conference last week that foreign companies or multinational corporations that need to use VPN for business purposes could rent special lines from telecom providers that legally provide such services.

Previously, the Ministry had denied a Bloomberg report that it ordered major telco operators China Mobile, China Telecom and China Unicom to block individuals' access to all VPNs by February 1, 2018.

Johnson said the authorities would "prefer to divide users such that businesses can continue to access the global internet, while ordinary users can only access the filtered internet."

"The Chinese government does not care at all about freedom of speech, but they do care very much about economic growth and China's economy continues to be very dependent on the outside world. Apple should use this leverage and stand up for the principle. Sadly they don't," he said.

CNBC's Barry Huang contributed to this report.

Continued here:

Apple removes VPN apps in China as Beijing doubles down on censorship - CNBC