Monthly Archives: May 2020

A new law has been passed in France that allows it to impose draconian punishments on social media companies that fail to take down some content within 60 minutes.

The news comes courtesy of Reuters, which reports: online content providers will have to remove paedophile and terrorism-related content from their platforms within the hour or face a fine of up to 4% of their global revenue. Other content that is deemed manifestly illicit by whoever makes these decisions will have to be taken down within 24 hours.

People will think twice before crossing the red line if they know that there is a high likelihood that they will be held to account, said Justice Minister Nicole Belloubet, apparently oblivious to the fact that the law largest the platforms, not their users. Its not clear whether the responsibility for identifying content that crosses this like will be the responsibility of the platforms too, but if it is, they will need to be provided with a comprehensive censorship manual if theyre expected to comply.

The matter of social media censorship is a very tricky one and nobody is saying illegal content should be allowed to remain in the public domain, but this looks like a very clumsy approach by the French. There are many alternatives to the imposition of massive fines and this smacks of yet another cash grab by the French state on the US tech sector.

Read the rest here:
France imposes 1-hour deadline on some social media censorship on pain of massive fines - Telecoms.com

Disney announced on May 12 that Broadway sensation "Hamilton" will hit Disney Plus this summer on July 3, over a year in advance of the movie's planned theatrical release date of October 15, 2021. The film, which is professional recording of the stage production edited together from three performances of the show in 2016, features the original cast including Lin-Manuel Miranda, Leslie Odom Jr., and Rene Elise Goldsberry.

The production, which debuted in 2015, follows the life of Alexander Hamilton, the first secretary of the Treasury of the United States. Not only did the show win the 2016 Pulitzer Prize for drama, it also picked up 11 Tony Awards including best musical and direction of a musical. The show is best known for its rap and hip-hop style, which sees depictions of historical figures like Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, and Aaron Burr engaging in rap battles or dancing their way through the birth of the United States.

Following the announcement, however, people online worried that "Hamilton" would arrive on the streaming platform with some changes to some of its language or content. The show features several instances of explicit language as well as sexual themes and gun violence.

This isn't the first time that censorship has come up in reference to "Hamilton's" Disney deal. The show features several swear words that would jeopardize a PG-13 rating, although it does censor the f-word in songs like "Say No To This" and "The Adams Administration." Kyle Buchanan, a pop culture reporter at The New York Times, tweeted in February 2020 that he had asked Lin-Manuel Miranda about potential censorship of swear words.

At the time, the writer told Buchanan that there were no plans to cut out sections of the show, reportedly saying, "If we have to mute a word here or there to reach the largest audience possible, I'm OK with that, because your kids already have the original language memorized. I don't think we're depriving anyone of anything if we mute an f-bomb here or there to make our rating."

Disney Plus is committed to providing family-friendly content and has historically shuttled more mature programs over to Hulu, which Disney also owns, or censored them on the platform. The company moved a "Love, Simon" spinoff series from Disney Plus to Hulu recently sources told Variety that Disney felt that certain facets of the show like alcohol use and sexual exploration would preclude it from fitting in with Disney Plus' family-friendly fare (the original Love, Simon story is one of queer romance). Disney has also censored content on Disney Plus, including a post-credits scene in "Toy Story 2" and a partially bare butt in the 1984 movie "Splash."

That being said, it's currently unclear as to whether Disney has any plans to censor language or content in "Hamilton." That didn't stop people from taking to Twitter to plead for Disney to not censor.

Others imagined what "Hamilton" would be like if key words or plot elements were made more family-friendly.

Insider has reached out to Disney for comment as to whether it will censor "Hamilton" on Disney Plus.

Link:
People are worried about Disney censoring 'Hamilton' when it comes to Disney Plus this July - Insider - INSIDER

Public tug-of-war platform Twitter is opting to label, rather than censor, tweets it considers misleading about the COVID-19 situation.

Twitters latest tweak was announced in a blog post entitled: Updating our Approach to Misleading Information. Starting today, were introducing new labels and warning messages that will provide additional context and information on some Tweets containing disputed or misleading information related to COVID-19, it said.

The disputed part is hilarious, since dispute is what characterises Twitter. What they mean is disputed by sources we favour. Whether or not something is misleading once more depends on which sources you consider to be definitive. For example Facebook has defaulted to the World Health Organisation as the unimpeachable source on all things rona.

Since all decisions on accuracy are subjective, with the exception of settled science (itself a hotly disputed concept), those in a position to make them should do so with humility and a soft touch. Sadly they all to often opt for outright censorship in the mistaken belief that will resolve whatever problems they think the banned speech creates.

Twitter is taking a more sensible approach in this case, by attaching labels to tweets it takes issue with, hyperlinked to either its own curated repository of correct information or an external trusted source. Both will be subject to their own biases, of course, but at least outright censorship has been averted and people are being permitted to use their own judgment about what to believe.

Having said that, there is an escalating scale, including superimposing a warning, that can still lead to censorship if the tweet is considered harmful enough. Twitter is, of course, free to police its platform as it sees fit, but if it opts to censor too many marginal tweets then this sensible concession will quite rightly be viewed as window dressing and an empty gesture.

Read this article:
Twitter tries a better alternative to censorship - Telecoms.com

Screenwriter Zhou Xiaoxuan speaks during an interview with the Associated Press at her home in Beijing, China, on January 16, 2019, detailing her involvement in China's #MeToo movement.

Two years since the #MeToo movementtook offin China, Chinese feminists are battling headwinds in a political environment where the ruling Communist Partys control over the Internet, media and independent activism is tighter than it has been in 30 years.

Chinas party-state has zero tolerance for collective actions, so the countrys #MeToo movement has never been able to manifest in mass street protests. But individual victims have taken their cases to court, demonstrating extraordinary determination and resilience.

Facing intense slut-shaming on Chinese social media platforms and censorship of discussions of her case, University of Minnesota student Liu Jingyao who is suing, in a Minnesota civil court, Chinese billionaire Liu Qiangdong for an alleged rape vowed tonever settleor sign a nondisclosure agreement (prosecutorsdeclined to charge him in the case, and he maintains that the sex was consensual). Similarly, screenwriter Zhou Xiaoxuan who is suing, in a Beijing court, famed state media anchor Zhu Jun for alleged sexual harassment and assault, which hedeniessaid, Even giving me 100 million [yuan], I wouldnt settle.

Under pressure, the Chinese government has made limited improvements. In December 2018, the Supreme Courtadded sexual harassmentto the list of causes of action, making it easier for #MeToo victims to seek redress. Yet China still lacks robust laws against sexual harassment.

Silenced in their home country, Chinese feminists have increasingly found footingoverseas. Utilizing the relatively free and safe space in Western countries, #MeToo activistshold protests, discussions and trainings, and provide support to their counterparts inside China.

In late 2019, authorities detained Huang Xueqin, a journalist and leading figure in Chinas #MeToo movement, for three months for unknown reasons.Upon release, Huang reportedly wrote: This is Xueqin, and Im back. One second of darkness doesnt make people blind.

Amid the vast darkness, nevertheless, Chinese feminists persisted.

The rest is here:
#MeToo in the land of censorship - Human Rights Watch

A study has revealed that China-based WeChat is monitoring foreigners, prompting people with non-China-registered accounts to think twice about using the messaging app.

WeChat, owned by Chinese internet giant Tencent, is the most popular social media platform in China, and is also widely used in the rest of the world with 1 billion users globally.

However, the University of Torontos Citizen Lab claimed that the app, which follows Chinas stringent censorship rules, also monitors messages shared by people registered with non-China-based phone numbers, feeding the content into censorship algorithms to help build up the database it uses to censor China-based accounts.

The conclusions were based on an experiment that started by sending politically sensitive content between non-China-registered accounts. Afterward, when the same content was sent between China-registered accounts, it was flagged and subsequently censored.

While accounts outside of China were not censored, they are reportedly subject to content surveillance, information on which was not found on any public documents and data access requests, including discussions with Tencent representatives.

Citizen Lab clarified that there is no evidence that WeChats surveillance on international users was directed by the Chinese government. Tencent, however, told CNBC that it received the findings of the research, and that it was taking it seriously as the company considers user privacy and data security as core values.

With regard to the suggestion that we engage in content surveillance of international users, we can confirm that all content shared among international users of WeChat is private. As a publicly listed global company we hold ourselves to the highest standards, and our policies and procedures comply with all laws and regulations in each country in which we operate, a Tencent spokesperson told CNBC.

The accusations against WeChat follows similar claims against TikTok, another popular China-based app. To build user trust, the company behind the app opened the TikTok Transparency Center, a location where its moderators may be observed by outside experts.

It remains to be seen if Tencent will do something similar for WeChat, after the release of Citizen Labs research. The findings may also affect the apps listing on Apples App Store and the Google Play Store, as both platforms require developers to disclose the data that they collect.

Read the original here:
WeChat reportedly spying on foreigners to feed censorship algorithms in China - Digital Trends

Youve probably never heard of Robert B. Strassler. Thats OK, youre not alone.

Early in his career, Strassler worked in oil fields, but he always had an interest inthe classics(the formal designation for the studies of ancient Greek and Roman civilizations). Eventually, Strasslers hobby became an obsession. He went so far as to author his own translation of Thucydides, the Athenian historian of the Peloponnesian War.

The problem was nobody wanted to read Strasslers book. This was in the 1990s. It was more difficult to publish to the web and there was no social media. Strassler approached every Ivy League institution he could find. Nobody was interested in reading a manuscript about Thucydides penned by an oilman with no formal credentials. That was the situation until Strassler contacted Victor Davis Hanson, a classicist professor in Fresno, California. Hanson agreed to look at the manuscript and was astounded by Strasslers work: a brilliant, highly readable translation of Thucydides including maps, diagrams, and charts. Hanson helped the disconnected oilman get in touch with a literary agent. Strasslers landmark edition became the standard translation of Thucydides. Still read today, The Landmark Thucydides: A Comprehensive Guide to the Peloponnesian War is as successful as any book on the classics can bein the age of Twitter.

Those of us who take the idea of democratic publishing seriously rejoice at how the field has opened to include anyone who has something to say and is willing to write it down. Thats why we should be more alarmed when we see social media companies crowd the spaces once occupied by blogs and do-it-yourself content creators. We see a decline in diverse opinions as the web quickly becomes less free and more autocratic.

How many Robert B. Strasslers are being stifled today by biased algorithms and arbitrary community guidelines?

In March, as COVID-19 exploded into a worldwide panic, the web gatekeepers weve come to rely on quickly massed around a singular interpretation of events andstifled dissenting voiceseven mild ones.

YouTube, the second largest search engine in the world, demonetized all videos that mentioned COVID-19, Coronavirus, or any term related to the pandemic, and herded viewers away from content creators and toward the Center for Disease Control (CDC) the sameCDC that first advisedagainstwearing masks. Even medical practitioners who deviated slightly from the prevailing visionwere removed from the platformafter gaining millions of views.

Experienced journalists who questioned official decrees (surely, the role journalists are expected to perform) were targeted with hit pieces and character assassination by their own peers.

As author/professor Cal Newport noted in anop-ed forWired, much of the dissenting viewpoints and on-the-ground data have become part of the mainstream conversation even after being suppressed by a small group of decision-makers:

We dont necessarily want to trust engineers at one company to make the decisions about what topics the public should and should not be able to read about.

How many times have you clicked on a link in a tweet and received a message as shown in the following screenshot?

Adults should be trusted to determine what kind of content is harmful (if such a thing exists) without the assistance of Twitter employees and their partners. And, are these warnings actually meant to protect people or simply to shield Twitter from corporate liability? I think we can guess what the answer is.

Its not only those without official-sounding credentials who are being barred from sharing content. Creators who clearly have experience in their fields of study are also facing arbitrary censorship.

The Great Courses Plus, a streaming service that produces college-level video courses taught by actual professors, was threatened with a ban from Google if they did not remove COVID-19-related content from their app. In an email to subscribers, the team wrote:

Google informed us they would ban The Great Courses apps if we continued to make [Covid-19] in-app content available. We are working with Google to ensure that they understand our content is factual, expert-led, and thoroughly vetted, so that we can remedy this misunderstanding as soon as possible.

The videos in question included content from Dr. Roy Benaroch, Adjunct Assistant Professor of Pediatrics at the Emory University School of Medicine; Dr. David Kung, Professor of Mathematics at St. Marys College of Maryland; and Dr. Kevin Ahern, Professor of Biochemistry and Biophysics at Oregon State University. How or why these scholars were found unworthy of Googles imprimatur is a mystery. As the public does not presume to give Google programming advice, perhaps Google could return the favor by not pretending to be experts on epidemiology, immunology, and virology.

The only way to see these offending videos is on the Great Courses website, where Googles authority is not absolute. It happens to be a WordPress-powered site. For intellectuals and laymen who value free expression, having your own website is becoming the only way to make sure you can keep it.

The problem of pitting credentials against experience in a zero-sum conflict is fixable, and WordPress is a big part of the solution.

WordPress allows capable scientists, economists, and medical professionals in other fields to write at length about their ideas without fear of being blocked by arbitrary restrictions. Also, the five-minute install (which does take a little more than five minutes for many people) imposes enough of a barrier to entry to discourage cranks.

We like to think of the internet as a true egalitarian system, where every voice is given equal consideration, but deep down we know thats not exactly how it works. Network effects tend to form hubs of concentrated influence around a handful of websites. This isnt always a bad thing. A recipe blog with poor taste and no pictures deserves fewer readers than a blog with great-tasting recipes and high-resolution images.

There is still room enough in the network for certain nodes to grow in size and influence based on the quality of their content. A node with enough backlinks, good organic search rankings, and high-quality content will gain an audience, and be able to keep it, without fear of corporate reprisals or aggressive algorithm updates.

If we really care about democratizing publishing, we wont always like what we read. There will be disagreements, but democracy requires a literate population eager for debate. We can challenge, discuss, and learn.

There are a lot of Robert B. Strasslers out there in the network, waiting patiently to be heard.

Like Loading...

View post:
Bringing Back Blogs in the Age of Social Media Censorship - WP Tavern

NCAC has joined a coalition of 36 organizations led by the ACLU, FreedomWorks, and Demand Progress, to urge Congress to reform the USA Freedom Reauthorization Act of 2020, a bill that would extend provisions of the Patriot Act which expired in March and pose unprecedented threats to Americans civil liberties.

These provisions include the controversial lone wolf and roving wiretap authorities. The coalitions letter calls for support of privacy-protection amendments to the bill, which were introduced by Senators Lee, Leahy, Paul, Wyden, and Daines. These amendments are both meaningful and extremely reasonable.

Senators Lee and Leahys amendment strengthens the role of independent, expert advisors to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), which authorizes the government to conduct electronic surveillance, physical search, and other forms of investigative actions. Senators Daines and Wydens amendment prohibits warrantless surveillance of people in the United States internet search and browsing history. Senator Pauls amendment prohibits the use of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) against people in the United States or in proceedings against them. It also makes clear that if the government wants to surveil a US citizen, they must have a warrant.

The full letter is available below, co-signed by a wide range of organizations that advocate for civil liberties, racial and ethnic justice, and government transparency. We encourage all those with an interest in privacy to read it fully and contact their representatives to voice their opinions.

Co-signed by:

Access Now | American Booksellers for Free Expression | American Civil Liberties Union | Americans for Prosperity | Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law | Center for Security, Race and Rights | Constitutional Alliance Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) | Defending Rights & Dissent | Demand Progress | Due Process Institute | Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) | Free Press Action | FreedomWorks | Government Accountability Project | Government Information Watch | Human Rights Watch | Liberty Coalition | Media Alliance | National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) | National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) | National Coalition Against Censorship | Oakland Privacy | PEN America | People Demanding Action | People For the American Way | Progress America | Public Citizen | Restore The Fourth | Secure Justice | South Asian Americans Leading Together (SAALT) | TechFreedom | The Project for Privacy and Surveillance Accountability | Union of Concerned Scientists | Woodhull Freedom Foundation X-Lab

Click here for a full-screen view.

Read more:
NCAC Urges Privacy Protection Reforms - Blogging Censorship

The glitter of Botswanas shining example of democracy is fading as the country of 2.3-million people slowly slides towards authoritarianism.

The trend began under former president Ian Khama, who silenced critical media and cowed citizens into apathy. His term in office ended in April 2018.

Early indications that his successor, Mokgweetsi Masisi vice-president for four years had a penchant for intolerance was evinced in the run-up to the ruling Botswana Democratic Party (BDP) congress in April 2019 when he openly thwarted his rival, Pelonomi Venson-Moitois incipient challenge for the party presidency.

The Covid-19 pandemic has led to a further centralisation of power: Parliament recently passed an emergency bill that gives Masisi sweeping powers to rule by decree for a six-month period.

It was bulldozed by the majority BDP despite opposition protests that putting power in the hands of one man will breed corruption and infringe on the powers of other branches of government.

On April 9, Botswanas government endorsed a six-month state of emergency.

The country was also placed under a 28-day lockdown, due to end on April 30. The lockdown was extended to May 7, and is now being gradually eased. To date, Botswana has reported one death and 23 cases of people infected with Covid-19.

The only explanation Masisi and his government have given, albeit vaguely, to the need for the lengthy state of emergency is that the Public Health Act is too weak to staunchly enforce a lockdown.

One alarming provision of the presidents emergency powers is the introduction of a prison term of up to five years or a $10 000 fine for anyone publishing information with the intention to deceive the public about Covid-19 or measures taken by government to address the virus.

Critics say the law, with broad and vague definitions, is a gift to authoritarian leaders who want to use the public health crisis to grab power and suppress freedom of speech.

Masisis backers argue that the law is needed as a deterrent. It has become necessary to curtail some rights to prevent the spread of the virus, said BDP spokesperson Kagelelo Banks Kentse.

There are well-grounded fears that the emergency powers will be used to extend the government grip on supposedly independent institutions. Already there are concerns that the security forces are meting outheavy-handed justice in the name of enforcing the lockdown.

Two police officers in central Botswana are facing assault charges and a schoolteacher was arrested after challenging the governments claim that a health worker who was screening lawmakers during a heated parliamentary debate on the state of emergency had tested positive for Covid-19.

On his Facebook page, the teacher, Rakkie Kelesamile, also questioned why people infected with Covid-19 inhospital were not developing further complications or recovering. It takes five days for corona to manifest in its victim. We are in the 14th day of lockdown. Common sense says patients should be showing signs of infection.

Police say Kelesamiles arrest is part of a larger effort to crack down on alleged misinformation under section 30 of the Emergency Powers Act.

His lawyer, Kgosietsile Ngakaagae believes that the government is trying to criminalise the airing of opinions. The interpretation of freedom of speech is wrong, he said. Making personal observation should not be criminalised.

Days earlier, police had arrested Justice Motlhabane, the spokesperson of Botswana Patriotic Front (BPF), an opposition party with ties to Khama for degrading and maligning the leadership.

The charges were labelled worrying by the Botswana Federation of Public, Private and Parastatal Sector Unions.They were also not brought under the Emergency Powers Act, but under the countrys Penal Code. Under the code, Motlhabane faces a potential fine of $50 or around P600.

Motlhabane and Oratile Dikologang are accused of suggesting on a Facebook page, Botswana Trending News, that Masisi had declared a lengthy state of emergency so that he could deal with his political rivals and business competitors.

A police spokesperson, assistant commissioner Dipheko Motube, said that all three men had published an offensive statement against the government as well as degrading and maligning the leadership of the country.

Motlhabane, who is out on bail, denied the charges, saying he does not have access to the Facebook account. He told INK Centre that the police gave him electrical shock treatment on several occasions while demanding certain information about a coup by the former president [Ian Khama].

They placed a Taser on my buttock and in between my thighs, he claimed. Biggie Butale, his lawyer and president of BPF, said the police do not have a case against his client.

He is not the administrator of the Facebook account in question, he said, adding: Police never questioned him over Covid-19 they asked him about a coup. You wonder what they are looking for.

Several other people have been charged under the Emergency Powers Act.

A South African woman, Charmaine Ibrahim, appeared before court on March 27 for alleging that two fellow South Africans in Botswana have tested positive for Covid-19. Ibrahim has since been released on bail.

One lawyer, Mboki Chilisa, commented on social media that there is no point in punishing innocuous false statements which no right-thinking member of the public could ever believe.

The Emergency Powers Act also risks worsening the already adversarial relationship between the government and private media. The Act prohibits journalists from using source(s) other than the [Botswana] Director of Health Services or the World Health Organisation when reporting on Covid-19. Journalists who use other sources potentially face a fine of $10 000 or a five-year jail term.

The executive director of the Media Institute of Southern Africa (Botswana Chapter), Tefo Phatshwane believes that the emergency prohibits independent journalists from holding those in power to account.He said Masisi has started a censorship pandemic, using wide-ranging restrictions as a cover to violate freedom of expression. As journalists, we cant rely on a government that we are expected to police.

If the coronavirus outbreak has taught us anything beyond the necessity of washing our hands, it is that its victim has been leadership. Bureaucracy and incompetence have made it difficult to trust the WHO and governments worldwide.

On March 21, Masisi, who has a penchant for air travel, defied the lockdown to fly to Windhoek to witness the swearing in of Namibian President Hage Geingob.He insisted that the trip was essential to enable leaders to discuss strategies to combat Covid-19.

Government also botched the handling of the death of Botswanas first, and currently only, victim of Covid-19.A local newspaper reported that the funeral of the elderly woman, from Ramotswa in the south-east of the country was not handled in a manner consistent with guidelines for the burial of victims.Government admitted days later that she had died of the disease.

It is tempting to demand prompt action to combat those who undermine national and global efforts to combat the pandemic through disinformation. But Ngakaagae insists censorship should not be part of the cure.

Government should identify the most efficient responses and communicate them to the public and allow reasonable and genuinely held opinions to flourish. Government has to engage the public in dialogue, he said.

Joel Konopo works for the INK Centre for Investigative Journalism

Read more here:
Censorship, the unexpected side-effect of Covid-19 - Mail and Guardian