Daily Archives: January 31, 2021

Categories of gambling, media outlets merging to aid growth – Arkansas Online

Posted: January 31, 2021 at 7:15 am

ATLANTIC CITY, N.J. -- The many different types of gambling are quickly coming together with one another and with media outlets -- and Wall Street is taking notice.

Casino gambling, internet gambling, sports betting and daily fantasy sports are no longer separate silos with unique audiences. Gambling companies are increasingly combining them and partnering with media companies to expand the reach of gambling.

This expansion is leading Wall Street analysts to predict fast-growing revenue in the U.S. over the next five to 10 years. Morgan Stanley sees a $15 billion sports betting and internet gambling market by 2025, and Macquarie Research says that same market could be $30 billion by 2030.

"The once disparate categories of online gaming, media and sports are joining teams to create powerful partnerships that we believe will grow viewership, increase overall fan engagement, and drive significantly higher market values for all those connected," Macquarie wrote in a report issued last week.

It cited numerous examples of deals between sports betting and media companies last year, including Bally's and Sinclair Broadcasting; Flutter Entertainment and FOX; PointsBet and NBC; William Hill and CBS; DraftKings and Caesars Entertainment partnering with ESPN; Penn National and Barstool Sports; BetMGM and Yahoo; and Turner Sports' deals with FanDuel and DraftKings.

[CORONAVIRUS: Click here for our complete coverage arkansasonline.com/coronavirus]

David Schwartz, a gambling historian with the University of Nevada-Las Vegas, said combinations like these "seem to be the wave of the future."

"With geographic expansion nearly complete in the U.S. -- Texas is the biggest unserved market still out there -- casino companies are looking to grow their revenues by expanding into new forms of gambling, [and] online and sports betting are the most prominent," he said. "Even daily fantasy sports is seen as a viable route, as seen by recent moves by Bally's and Caesars. The media partners get more content and more eyes on their product."

Bill Miller, president of the American Gaming Association, the gambling industry's national trade association, said deals like these are "a logical extension" of the industry's desire to keep pace with customer expectations.

"Responsibly growing these verticals will be essential to the industry's continued success," he said.

In a report earlier this month, Morgan Stanley forecast a $15 billion market for sports betting and internet gambling by 2025, an increase of 27% over current levels. As much as $10 billion of that is likely to come from sports betting, the company said.

Most analysts expect at least half of the country will have legal sports betting by the end of 2021, with continued expansion after that.

Morgan Stanley said sports betting and internet gambling revenue reached $3.1 billion in the U.S. last year, well outpacing its forecast of $2 billion. While some of the growth in online wagering was undoubtedly helped by months of casino closures during the coronavirus pandemic, Morgan Stanley says there's a durable market taking shape in these industries.

"We see legalized U.S. sports betting and iGaming as a once-in-a-generation shift for what was a mature gaming industry," Morgan Stanley wrote. "It is clear to us that Americans' interest in sports and gambling should lead to higher revenue [per] adult than we previously expected."

In this July 2, 2020 photo, a woman plays a slot machine at the Golden Nugget casino in Atlantic City N.J. Gambling companies in the U.S. are increasingly bringing different forms of gambling together, including sports betting, casino gambling, internet gambling and daily fantasy sports, and partnering with media companies as they seek to increase revenue. (AP Photo/Wayne Parry)

This Oct. 25, 2018 photo, employees at the sports book at the Tropicana casino in Atlantic City N.J. count money moments before it opened. Gambling companies in the U.S. are increasingly bringing different forms of gambling together, including sports betting, casino gambling, internet gambling and daily fantasy sports, and partnering with media companies as they seek to increase revenue. (AP Photo/Wayne Parry)

Read more from the original source:

Categories of gambling, media outlets merging to aid growth - Arkansas Online

Posted in Gambling | Comments Off on Categories of gambling, media outlets merging to aid growth – Arkansas Online

Illegal Bar and Gambling Operation Bust in NJ Ends With Three Arrests: Police – NBC New York

Posted: at 7:15 am

What to Know

Three men from Newark were arrested in connection with a large gathering involving the illegal serving of alcohol and gambling that took place over the weekend.

Newark Public Safety Director Anthony F. Ambrose announced that Jos DaSilva, 53, Victor Pereira, 61, and Byron Barraza, 31, were arrested following the bust Saturday.

According to Newark officials, at about 10 p.m., members of the Newark Police Divisions Environmental, Graffiti and Vice Crimes Task Force responded to the Portuguese Soccer Club, located at 215 Wilson Avenue, on complaints of illegal alcohol and gambling.

Detectives allegedly observed Barraza unlocking a gate at the location for patrons to enter and exit. Once they entered, police allegedly observed around 50 people inside the establishment drinking alcohol, playing cards and using gambling machines.

According to Newark officials, Pereira was seen serving as bartender at a fully stocked bar with a variety of beers and liquors. Meanwhile, DaSilva, the manager, was allegedly unable to furnish the appropriate paperwork for selling alcohol.

The three men were arrested and police subsequently confiscating $6,829 in proceeds from the alleged illegal sale of alcohol, cash from the gambling machines, along with 403 bottles of various beer, wine and liquor.

DaSilva and Pereira each face charges of maintaining an unlawful liquor establishment, possession of alcohol, illegal sale of alcohol and possession of gambling devices. Meanwhile, Barraza faces a charge of aiding and abetting.

Attorney information for the accused was not immediately known.

This was not the sole social activity with a large gathering in the tri-state area that resulted in arrests, particularly at a time when large groups and certain activities are limited due to the ongoing pandemic.

Dozens of people who were drinking and smoking hookah inside an illegal club in New York City were cited over the weekend and the club owner has been arrested, authorities said.

Sheriff Joseph Fucito announced that deputies found at least 75 people inside an illegal bar located at 65-25 Roosevelt Avenue in Queens on Saturday. The location had a "heavily fortified" door and blocked egresses, creating a safety hazard in the event of a fire or other emergency, Fucito said.

Firefighters had to force their way through the entry into the nightclub and when deputies tried to inspect the bar, owner and operator Marco Chacon allegedly refused to cooperate and attempted to restrain the deputies.

Continue reading here:

Illegal Bar and Gambling Operation Bust in NJ Ends With Three Arrests: Police - NBC New York

Posted in Gambling | Comments Off on Illegal Bar and Gambling Operation Bust in NJ Ends With Three Arrests: Police – NBC New York

MLB has a sports gambling wild card to protect its media rights – CNBC

Posted: at 7:15 am

San Francisco Giants Shortstop Brandon Crawford (35) tries his hand at the TV camera before the Major League Baseball game between the San Diego Padres and San Francisco Giants on August 29, 2019 at Oracle Park in San Francisco, CA.

Bob Kupbens | Icon Sportswire | Getty Images)

Major League Baseball is at the media rights negotiating table, and it has a wild card to play.

The league's deal with Disney-owned ESPN is in renewal discussions, and the outcome could change how baseball looks on national TV during the week. Some media pundits believe MLB's Monday and Wednesday package is worth $150 million to $200 million per year.

The chatter started to circulate when The Athletic reported ESPN is willing to part with some of its baseball content. The story led to predictions that MLB's media rights fees could collapse.

"I think they will be sold, just not at the asking price of $350 million," media rights expert Dan Cohen told CNBC. Cohen, the senior vice president of Octagon's global media rights consulting division, said he believes MLB will drop its asking price on the package if that's the figure. Not by much, though.

"MLB is not looking to give these rights away for free," Cohen said. "There is value for nationally televised baseball games on Monday and Wednesdays."

The thing is, it's not exclusive value. And it's making MLB get creative about its future, with permission around sports gambling as leverage.

Rhys Hoskins #17 of the Philadelphia Phillies runs down Gio Urshela #29 of the New York Yankees during a Summer Camp game at Yankee Stadium on July 20, 2020 in New York City.

Jim McIsaac | Getty Images

To help its network partners overcome losses due to Covid-19, the league granted them permission to use limited sports gambling advertisement spots.

MLB controls what ads are aired during games, though there are still restrictions around sports gambling ads. During its pandemic season, in which networks were shortchanged games, MLB approved the ads and helped its partners.

The National Football League pulled a similar move earlier this month, according to the Wall Street Journal. The league provided its national media partners more ad slots during its postseason games and Super Bowl LV.

Sports gambling companies like DraftKings and FanDuel are spending millions on marketing. One of the best options for them is to buy ads around sports content.

The spending should continue. That means the MLB can once again increase the number of ad spots it provides to networks. The partners will collect their fees and pay MLB a slice. In a way, the league is protecting its media rights.

ESPN has a reason to devalue the MLB's package. And again, the games on Monday and Wednesday aren't exclusive.

In 2012, it agreed to pay the MLB $700 million annually in an eight-year, $5.6 billion deal. ESPN gets an exclusive Sunday game and rights to the Home Run Derby.

But on Monday and Wednesday, regional sports networks also air the games, giving in-market consumers no incentive to watch ESPN's telecast.

"If the (New York) Yankees or (Philadelphia) Phillies games are available on a regional network, they get most of the ratings, and ESPN doesn't do that well with its national game," said long-time TV executive and former president of CBS Sports Neal Pilson.

"I always wondered why ESPN has that package in the first place," added Pilson. "And if they are giving it up now, I think that's a smart move."

Octagon analysts used 108 out of 114 games in the last three years to determine average viewership on the Monday-Wednesday package on ESPN, not including ESPN2 broadcasts. The findings: an average viewership of 761,434 in 2018, which dropped to approximately 632,000 in 2019.

Viewership dropped to an average of 358,947 in 2020, but sports viewership was also impacted by the pandemic, social unrest and the U.S. presidential race.

"I call them semi-exclusives," added Cohen. "Sometimes you're talking the big markets New York, LA, Chicago, Boston, Philly but you're still missing 90 percent of the rest of the country."

But lacking exclusivity and other league rights, like the National Hockey League, which is up for bid, MLB may have a new home for its package.

ESPN an MLB declined to comment due to active negotiations.

Reports suggest ESPN wants to trim its annual fee by roughly $150 million. Assuming MLB starts its price at that figure or more, it plans to get creative around its offerings to justify the cost.

Gambling commercials may attract networks. Another is the actual game, since MLB controls what can be displayed, it has a say over the marketing that networks can use on the screen.

According to people with knowledge of negotiations, the league doesn't believe it needs to lower the package's value and will use its broadcast permissions to protect it.

Cohen suggested Sinclair may be interested in a partnership.

The company owns 14 regional networks that broadcast MLB games. It has a streaming play with Stadium, which was backed by Chicago White Sox owner Jerry Reinsdorf, one of the most powerful owners in the MLB club.

Sinclair could pay itself with the national package, feeding some of its content into Stadium and selling more ads slots with MLB's permission.

NBCUniversal is dropping its sports network this year and is moving media rights to the more accessible USA network. The channel has a history in sports and NBCUniversal just made a play for wrestling with its Peacock service snagging the rights to stream WWE matches in the U.S. And with live entertainment, the main force protecting the cable model, NBC Sports could make a play for the MLB on USA and gain special advertisement access, too.

"There's a lot to consider," Cohen said. "I think they can get pretty clever and creative."

MLB also has partnerships with Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube, which means it already appears to have have streaming options. Using the streaming model, MLB could get short-term deals similar to NFL's Amazon package and create flexibility, since it wouldn't be locked in long-term to a partner.

And if ESPN walks away, MLB is still ahead in the media rights card game.

The league already secured new rights fees with Fox Sports WarnerMedia-owned Turner Sports, the latter of which is adding a Tuesday game to its coverage. The network will pay over $3 billion to retain baseball.

Whatever the play, MLB seems to have its wild card and ready to use. And don't forget, there are still extra postseason games that it can add add to the deck. But for those, MLB will need permission from a top media rights partner the players union.

Disclosure: Comcast owns NBCUniversal, which is the parent company of CNBC.

More:

MLB has a sports gambling wild card to protect its media rights - CNBC

Posted in Gambling | Comments Off on MLB has a sports gambling wild card to protect its media rights – CNBC

YGAM and GamCare surpass gambling harm prevention targets – iGaming Business

Posted: at 7:15 am

UK responsible gambling charities the Young Gamers and Gamblers Education Trust (YGAM) and GamCare have revealed they surpassed the first-year targets for the joint Young Peoples Gambling Harm Prevention Programme, despite challenges imposed by the novel coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic.

Launched in 2020, the four-year programme aims to deliver evidence-led education, training and support to young people across England, Wales and Northern Ireland, as well as collaborating with other organisations in Scotland.

During the first year of the initiative, YGAM trained 2,906 practitioners, ahead of its original target of 2,592. These practitioners are expected to reach 184,700 young people

GamCare also trained 4,185 professionals to work with young people, exceeding the initial goal by almost 3,000 people to date, with two months of the first year of the initiative to go. Educational workshops were delivered to 3,947 young people.

Other achievements included GamCare setting up the UKs first national young peoples support service offering information, advice and support tailored specifically to the needs of young people impacted by gambling. This service is now accessible online or over the phone.

The Young Peoples Gambling Harm Prevention Programme is now established in all regions of England and Wales, and in December, education and support services were extended to young people to Northern Ireland for the first time.

In addition, as a response to the challenges of Covid-19, YGAM and GamCare accelerated the digital transformation of resources to enable them to deliver workshops online during lockdown, while GamCare developed an eLearning resource for young people.

As 2020 unfolded, we saw the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic as an invitation to develop YGAMs digital capacity in all areas of our work, YGAM founder and chief executive Lee Willows said. Although this was done as a response to the crisis, the effect has been significantly advantageous for our education programme.

Now that the delivery is entirely digital, we have removed enormous barriers that may have prevented some individuals and organisations from taking part.

GamCare chief executive Anna Hemmings added: The pandemic has proved a huge challenge, yet our teams have continued to deliver great engagement with professionals and young people. Weve also developed a dedicated support service tailored to the needs of young people.

By 2024, YGAM and GamCare aim to work with at least 13,492 practitioners and partner organisations, with the idea of ensuring every young person between the 11 and 19 has at least one session of gambling awareness education during their secondary or further education.

See more here:

YGAM and GamCare surpass gambling harm prevention targets - iGaming Business

Posted in Gambling | Comments Off on YGAM and GamCare surpass gambling harm prevention targets – iGaming Business

Risks, rewards of expanding gambling in New York highlighted in report – The Daily Gazette

Posted: at 7:15 am

SCHENECTADY The state Gaming Commission this week released a consultants sweeping report on New Yorks gambling industry, with extensive predictions on the impact new or expanded casinos would bring.

The conclusions and recommendations line up neatly with some of the budget proposals Gov. Andrew Cuomo made last week for the casino industry, which entail the potential benefits of opening three more casinos, the potential reduction of taxes paid by existing casinos, and the implementation of digital sports betting.

This report provides a valuable tool for the Commission and policy makers to use as discussions continue on the future of the gaming industry in New York, said Brad Maione, spokesman for the Schenectady-based Gaming Commission. This reportshould assist withmakingsound fiscal decisions.

Pennsylvania-based Spectrum Gaming Group was selected to provide a market analysis in November 2019; an analysis of the impact of COVID was subsequently added to its scope.

Spectrum has provided research and professional services centered on the gaming industry since 1993, including studies or consultations in 40 states or territories and in 48 countries on six continents.

Its 345-page Gaming Market Study: State of New York provides extensive facts, predictions and recommendations.

Some of the points are quoted or summarized below:

Categories: Business, News, Saratoga County, Schenectady County

Original post:

Risks, rewards of expanding gambling in New York highlighted in report - The Daily Gazette

Posted in Gambling | Comments Off on Risks, rewards of expanding gambling in New York highlighted in report – The Daily Gazette

Important changes in the European gambling industry during 2020 – Times of Malta

Posted: at 7:15 am

Needless to say, 2020 was a rough year for everyone, so it is not surprising that the European gambling industry experienced many turmoils and challenges.Here are the most dramatic changes in the European gaming industry that happened in 2020!

The Evolution takeover of NetEnt can only be described as the proverbial clash of titans. The most popular live casino supplier completed the $2.3bn acquisition of one of the most prominent gambling software companies NetEnt. What was supposed to be just another merger (at least for the public), turned out to be a story that hogged column inches and set the rumour mill going.

But how will this acquisition affect the industry? Well, Evolution shut down the NetEnt live casino thus establishing Evolution Live's dominance in the live gambling vertical. Despite that, NetEnt appears among the greatest casino games providers. Gambling guides such as Casinofavoritter.com claim that video slot machines from NetEnt can be found in nearly all online casinos.

NetEnt continues to release table games and slots at the same pace as before, and it seems how new owners didn't meddle into it but were primarily focused on removing their no.1 competitor in the industry, as Evolution is focused exclusively on live gambling. One thing's for sure as of 2020, players have fewer live gaming providers to choose from.

In Norway, the situation with gambling is not that clear. In the summer of 2019 the Norwegian authorities made a controversial attempt to stop international online casino providers from sending winnings to Norwegian players. The argument was that these online casinos put the risk on weakening the monopoly of Norwegian Tipping.

The online casinos, on the other hand, believed that they were in their full right to pay out the winnings to their customers, referring to the EEA Agreement which Norway is a part of. It all ended fortunately happy for Norwegian gamblers, and the authorities have apparently stepped down attempts during 2020, mainly because of the new, intuitive payment solutions that make it easier to conduct transactions with both bank cards and e-wallets.

Another important dramatic change in 2020, at least in the UK, that has also something with gambling payments to do, is the ban of all credit card transactions towards casinos. This decision came on April 14 with the general public welcoming this decision.

The ban comes at a vital time as we are seeing an increase in the use of some online products, such as online slots and virtual sports, and our online search analysis shows an increase in UK consumer interest in gambling products since the lockdown began," said Neil McArthur, chief executive of the Gambling Commission. However, most insiders agree on how the ban won't reduce the number of problem gamblers, as they will simply switch to alternative payment methods.

Disclaimer: Play responsibly. Players must be +18. For help visit https://www.gamcare.org.uk.

Independent journalism costs money. Support Times of Malta for the price of a coffee.

See the original post here:

Important changes in the European gambling industry during 2020 - Times of Malta

Posted in Gambling | Comments Off on Important changes in the European gambling industry during 2020 – Times of Malta

Letter to the editor: Silencing free speech by breaking the law not what Edmonds is about – My Edmonds News

Posted: at 7:14 am

Editor:

Recently, My Edmonds News reported on the vandalism to the art installation that changed key characteristics of the message into an entirely new message altogether. The public was appropriately appalled, and legal action was pursued. Oscar Wilde is quoted as sayingI may not agree with you, but I will defend to the death your right to make an ass of yourself. Service members have given their lives defending this freedom. All the people of Edmonds should be mindful, respectful, and display the true meaning of decorum when it comes to defending every citizens right to protected speech.

In local Facebook groups, discussion is abundant and emotionally charged about the theft of political signs and other signs reflecting individual beliefs. We might not agree, or even understand the messages on those signs and can become blinded by our own passion. The use of a sign is a way to provoke thought, declare a strong personal belief, offer support. It is a sacred and protected right we as Americans enjoy and others in the world can only envy. Recently, many in Edmonds have had to resort to extreme measures to keep trespassers, enemies of free speech, and those who disagree from stealing yard signs. This week Councilmember Adrienne-Fraley Monillas used her position to make rhetorical and unproven statements during the Council Comments section of the Jan. 26, 2021 council meeting. I will fight to protect her right to express her thoughts. She is perfectly within her rights to say the things that she does, and residents of Edmonds are perfectly within their rights to display legal signage on private property to express their views.

A case in point. Recently, I was asked to watch a neighbors property while they were away. They had multiple legal signs on their private property. Over the course of seven days, trespassers stole private yard signs no fewer than four times. Fortunately, in two of the cases, I was able to secure photographs of these individuals. I promptly filed a police report and provided the photographs.

The people stealing these signs (and silencing protected speech) need to be prosecuted and serve their penalty.

Whether you want to express Black Lives Matter, Drop the Mike, Equity, Justice, We Choose Kindness, or I Like Turtles signs on your private property is your business. If you dislike the sign, think about why that is and engage in a discussion with those you disagree with to understand their views and share yours. Using misleading speech and to emotionally divide our community as Councilmember Adrienne-Fraley Monillas is doing is both wrong and dangerous.

One thing most of us have in common is our love for this city. We have done our best work when we share ideas, opinions, and respect. Members of this community crave having a voice and a meaningful role in their future. History has taught us what we become when we seek to silence those with whom we disagree.

George BennettEdmonds

More:
Letter to the editor: Silencing free speech by breaking the law not what Edmonds is about - My Edmonds News

Posted in Free Speech | Comments Off on Letter to the editor: Silencing free speech by breaking the law not what Edmonds is about – My Edmonds News

The Great Deplatforming: Can Digital Platforms Be Trusted As Guardians of Free Speech? – ProMarket

Posted: at 7:14 am

Online social media platforms accepted the role of moderating content from Congress in 1996. The Great Deplatforming that occurred after January 6 was less a silent coup than a good faith effort to purge online platforms of toxic content.

After former President Trump and many of the extremist followers he goaded were removed from a variety of online platformsmost notably Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, as well as Redditmany saw the subsequent silence as a welcome relief. But is that, as Luigi Zingales posits, an emotional reaction to a wrong that is being used to justify something that, at least in the long term, is much worse?

The Great Deplatforming (aka the Night of Short Fingers) has exposed the fact that a great deal of political discourse is occurring on private, for-profit internet platforms. Can these platforms be trusted as our guardians of free speech?

Recognizing that the Internet and other interactive computer services offer a forum for a true diversity of political discourse, unique opportunities for cultural development, and myriad avenues for intellectual activity, and with the intent of preserving the vibrant and competitive free market that presently exists for the Internet and other interactive computer services, unfettered by Federal or State regulation, Congress granted immunity in 1996 to interactive computer services (which are equivalent of Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and other online social media platforms) for any information published by the platforms users. Without this immunity, social media platforms would simply not exist. The potential liability for the larger platforms arising from the content of the millions upon millions of posts would be far too great a risk.

Congress also granted social media platforms immunity for any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected. This provision gives platforms an incentive to moderate content to weed out objectionable and illegal content. It can be a vile world out there, as evidenced by some of the hateful, harmful, and obscene comments that are posted in online forums. As noted by Cloudfare founder Matthew Prince, What we didnt anticipate, was that there are just truly awful human beings in the world. The situation has devolved to such an extent that experts now recognize that some human moderators suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder-like symptoms.

What do we do when the moderation we have encouraged social media platforms to conduct is applied to what some consider political speech? Many fear that platforms have difficulty differentiating between racist and/or extremist posts advocating violence against individuals or institutions based on political views, and simple political opinion. Indeed, Facebooks own executives acknowledge that the companys algorithm-generated recommendations were responsible for the growth of extremism on its platform. Concerns have also been raised that, with bad intent, some platforms refuse to make that differentiation to promote their executives own political agendas. Social media platforms have also been accused of moderating such political speech with a bias toward a particular party.

One approach is to amend Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, the law that provides internet social media platforms their immunity. Republicans introduced five bills in the 20192020 Congressional session calling for amendments, as well as the full repeal, of Section 230. For example, Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo), claiming a lack of politically neutral content on social media platforms, sponsored the Ending Support for Internet Censorship Act. Under the bill as introduced, online social media platforms with 30 million or more active monthly users in the US (or 300 million or more active monthly users worldwide, or more than $500 million in global annual revenue) would have to obtain an immunity certification from the FTC every two years. The social media platform would be denied a certification and lose Section 230 immunity if it was determined to be moderating in a politically biased manner, which would include disproportionately restricting or promoting access to, or the availability of, information from a political party, political candidate, or political viewpoint. As one article noted, Hawley wants to stop internet censorship by censoring the internet, not to mention regulating political speech.

The Parler lawsuit amplifies a point made by one commentator: If you are so toxic that companies dont want to do business with you, thats on you. Not them.

In May 2020, President Trump signed an Executive Order claiming online platforms are invoking inconsistent, irrational, and groundless justifications to censor or otherwise restrict Americans speech, and stating that online platforms should lose their immunity, because rather than removing objectionable content in good faith as required under the law, they are engaging in deceptive actions by stifling viewpoints with which they disagree. The Executive Order called on the FCC to propose new regulations to clarify immunity under Section 230 and for the FTC to investigate online platforms for deceptive acts. Both Tim Wu and Hal Singer have provided cogent arguments on ProMarket as to why these are doomed approaches.

Online moderation is enforced through each platforms terms of service (TOS) that each user must agree to before being able to post to each respective platform. After the January 6 siege of the US Capital, the tech companies that deplatformed a large number of users, including former President Trump, and deleted tens of thousands of posts, did so on the basis of users violating their respective TOS. For example, Amazon Web Services (AWS) stopped hosting Parler because of Parlers alleged violations of the AWS TOS, which include an Acceptable Use Policy. Parlers subsequent lawsuit against AWS could have served as a bellwether case for the application of TOS to regulate speech. Unfortunately, the case Parler presented is appallingly weak (one lawyer referred to it as a lolsuit). For example, the AWSParler hosting agreement clearly gives AWS the power to immediately suspend and terminate a client that has violated AWSs Acceptable Use Policy.

In its swift denial of a preliminary injunction in this case, the court also noted the lack of any evidence that Twitter and AWS acted together either intentionally or at all to restrain Parlers business.

Parlers causes of action continue with a claim that Twitter was given preferential treatment by AWS because similar content appeared on Twitter, for which Twitters account was not suspended, while Parlers account was terminated. There are two issues with this assertion: First, we return to the role of moderation. Twitter actively (though, to some degree, imperfectly) moderates the content on its platform. In contrast, Parlers home page stated its users could [s]peak freely and express yourself openly, without fear of being deplatformed for your views.

Even more damaging to Parlers assertion is the fact that the evidence in the case demonstrates that AWS doesnt even host Twitter on its platform and therefore did not have any ability to suspend Twitters account even if it wanted to. But the Parler lawsuit amplifies a point made by one commentator: If you are so toxic that companies dont want to do business with you, thats on you. Not them (which would seem to apply to Zingaless justification for Simon & Schusters cancellation of Senator Josh Hawleys book deal).

In denying Parlers request for a preliminary injunction that would order AWS to restore service to Parler pending the full hearing, the court rejected any suggestion that the public interest favors requiring AWS to host the incendiary speech that the record shows some of Parlers users have engaged in. While this ruling does not end the case, it does substantiate the weakness of at least some of Parlers arguments.

The corporate owners of the social media platforms are permitted in our free enterprise system to set the terms under which content may be posted or removed from the platforms.

Although the AWS-Parler case before the court will ultimately resolve this particular dispute, the underlying issues will remain far from resolved regardless of the outcome of the case. The explosion of social media over the last ten years, and its supplanting of traditional media to a large degree, has created a new and untested playing field for public discourse. Some of the issues raised are similar in scope, if not size, to the issues our courts have dealt with in the past. The corporate owners of the social media platforms are permitted in our free enterprise system to set the terms under which content may be posted or removed from the platforms. As non-government actors, the First Amendments freedom of speech protections do not apply to the speech of a private company, a fact confirmed by the court in denying Parlers preliminary injunction. The audience of the social media platforms at issue, however, has grown to exponentially. While deplatforming will, at least temporarily, silence those voices promoting violence on specific platforms, the long-lasting implications are less clear.

While it is true that Trump lost the popular vote in the 2020 election by 7 million votes, the fact remains that 74.2 million Americans did cast their votes for Trump. Once Twitter permanently banned Trump from its platform, and many surmised that he would join the less restrictive Parler, nearly one million people downloaded the Parler app from Apple and Google before it was removed from those stores and Parler was suspended from AWS. Moving the conversation off of mainstream social media and driving it into less balanced platforms whose subscribers are more homogeneous, much to the dismay of even Parlers CEO, John Matze, encourages an echo chamber of ideas in smaller encrypted platforms that are more difficult to monitor and potentially amplifies the most angry and passionate voices.

If the touted exodus of conservatives from Twitter to other platforms that they view as more welcoming comes to fruition, could our public discourse become even more divided, with opposing viewpoints feeding upon their own biases rather than potentially being tempered by responses and dialogue with each other? An informed public exposed to conflicting opinions is the best chance for resolving political differences. These issues are important and warrant further discussion, but the current termination of Parler from the AWS platform does not seem to result in heightened concern that public discourse is truly harmed. There are alternatives to AWS, and in fact, Parler already seems to have found one that will bring it back. While there is a significant amount of talk of conservatives leaving Twitter, there seems to be little evidence that has happened on a large scale. For the moment, at least, the largest social media platforms seem to be retaining users on both sides of the political spectrum, which we believe is good for democracy.

Go here to read the rest:
The Great Deplatforming: Can Digital Platforms Be Trusted As Guardians of Free Speech? - ProMarket

Posted in Free Speech | Comments Off on The Great Deplatforming: Can Digital Platforms Be Trusted As Guardians of Free Speech? – ProMarket

The free speech row tearing apart the tech community – Spectator.co.uk

Posted: at 7:14 am

Donald Trumps Twitter suspension after the riot at the US Capitol made headlines around the world. What was less reported, however, was that as the then-President was suspended, so too were tens of thousands of right-wing accounts. Their social media refuge was Parler, another micro-blogging platform.

Parler markets itself as a free speech-focused and unbiased alternative to mainstream social networks. Whatever its intentions, in recent years the platform has become a cesspit of extremist content. So extreme, in fact, that Amazon banned Parler from its hosting services earlier this month. The case is now going through the courts, after Parler launched a lawsuit.

What makes Parler an interesting case is that there was initially speculation it could be hosted on the blockchain networks used by cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin (although Parler has since opted for a more conventional hosting system). For the uninitiated, blockchain is a special type of computer database for cryptocurrency transactions. It functions like a ledger and can record transactions between parties in a way thats verifiable, permanent and, most importantly, anonymous.

So what unites an obscure social media platform dedicated to free speech and the fiendishly complicated databases used by cryptocurrencies? In short, libertarian politics. These networks do not have any top-down control, whether from governments or internet monitors; that is their appeal. If Parler moved its network to a blockchain, it would ensure its ability to survive without interference from Amazon or any government.

The problem is that if a service like Parler was hosted on such a network, messages that incite violence would be pretty much impossible to attribute. Funds could move to finance bombings, murders or other terrorist activities while remaining undetected by the authorities.

Indeed, fears of a far-right insurgency have spooked some big players in the cryptocurrency world. Vinay Gupta, who helped launch Ethereum, a major Bitcoin rival, responded in no uncertain terms to suggestions that Parler should move to Ethereums network: You will regret it. We will collude against you. We will make your lives miserable. We will seriously figure out underhanded-yet-ethical ways to make your project fail if you force us to host it. Please, kindly, fuck off and build your own infrastructure. You are not wanted here.

His belief that Ethereum should under no circumstances allow itself to become a haven for the far-right goes beyond political preferences: If these people move on to our platform, we will be knee deep in terrorism financing lawsuits in 18 months. It is critical for the survival of the open internet that we are not a safe haven for fascists. Let me explain the logic If Parler was built on Ethereum instead of AWS [Amazons network] right now we would be losing all of the non-blockchain infrastructure the Ethereum community depends on: websites, exchange licenses, bank accounts, IPFS infrastructure, Infura, he tweeted.

Guptas fears are far from unfounded. Reuters reported on 14 January that payments in Bitcoin worth more than $500,000 were made to 22 different virtual wallets, most of them belonging to far-right activists and internet personalities, before the storming of the US Capitol. There is a real danger that a blockchain network could find itself complicit in acts that might fall under terrorism legislation. But there are those who disagree with Guptas approach. Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin has claimed that Parler has a right to exist, full stop.

At the heart of the matter is a conflict that has been raging in the tech world for years: how much freedom should there be online? This debate has particularly affected the crypto and hacking communities. Defcon, one of the world's largest hacker conventions, effectively told alt-right agitators they werent welcome at its events in 2018. In the same year, Hope, another conference, was accused of refusing to remove fascists and white nationalists.

Its not just in the US either: at CCC, a conference organised every December in Leipzig, an actual physical fight reportedly broke out between left-wing organisers and attendees accused of alt-right sympathies in 2019.

What comes up again and again, from Parler being shut down to Trump being banned from Twitter, is the tension between the right to free speech and the potential of these technologies to cause real-life harm. Its about the threat that the far-right could pose if they had the expertise to utilise technologies like blockchain networks. And furthermore, how much of a presence the alt-right already has in the tech community.

Gupta tells me he believes the tension has arisen online because the libertarians in the crypto-community look at the new left, the woke left, and what they see is Stalinism. At the same time:

The left hates libertarians because theyre individualist and dont care about political correctness or the idea of society. So the libertarian position, that we are not responsible for what other people do, we are only responsible for what we do, is the standard Bitcoin political doctrine Libertarians will say you want to impose censorship on the blockchain, just like you imposed censorship on the internet. What they dont understand is that if we end up hosting that kind of content, the feds are going to shut us down. Fundamentally, the clash with a sovereign national state is one that the blockchain cannot survive.

What is clear, as we have seen over the last month, is that the far-right can thrive in the space created by the (admirable, if at times naive) defence of absolute free speech. And it will fall on communities, like the blockchain one, to find a way to navigate these choppy waters.

The stakes are real: if self-regulation fails, nation states will start imposing their sovereignty over parts of the internet, in effect Balkanising it. The era of the free internet, where information flows (mostly) seamlessly, would be over. In its place would be a version of the internet that more closely resembles countries like Russia and China heavily censored and subject to the whims of politicians. It would be a sad end for one of the greatest experiments in history.

Go here to see the original:
The free speech row tearing apart the tech community - Spectator.co.uk

Posted in Free Speech | Comments Off on The free speech row tearing apart the tech community – Spectator.co.uk

Sanctifying sentiment? Bail must be overriding principle in free speech cases unless theres incitement to v – The Times of India Blog

Posted: at 7:14 am

Supreme Courts refusal to grant interim protection from arrest to the cast and crew of Tandav facing FIRs in multiple states, for allegedly hurting religious sentiments, doesnt help the cause of free speech. The court observed that the right to free speech is not absolute and cannot come at the cost of hurting the rights of others. Hurt to sentiments, however, is a slippery slope that imparts a chilling effect on any exercise of the right to free speech. If Article 19(1) of the Constitution protects the citizens fundamental right to free speech, it is noteworthy that hurt to sentiment doesnt figure among the reasonable restrictions to free speech in Article 19(2).

Hurt to sentiments is subjective in the sense that what is entertainment or information or a legitimate belief to one person could be deeply disturbing or falsehood or blasphemy for another. Unless a clear cut offence that endangers public order by inciting imminent violence is committed, the state and its organs like police and courts will ordinarily have a tough time adjudicating free speech cases amid such subjective biases. Clearly, the Tandav makers havent succeeded in inciting any such offence. Indias free speech laws then necessarily command authorities to exercise forbearance in such cases.

The tactic of police filing cases in multiple states is a deadly and effective instrument of state harassment. Few individuals have the resources or temperament to withstand such pressure. In SCs glorious precedents lies its equally effective antidote of asking the offence industry to refrain from seeing what they cannot stomach. Lawyers for the Tandav cast and crew invoked the SC relief in similar situations for journalists Arnab Goswami and Amish Devgan. Both hyper-aggressive practitioners of their free speech rights were granted protection from arrest, and rightly so, effectively ending witch hunts against them.

The Tandav petitioners have an uphill task approaching each high court under whose jurisdiction FIRs have been filed, seeking protection from arrest. They had apologised and deleted the offending portions hoping to mollify the culture censors. A similarly apologetic Munawar Faruqui, still in jail for jokes he didnt crack, has suffered three bail rejections. A single-judge MP high court bench has raised the possibility of investigation coughing up more incriminating evidence. Faruquis jokes disqualifying him for bail conflict with free speech protections under Article 19(1). All courts must promptly call the police bluff, not let it play on much longer.

This piece appeared as an editorial opinion in the print edition of The Times of India.

END OF ARTICLE

Follow this link:
Sanctifying sentiment? Bail must be overriding principle in free speech cases unless theres incitement to v - The Times of India Blog

Posted in Free Speech | Comments Off on Sanctifying sentiment? Bail must be overriding principle in free speech cases unless theres incitement to v – The Times of India Blog