Chinese Government Enforces Censorship by Targeting Local Broadcasters – The Merkle

We all know the Chinese government is keeping a close eye on what content can be found on the Internet. China is not exactly known for freedom of speech or making information easily accessible. Various broadcasters and media platforms have been put on notice regarding broadcasts putting China or its government in a negative spotlight. This is another clear example of how censorship is enforced by oppressive governments.

It is understandable governments are not too happy when negative press gains mainstream traction. Reading about how a government official did X or Y wrong is not fun, even though such information deserved to be shared. Contrary to what the Chinese government may want to believe, negative information deserves to be known by the public as well. However, if it is up to government officials, that situation will come to a halt very soon.

More specifically, the Chinese government has warned local broadcasters regarding what they can and cannot share with the public. Any negative news regarding China or its government will be banned from now on. This appears to be a rather drastic decision, as this is a clear example of censorship. According to the State Administration of Press, Publication, Radio, Film, and Television, airing the dirty laundry violated local regulations.

It has to be said, this is quite an interesting turn of events. According to the government, all of the notified broadcasters share large amounts of programs with the public. However, a lot of this information doesnt comply with national rules. Moreover, there are seemingly more broadcasts regarding negative discussions about public affairs. This seems to indicate the local government isnt doing the job to the best of their abilities, yet no one is supposed to know about these things, it seems.

It is believed the agency will take measures: to shut down these programs airing the dirty laundry of China and its government. Considering the agency contacted both traditional and online broadcasters, it remains to be seen how this new rule will be executed. It is possible some broadcasters may effectively lose their license or suffer from major government repercussions, including fees and potentially even jail time.

It is not the first time we see such drastic actions taken by the Chinese government regarding censorship and freedom of speech. The country ranked in the bottom 5 countries on the 2017 World Press Freedom Index. It is evident freedom of speech and China will never be two peas in a pod, and one can only expect harsh measures like this to become even more common in the future. In fact, the government has recently been granted more control over the Internet and broadcasts in May of this year.

Interestingly enough, it looks as if some broadcasters are taking this new guideline to heart. Both Weibo and Acfun have made a post on their official Weibo accounts to state how they will enforce stricter content management. For Chinese companies, complying with new regulations is a top priority. No one wants to lose a license or face severe punishment for disregarding the rules. Moreover, Weibo will only allow users to broadcast if they have the proper government license to do so.

If you liked this article, follow us on Twitter @themerklenews and make sure to subscribe to our newsletter to receive the latest bitcoin, cryptocurrency, and technology news.

View original post here:

Chinese Government Enforces Censorship by Targeting Local Broadcasters - The Merkle

The Line Between Speech and Censorship at Bookstores – Publishers Weekly

}kSHgP=1>@3lCo,m5yD8%73J*2znGVV*zw|Q28a&dwr ^;s}D2gqa(! ; 8 "dH8%Ih{ph'n5f~"W;= g(( sHbQbN29E nrmfXDT"dA? yb2RU'il9L0%Y$< $ R{dPFjrF3FeU{~/ MzH};q~A$Pp;av$@cN<_kbOL_(S$J|")zF#^`sD D!hn47Xj}uoCk%"$CiyW@*so,T/lhiQSP)J=a5R( ]IP+aP,B"!E?$Wq:HKQRr|T_iuv:k-^lcX@#;*s!IYA=XA!l_mQ`j5O$fJO41Wy;; )Y,DMP8[pV<~[^5=Q'FqBa[jP{=ETH1eYpU[s?6$hbZ1p}xz*}]]2naBb*FIiO+Po`Lw)1H. 6M0PN?lk Mff$GH8u`bhs&?B2%#Na8dCuw)qb^T`0j(4,8G@KvHSv'aBC@D O@6Yx-rT3l[-kmbB"v;3+Ia1s@c>4ART!n9e%r T.l>"ut<1)$c<,tuLI0]OA8q*_XzWk|/%'-Fi:?+2n_gZMP2Xc5`p|r0#M@00htZ-.ia_0][:Pc[w%]vP0X|3;1)&(84y{ ,#X!%!rf OWvu6*c.4CRlQ=4Y",?i"r}gIRpT/dU|YH&eBcR}@[ZO?WDsw$KV0GLo! L2PqN ifYc((fZz"Ynnr}'4*qDPB +N@ VV%43<7F[Yt20dn1d.` @]vUG`F(w%ODqA rqtVs)Bf)CzZ5)*4Tp Cf2momY`"EJAs+m/4{9`B 6;H{#5^DT q{sZW|9nhnB(n24Ck+ F'Epx"7fqb0ch#%dHDWNq~~7$k6tGOcdx >A1'YeN%T5LlBQ?S-QKaku kKFaZraS)u&[F_#0p CD.G:Ab]`Bd: >nyb@BzFPPZgkJt=s{gwYHVe:7k yVP k2PJEZuX*:S47+Ju|f^q K 1Ws/i Fg9']w8Dh'cb`rf/P~NqrQ 1nRRERxS0H ](,lL!4a)Nh}&ock4@pDl6'eNMF8RLU`q6Pde}04`8~4$ugKs~KmIfhV *FB1D!Z(`Q.)~ #=4hT$h/PI1Kj{|2eG<> S7uPL)NH"1#-9G% t$;Icmz[K^OW+8UM? 8;[7c'Z%h /UDF*Q!HNA0rbP2AW@hXk,[&}@3`VA2k5s<)PPA{:@h #iZ8Xj,`Uc l@7"!;h2 1HXu6Tnh$z4Y'BbL I q$QJC9QLD (6:xYj+!jPAD,5L7TK/*qEjRpZ:vDb UUu1A#8T[+QUd@b%j14V:!-02?tMud(34!MBAWl%nZ3fI$dprGj'CLjX`+Qhe! {^kL6j;9hbsuIsm,CG EUaM)zmb0@d{.iLpE)'WG 1<@uIzx.Qmd8mBZG7`So}pAK:b2dCAGh 8w@&@DE RqZQ(>"9(dSY4.RO*-RUR)Trp0|cemoHB|$oR3=A&GM)XIsYj}ii@n*D#cZdK4%R4J vPn/1$@oRNYN;XuD4/6Rcd~>Yw bNuTM 6 9lFI Q4bafy-ZcrMAADo#12^&iTQZ;Z)4_7I_"%V.V5WIt&(_5} 2u({u5wVdV8i%G}y;UoUWN]*4A"F.PMbD0Rek1o~m h^1gDu&+Sp0OWW>VVAB=#B]+/2cy!?cKKZd4D8fS#weCPc6*ez;T-,!DS?c3Bny153N3=eXW9V_9y{+ +[:"1U`vj`)f6wx.8_,Zm+5U~ve R-*kcy9_uUdf08 ?gz{H.Jl jcSs`R *yng&X$}piIH0 uejTUS4ZUr1R *b&9?UlcrFVq({X:FLLi '#3Youwvi6~l'\yy7hs+Bt@Kuhp^@ZLA]uWkUG8K#n{I/HMr}oea57x5-f1B 5E~t8gEK%avlA0kAX#+P O)'Vg{*UT8L"d|'G~a@2Uf}mgAO#]p},*93k.A~`|P)l3^} Knt3uo^"elI,<8>^gp_Z6=|~DES}'! =<|];U]-R Wpv, n qS{p%h'{~c<>nKJ|,>M[ f?+ :1r`ggMvyr.>o&9US1F+,f,>C?+*<2^w}7IyTM%m[nH<-^a6]me|x]^? /B)Y^;pe=?pc+B?[N^s{^TiY%46W] nf.w-y]qg:GOfFCv>(^qO*q}Kfe"E_3LnLo/lc2>@t9SxDo8|+Gg':}>WN/Rc@@]P_9-F N;Wy.gnm?C Zi@ NEuMtnXcmfqAH0t(| FxKw[7"xu6mI(p;D-yK__A&/w6Cgu:H(@c:v]5a.B SL=\d|gh#o#e:j&g&(zy*O2|{ 40 W=WOO XC'Id4kI)M)E;OxPxp sPJKQuR_>$oK,nPl|/lS=##Zh"g_'ryq. dm@:h}KGR#0{%B4xGb3"b}tRH$YI}S>^|?ctW&Dg-4s!r%+ V?:25Wa)<;^W@>~|TRS3i62*ix> _9(bVeUZ~^A%zs}ye.c4T=JRh^xQAy|Ms<@ e1YmI, #4Q;5 5QJ?IMdU#bwzy'HAoE%M(&54:j%Y6mcYxi!#GEW%Cw!815ytR$WG'R+i+k^Uo lth*P5m=MWgIwB6Vr`XGPrBQ a+

mF8=w;@` P]8Qw& nTB@.bI 'YBEf3>D=;|ACr+@Ap6g3"$i=^?IaMOeM..y3O0E*]a.d#I}jVUKwY5rtPLdlS8Y}icTd=p{;O )VNsJ]l5m`RDhxM`-"PS}VnxZq]sL.iiM~$(D4Xc{O~A@B|+%Z[{^wIV=g7p6/aN9Ia]ff/K%ZhmtIP[^Bb8C9{?gs3Ip(UBfq"kz_V(/AJFZS1 C<|I7&G$blW<)q_Rno6X!wU``h>R_eL0q8&xQC1'S#|Mn%hr4L eC#m`Y-Kp4@aXdz^`';VKI_ixM_Dji|$EA6;2J@v3jOTSl@AI9<' U!T_MhXcEQ~fZ_-YJ^0Io+LWN!:>E#Lx=f1pvu<5o0:{b,~7ge;

See the rest here:

The Line Between Speech and Censorship at Bookstores - Publishers Weekly

Fighting censorship online: ‘It’s an ongoing race’ – Deutsche Welle

DW: Mr. Baumhauer, According to the Freedom on the Net Report 2016, Internet freedom has declined globally for six consecutive years. Users in China, Syria and Iran are among the most affected. The report also states that governments are increasingly censoring social networks and messaging apps like WhatsApp and Telegram. How does this affect strategies to hold online censorship in check?

The basic concept hasn't changed. Millions of people are affected by online censorship, it happens across the globe, it affects social media as well - and it's nothing new to DW. We know exactly that there are governments out there who don't want us to get into the country to make sure that our content reaches the people who live there. Depending on how the internet is set up technically in a certain country, it can be very easy to block websites. However, in some societies, for instance in Iran, the young generation is very capable when it comes to bypassing censorship - that also goes for messaging apps. We at DW won't accept censorship and wherever it happens, we'll try to find a way around that. Bypass Censorship is just another approach.

The website provides download links and guides for a number of tools that help you go online without being tracked or get access to blocked content. How exactly does that work?

Some users at some point might have tried to watch a movie that was released in another country, for instance in the US, but not yet in their own country. They might have used some kind of VPN (virtual private network) software. These tools make it look like they're an American user, that way they get access to US servers. The tools we recommend on the website use a similar technology. After downloading them, they help users connect to various servers, and thus offer unrestricted internet access to them. For example, we use PSIPHON for our Farsi and Amharic services. Both Iran and Ethiopia are pretty good at censoring.

Some of the tools on the website, for instance TOR, are quite well known, at least to people who know a thing or two about encryption. Does this mean the website is aimed at users who aren't familiar with these topics?

DW's Guido Baumhauer hopes that DW's knowledge of combating censorship can help internet users worldwide

Most of the tools have been out there for a while, none of them are brand new. In countries where censorship is a daily routine, let's say Iran or China, we find a lot of internet-savvy users who know what they are doing. But other users elsewhere might want to get access and feel a little helpless to begin with. We want to show them what possibilities they have.

Additionally, the website always provides download links for the newest versions of the tools. The moment the censors realize how the technology works, they start blocking the servers. The tool basically adapts to the censorship and tries to keep the road to free internet access open. It's an ongoing race and it will not stop until one side backs down - and that will definitely not be us. We will do everything we can to help people get access to information because we believe freedom of speech is the highest value for people. Even if we only reach a few people through the website, it will be worth it.

But aren't you worried that the whole website might be blocked once word gets out?

That's definitely something that's going to happen and we have to find ways for users to access the information on the website through other means. When content on the DW website gets blocked, for instance in Iran or China, we find ways around that and we'll do the same with Bypass Censorship. For example, we offer users to email the tools to them. That might sound stupid and very simple, but it works.

Experts say that tens of thousands of Internet police are employed to implement China's "Great Firewall"

Bypass Censorship sounds like a project that could have been founded by activists or a hacker group. Why are leading international broadcasters getting involved?

If we're talking about providing free access to censored content that people should be able to see in order to know what is happening in their country and around them - which does not include promoting things that are lawless -I think we have the same mindset.

We have great people who know ways around censorship and we want to share this knowledge. In that respect, I think there is no difference between people who call themselves activists and broadcasters like DW.

Bypass Censorship is co-sponsored by Deutsche Welle, the BBC, the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), France Mdias Monde (FMM) and the Open Technology Fund. Guido Baumhauer is DW's Managing Director of Distribution, Marketing and Technology.

Thisinterview was conducted by Helena Kaschel.

See the article here:

Fighting censorship online: 'It's an ongoing race' - Deutsche Welle

Chinese Authorities Crack Down on Streaming to Create a ‘Cleaner Cyberspace’ – TIME

The Weibo microblogging app displayed on an iPhone, April 22, 2014. Brent LewinBloomberg/Getty Images

China's media oversight body has ordered three major online companies to halt some of their multi-media streaming services, the government's latest move to tighten controls on an already restricted Internet.

Agence France-Presse reports that Sina Weibo the country's Twitter-like microblogging site with more than 340 million users as well as news sites iFeng.com and ACFUN, were informed they lacked permits required by the body to run audio-visual streams.

An announcement by China's State Administration of Press, Publication, Radio, Film and Television said the sites hosted "many politically-related programs that do not conform with state rules," and authorities are trying to "create a cleaner cyberspace," according to AFP.

Earlier this month another regulator, the Beijing Cyberspace Administration, ordered internet companies to terminate social media accounts that cater to "the public's vulgar taste" and disseminate celebrity gossip, AFP reports.

Willy Lam, a professor at Chinese University of Hong Kong's centre for China studies, tells TIME that Beijing has steadily tightened the screws on expression ahead of the Chinese Communist Party's 19th Congress, due to be held around October.

Lam says that Chinese President Xi Jinping " wants stability above all else in this sensitive period," but that ultimately censorship could backfire. " The more control of the media there is, the more ordinary Chinese tend to believe in speculation and innuendo," he says.

[ AFP ]

Read the original:

Chinese Authorities Crack Down on Streaming to Create a 'Cleaner Cyberspace' - TIME

Kaepernick case isn’t about race but NFL censorship – Fort Worth Star Telegram (blog)


Fort Worth Star Telegram (blog)
Kaepernick case isn't about race but NFL censorship
Fort Worth Star Telegram (blog)
In short, Kaep' is full of it. If a team had offered him a job with a seven or six-figure salary he would have played ball, even on the bench. He would have been dumb not to, and this is not a dumb man. Kaep's famous taking of a knee is the ultimate ...

Here is the original post:

Kaepernick case isn't about race but NFL censorship - Fort Worth Star Telegram (blog)

Media Censorship in China | Council on Foreign Relations

Introduction

The Chinese government has long kept tight reins on both traditional and new media to avoid potential subversion of its authority. Its tactics often entail strict media controls using monitoring systems and firewalls, shuttering publications or websites, and jailing dissident journalists, bloggers, and activists.Googles battlewith the Chinese government over internet censorship and the Norwegian Nobel Committees awarding of the 2010 Peace Prize to jailed Chinese activist Liu Xiaobo have also increased international attention to censorship issues. At the same time, the countrys burgeoning economy relies on the web for growth, and experts say the growing need for internet freedom is testing the regimes control.

Chinasconstitutionaffords its citizens freedom of speech and press, but the opacity of Chinese media regulations allows authorities to crack down on news stories by claiming that they expose state secrets and endanger the country. The definition of state secrets in China remains vague, facilitating censorship of any information that authoritiesdeem harmful[PDF] to their political or economic interests. CFR Senior FellowElizabeth C. Economysays the Chinese government is in a state of schizophrenia about media policy as it goes back and forth, testing the line, knowing they need press freedom and the information it provides, but worried about opening the door to the type of freedoms that could lead to the regimes downfall.

The government issued in May 2010 its firstwhite paperon the internet that focused on the concept of internet sovereignty, requiring all internet users in China, including foreign organizations and individuals, to abide by Chinese laws and regulations. Chinese internet companies are now required to sign the Public Pledgeon Self-Regulation and Professional Ethics for China Internet Industry, which entails even stricter rules than those in the white paper, according toJason Q. Ng, a specialist on Chinese media censorship and author ofBlocked on Weibo. Since Chinese President Xi Jinping came to power, censorship of all forms of media has tightened. In February 2016, Xi announced new media policy for party and state news outlines: All the work by the partys media must reflect the partys will, safeguard the partys authority, and safeguard the partys unity, emphasizing that state media must align themselves with the thought, politics, and actions of the party leadership. A China Daily essay emphasized Xis policy, noting that the nations media outlets are essential to political stability.

In 2016, Freedom House ranked China last for the second consecutive year out of sixty-five countries that represent 88 percent of the worlds internet users. The France-based watchdog group Reporters Without Borders ranked China 176 out of 180 countries in its 2016 worldwideindex of press freedom. Experts say Chinese media outlets usually employ their own monitors to ensure political acceptability of their content. Censorship guidelines are circulated weekly from the Communist Partys propaganda department and the governments Bureau of Internet Affairs to prominent editors and media providers.

Certain websites that the government deems potentially dangerouslike Wikipedia, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and some Google servicesare fully blocked or temporarily blacked out during periods of controversy, such as the June 4 anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre or Hong Kongs Umbrella Movement protests in the fall of 2014.Specific materialconsidered a threat to political stability is also banned, including controversial photos and video, as well as search terms. The government is particularly keen on blocking reports of issues that could incite social unrest, like official corruption, the economy, health and environmental scandals, certain religious groups, and ethnic strife. The websites of Bloomberg news service, theNew York Times, and other major international publicationshave periodically been blacked out, their journalists harassed and threatened, and visa applications denied. In 2012, Bloomberg and the New York Times both ran reportson the private wealth of then Party Secretary Xi Jinping and Premier Wen Jiabao. Restrictions have been also placed on micro-blogging services, often in response to sensitive subjects like corruption, including 2012 rumors of an attempted coup in Beijing involving the disgraced former Chongqing party chief Bo Xilai. Censors are alsoswift to blockany mention of violent incidents related to Tibet or Chinas Xinjiang Autonomous Region, home to the mostly Muslim Uighur minority group, and the Falun Gong spiritual movement.

More than adozen government bodiesreview and enforce laws related to information flow within, into, and out of China. The most powerful monitoring body is the Communist Partys Central Propaganda Department (CPD), which coordinates with General Administration of Press and Publication and State Administration of Radio, Film, and Television to ensure content promotes party doctrine. Ng says that the various ministries once functioned as smaller fiefdoms of control, but have recently been more consolidated under the State Council Information Office, which has taken the lead on internet monitoring.

The Chinese government employs large numbers of people to monitor and censor Chinas media. Experts refer to an October 2013 report in a state-run paper, the Beijing News, which said more than two million workers are responsible for reviewing internet posts using keyword searches and compiling reports for decision makers. These so-called public opinion analysts are hired both by the state andprivate companies to constantly monitor Chinas internet. Additionally, the CPD gives media outlets editorial guidelines as well as directives restricting coverage of politically sensitive topics. In onehigh-profile incidentinvolving the liberal Guangdong magazineSouthern Weekly, government censors rewrote the papers New Years message from a call for reform to a tribute to the Communist Party. The move triggeredmass demonstrationsby the staff and general public, who demanded the resignation of the local propaganda bureau chief. While staff and censors reached a compromise that theoretically intended to relax some controls, much of the censorship remained in place.

The Chinese government deploys myriad ways of censoring the internet. The Golden Shield Project, colloquially known as theGreat Firewall, is the center of the governments online censorship and surveillance effort. Its methods include bandwidth throttling, keyword filtering, andblocking accessto certain websites. According to Reporters Without Borders, the firewall makes large-scale use ofDeep Packet Inspection technologyto block access based on keyword detection. As Ng points out, the government also employs adiverse range of methodsto induce journalists to censor themselves, including dismissals and demotions, libel lawsuits, fines, arrests, and forced televised confessions.

As of February 2017, thirty-eight journalists wereimprisoned in China, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists, a U.S.-based watchdog on press freedom issues. In 2009, Chinese rights activist Liu Xiaobowas sentencedto eleven years in prison for advocating democratic reforms and freedom of speech inCharter 08, a 2008 statement signed by more than two thousand prominent Chinese citizens that called for political and human rights reforms and an end to one-party rule. When Liu won the Nobel Peace Prize, censors blocked the news in China. A year later, journalist Tan Zuorenwas sentencedto five years in prison for drawing attention to government corruption and poor construction of school buildings that collapsed and killed thousands of children during the 2008 earthquake in Sichuan province. Early 2014 saw the governmentdetain Gao Yu, a columnist who was jailed on accusations of leaking aParty communiqu titled Document 9.

The State Internet Information Office tightened content restrictions in 2013 and appointed anew director of a powerful internet committeeled by President Xi Jinping, who assumed power in late 2012. AJuly 2014 directiveon journalist press passes bars reporters from releasing information from interviews or press conferences on social media without permission of their employer media organizations. And in early 2015, the governmentcracked down on virtual private networks(VPNs), making it more difficult to access U.S. sites like Google and Facebook. By blocking these tools, the authorities are leaving people with fewer options and are forcing most to give up on circumvention and switch to domestic services,writes Charlie Smith[pseudonym], a cofounder of FreeWeibo.com and activist website GreatFire.org. If they can convince more internet users to use Chinese serviceswhich they can readily censor and easily snoop onthen they have taken one further step towards cyber sovereignty. The restrictions mount on a regular basis, adds theNew YorkersEvan Osnos. To the degree that Chinas connection to the outside world matters, the digital links are deteriorating, he wrotein an April 2015 article. How many countries in 2015 have an internet connection to the world that is worse than it was a year ago?

China requires foreign correspondents to obtain permission before reporting in the country and has used this as an administrative roadblock to prevent journalists from reporting on potentially sensitive topics like corruption and, increasingly, economic and financial developments. Under Xi, the ability of foreign journalists and international news outlets to travel and access to sources have shrunk. The hostile environment against foreign journalists is being fueled by efforts to publicly mark Western media outlets as not only biased, but part of a coordinated international effort to damage Chinas reputation [PDF], according to PEN Americas 2016 report on the constraints of foreign journalists reporting from China. Eighty percent of respondents in a 2014 survey conducted by theForeign Correspondents Club of Chinasaid their work conditions had worsened or stayed the same compared to 2013. International journalists regularly face government intimidation, surveillance, and restrictions on their reporting, writes freelance China correspondentPaul Mooney, who was denied a visa in 2013.

Austin Ramzy, a China reporter for theNew York Times, relocated to Taiwan in early 2014 afterfailing to receivehis accreditation and visa.New York Timesreporter Chris Buckley was reported to have been expelled in early January 2013an incidentChinas foreign ministry said was a visa application suspension due to improper credentials. China observers were also notably shaken bythe 2013 suspensionof Bloombergs former China correspondent, Michael Forsythe, after Bloomberg journalists accused the news agency of withholding investigative articles for fear of reprisal from Chinese authorities.

The treatment of foreign reporters has become a diplomatic issue. In response to theArab Springprotests in early 2011, then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pledged to continue U.S. efforts toweaken censorship[PDF]in countries with repressive governments like China and Iran. In response, Beijing warned Washington tonot meddlein the internal affairs of other countries. On a December 2013 trip to Beijing, then Vice President Joe Biden pressed China publicly and privately about press freedom,directly raising the issuein talks with Chinese President Xi Jinping and meetings with U.S. journalists working in China.

In more recent years, China has made it exceedingly difficult for foreign technology firms to compete within the country. The websites of U.S. social media outlets like Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram are blocked. Google, after a protracted battle with Chinese authorities over the banning of search terms, quietlygave upits fight in early 2013 by turning off a notification that alerted Chinese users of potential censorship. In late 2014,China banned Googles email service Gmail, a move that triggered a concerned responsefrom the U.S. State Department.

In January 2015, China issuednew cybersecurity regulationsthat would force technology firms to submit source code, undergo rigorous inspections, and adopt Chinese encryption algorithms. The move triggered an outcry from European and U.S. companies, wholobbied governmental authoritiesfor urgent aid in reversing the implementation of new regulations. CFR Senior FellowAdam Segal writesthat the fact that the regulations come from the central leading group, and that they seem to reflect an ideologically driven effort to control cyberspace at all levels, make it less likely that Beijing will back down.

Despite the systematic control of news, the Chinese public has found numerous ways to circumvent censors.Ultrasurf, Psiphon, andFreegateare popular software programs that allow Chinese users to set up proxy servers to avoid controls. While VPNs are also popular, the government crackdown on the systems have led users todevise other methods, including the insertion of new IP addresses into host files,Tora free software program for anonymityor SSH tunnels, which route all internet traffic through a remote server. According to Congress, between1 and 8 percent[PDF]of Chinese internet users use proxy servers and VPNs to get around firewalls.

Microblogging sites like Weibo have also become primary spaces for Chinese netizens to voice opinion or discuss taboo subjects. Over the years, in a series of cat-and-mouse games, Chinese internet users have developed an extensive series of punsboth visual and homophonousslang, acronyms, memes, and images to skirt restrictions and censors, writes Ng.

Googles chairman, Eric Schmidt, said in early 2014 thatencryption could helpthe company penetrate China. But such steps experienced a setback in March 2014 when authorities cracked down on socialnetworking app WeChat(known as Weixin in China), deleting prominent, politically liberal accounts. Soon thereafter, the governmentannounced new regulationson instant messaging tools aimed at mobile chat applications such as WeChat, which has more than 750 million users and was increasingly seen as replacing Weibo as a platform for popular dissent that could skirt censors. CFRs Economy says that the internet has increasingly become a means for Chinese citizens to ensure official accountability and rule of law, noting thegrowing importanceof social network sites as a political force inside China despite government restrictions.

China had roughly 731 million internet users in 2017. Although there have beenvocal callsfor total press freedom in China, some experts point to a more nuanced discussion of the ways in which the internet is revolutionizing the Chinese media landscape and a society that is demanding more information. Some people in China dont look at freedom of speechas an abstract ideal, but more as a means to an end, writes authorEmily Parker. Rather, the fight for free expression fits into a larger context of burgeoning citizen attention to other, more pertinent social campaigns like environmental degradation, social inequality, and corruptionissues for which they use the internet and media as a means of disseminating information, says Ng.

View original post here:

Media Censorship in China | Council on Foreign Relations

Censorship by Ownership? – Project Censored

WHAT IS MODERN CENSORSHIP?

At Project Censored, we examine the coverage of news and information important to the maintenance of a healthy and functioning democracy. We define Modern Censorship as the subtle yet constant and sophisticated manipulation of reality in our mass media outlets. On a daily basis, censorship refers to the intentional non-inclusion of a news story or piece of a news story based on anything other than a desire to tell the truth. Such manipulation can take the form of political pressure (from government officials and powerful individuals), economic pressure (from advertisers and funders), and legal pressure (the threat of lawsuits from deep-pocket individuals, corporations, and institutions).

In our view, the only valid justification for declining a news story is that in a medium limited by time and space, another news story was simply more important to the people of the community, whether local, national or international. While admittedly a subjective process, it is nonetheless, a process to be undertaken by the news people themselves (the investigative journalists and editors), NOT by the managers and CEOs of their parent company. No professional journalist or researcher should ever have to face the destruction of his or her career (or life) simply because they wanted to tell the truth. While no two people will always agree on what story is more important than another, a system where the working reporters and editors run the newsroom would at least provide a fertile environment for debate, dissent and critical thinking.

The growth of independent media and journalism in recent years shows that people throughout the world yearn to hold not only their leaders accountable, but their media sources as well. For that reason, the Project Censored research program continues, in its small way, to support and highlight those who tell the truth about the powerful (no matter the consequences) and are relentless in their quest to hold Big Media accountable for their decisions.

Continue reading here:

Censorship by Ownership? - Project Censored

Disrupting ‘Caesar’ play mostly about censorship – The Register-Guard

The show must not go on.

So sayeth some of President Trumps most ardent fans, who spent the past week and a half attempting to shut down a production of Julius Caesar with a Trump-like character in the title role.

These Trumpkins part of a bloc known for mocking political correctness, safe spaces and undue efforts to avoid offending the pwecious feewings of others deemed the show politically incorrect, unsafe and offensive.

Peaceful protest would be well within their rights. But these illiberal cultural illiterates instead wanted curtains for the offending Elizabethan play.

They stormed the stage at multiple shows, including Sunday evenings closing performance. They yelled and screamed inside and outside the open-air production part of the Public Theaters annual Shakespeare in the Park series to drown out dialogue they disliked. They threatened violence, sometimes quite graphically.

Some even sent death threats to other productions of Shakespeare and other plays in other parks.

In this, they are more like Caesars plebeian partisans than they may realize: It is no matter, his names Cinna, a member of a murderous mob cries in Act III, Scene 3 of the play, before tearing apart an innocent poet with the bad fortune to bear the same name as a perceived enemy of the state.

The justification for these present-day disruptions and threats is that, at least according to (wrong) right-wing media reports, the production advocates assassination of a Trump-like Roman tyrant. But the only people lately threatening political violence in the name of Julius Caesar are those who wanted to shut this play down.

If these reactionaries had actually thought about the play, theyd realize its portrayal of the aftermath of assassination offers the opposite lesson: that those who attempt to defend democracy by undemocratic means pay a terrible price and destroy the very thing they are fighting to save, as the Public Theater put it in a statement to theatergoers.

Theres a part of me that wants to rejoice that, 168 years after New Yorks Astor Place riots (also inspired by a contentious interpretation of the Bard), the theater can still be a source of so much controversy. In recent months not just Julius Caesar but also Hamilton has brought a raucous and artistically challenging rialto to the center of national social discourse.

Still, needless to say, death threats are not the type of intellectual engagement and social validation that most theater nerds were looking for.

The violent rhetoric of recent days is certainly no fault of the Public, even if, in choosing to portray Caesar with blondish hair, an ultra-long tie and a Slovenian-accented paramour, it clearly intended to provoke. But then, last years Taming of the Shrew production also had a Trumpian character portrayed by a woman, no less and earned no incendiary Fox News coverage.

Nor is this debacle the fault of a few misguided protesters alone.

After all, they were just firing the latest salvo in the ongoing war against the free exchange of ideas, that most precious and endangered of liberal democratic values.

Plenty of conservatives like to believe that illiberalism is confined to liberal college students. Certainly there is evidence that millennials are at the vanguard of hostility to free speech. But as I have written time and again, attempts to stamp out speech are not confined to young or old, or left or right.

Instead, End of History be damned, there is a growing sense on both sides of the aisle, and among all generations, that the free marketplace of ideas is broken. Everyone seems to believe that the inferior and dangerous ideas of their enemies are unfairly gaining ground; therefore, the words and beliefs of those enemies must be fair game for suppression.

And yes, attempts to shut down Julius Caesar like attempts to shut down conservative campus speakers are about objections to words and beliefs. They are not about protecting politicians or vulnerable minority groups from physical harm, despite the claims of would-be censors.

If this were really about blocking public entertainment that put lives at risk, youd find more Trump fans and college students alike disrupting football games.

In Julius Caesar, Shakespeare hinted that he expected his play to offer lessons for generations to come, though perhaps not the ones his characters believe they are offering.

How many ages hence/Shall this our lofty scene be acted over/In states unborn and accents yet unknown! declaims Cassius, after proudly smearing himself with the slain Caesars blood.

Censors willing, lets hope Cassius prediction continues to hold true.

Catherine Rampell (crampell@washpost.com) was a reporter for The New York Times and The Chronicle of Higher Education before joining The Washington Post as a columnist.

More Catherine Rampell articles

See the article here:

Disrupting 'Caesar' play mostly about censorship - The Register-Guard

National Coalition Against Censorship Chooses New Leader – Blogging Censorship

Chris Finan

CONTACT: Jas Chana, NCAC Communications Director jas@ncac.org, 212-807-6222 ext.107

New York, NY, June 21, 2017- The National Coalition Against Censorship (NCAC), an alliance of 56 national non-profit organizations, announced today that it has hired Christopher M. Finan as its next executive director. Joan Bertin, the current executive director, is stepping down after leading the organization for 20 years. NCAC promotes freedom of thought, inquiry and expression and opposes censorship in all its forms.

We are indeed lucky that a free expression advocate the caliber of Chris Finan has agreed to lead the NCAC to its next chapter, said Jon Anderson, chair of the NCAC Board of Directors and president and publisher of Simon & Schuster Childrens Publishing. In this most challenging of times for First Amendment rights, we need someone with the experience and reputation that Chris brings to the table in protecting the rights of all Americans to express themselves as they choose.

Finan has a long career as a free speech activist. He is currently director of American Booksellers for Free Expression, part of the American Booksellers Association (ABA). In 1982, he joined Media Coalition, a trade association that defends the First Amendment rights of booksellers, publishers, librarians and others who produce and distribute First Amendment-protected material. In 1998, he became president of the American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression. The foundation merged with ABA in 2015.

Finan has worked closely with NCAC as a member of the board of directors and as a board chair. In 2007, he and Bertin created NCACs Kids Right to Read Project, which supports parents, students, teachers and librarians who are fighting efforts to ban books in schools and libraries.

I am very grateful for the opportunity to lead an organization that plays such an important role in protecting free expression. I am also very fortunate to be succeeding Joan Bertin, who has led NCACs vigorous defense of free speech during a time of growing censorship pressure, Finan said.

As examples of NCACs recent advocacy, Finan pointed to statements defending publishers who are pressured to censor books that some critics consider offensive, condemning the Trump administrations attacks on the press and criticizing the Walker Art Centers decision to dismantle a sculpture after accusations that it was cultural appropriation.

See the rest here:

National Coalition Against Censorship Chooses New Leader - Blogging Censorship

Moves against Polish museum and Hungarian university stir fears of … – Christian Science Monitor

June 21, 2017 GDANSK, POLAND Housed in a $134-million, state-of-the-art building, Polands Museum of the Second World War opened early this spring. The museum, which took more than five years to construct, tells the story of Polands war experiences, which given the way the country is sandwiched between Germany and Russia are among the most tragic of all the conflict.

But even before the museum opened, it was already mired in controversy. The museums acting director, Karol Nawrocki hired when former director Pawel Machcewicz was fired, two weeks after the museum opened has complained that the exhibits about the rise of communism are too light, and the music is too happy, underplaying how deeply the political ideology inflicted damage on the Polish people.He has already indicated that he will be making changes to some exhibits.

In Hungary, meanwhile, it is a university that is in the sights of the government.Last week, students were busy finishing their spring term classes at Central European University, founded by American philanthropist George Soros. But even as faculty and students swarmed through the CEU buildings, clustered in the elegant heart of Budapest, a new law was taking aim at the Hungarian- and American-accredited university.

Both Polands Museum of the Second World War and Hungarys CEU one brand new, the other formed at the fall of communism have been seen as symbols of the advances in free thought and open societies in post-Soviet Europe. And the fact that both have become targets of their ruling governments is a sign, some critics say, of government attempts to control cultural and historic narratives and undermine academic freedom to consolidate political control.

The moves in central Europe hark back to an earlier era, in contrast to the anti-immigrant, anti-globalist nationalism taking root in western Europe, says Anton Pelinka, a professor of nationalism studies at CEU. The French nationalistic renaissance or German nationalistic renaissance is not about Alsace-Lorraine, says Professor Pelinka, referring to the historical land dispute. But Hungarian and Polish nationalism is very old fashioned. Taboos were perpetuated under communist rule, he says.But now, post-communist nationalistic regimes have created new taboos.

The war museum opened in March in the center of Gdansk, near a post office that was one of the first places Germans attacked the country during the war.It was commissioned in 2008 by then-Prime Minister Donald Tusk, today president of the European Council, and was intended to look at the war through an international lens. But the museum was barely open before the ultraconservative Law and Justice party (PiS) firedMr. Machcewicz and announced that some of the exhibits would change.

Mr. Nawrocki, the current director, says the museum the most expensive ever built in Poland has great potential. But I don't get [from the current exhibitions] the answer to a basic question what we Poles want to tell the world about our war experience, he says.

Poland suffered enormously in World War II, with 20 percent or more of its population killed,borders redrawn, and the war ending in communist rule. The new museum was not intended to diminish the Polish experience, says Machcewicz.But part of its purpose, he says, to tell a fuller story about the war, which may break ground for Poles, who havetended to cling to black-and-white ideas about victims and perpetrators.

One of the exhibits includes house keys that belonged to Jews in the village of Jedwabne, who were killed by their Polish neighbors with help from Nazis soldiers. The exhibits also spend time on atrocitiesperpetrated by the Soviet Union, as well ason the 3 million Russian soldiers who suffered in German captivity. The museum pushes Poles from the comfort zone, Machcewicz says, because we show how other nations suffered during the war.

Poles views are mixed, with some welcoming a new perspective, and others rejecting it. Kazimierz Burzynski, a retiree from Gdansk, says he is disappointed that there is not more about Poland in an educational center at the museum.But he also faults PiS opponents for politicizing the issue for political gain. [They are] discussing our issues abroad, involving foreigners in our discussion.

Internationally, the debate in Hungary has resonated even more widely.The Hungarian parliament passed a higher education law in April that effectively singles out the CEU, as it would require the school to open a campus in New York, where it is registered, or cease operations in Budapest.The university has announced that it will continue to operate in academic year 2017-2018, but its long-term future is now unclear. Negotiations between Hungary and the state of New York are expected later this month in an effort to find a solution before October, when the schools license to operate can be withdrawn under the new law.

The university was founded by Mr. Soros who was born in Hungary in 1991, with the stated intent of helping to usher in democracy in post-Soviet Europe. It has been operating in Budapest since 1993. Today CEU has over 1,400 students, including many who are seen as leaders in the region,and it is considered a major center of independent scholarship. But Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban who has said that he sees illiberal democracy as the right path for Hungary says that the university has cheated by violating Hungarian rules, and that no institution should enjoy an unfair advantage.

For many observers, the new law has more to do with Mr. Soros as symbol of liberalism than with academic censorship.It is not about attacking academic freedom, its more like generating a conflict between the government and more pro-Western organizations or figures like George Soros,says Dniel Mikecz, an expert on social movements at the Republikon Institute. It is much easier to campaign with a scapegoat as enemy of the state. You dont have to raise the salaries of public servants, or introduce such benefits for the people.

Whatever Orbans motivations for moving against CEU, many observers fear its an open Hungarian society that is at stake. Orban has also clamped down on funding for NGOs and independent media, and rolled back checks and balances on the Hungarian constitution.

Globally, the fight over the CEU has stirred a firm response.

Two dozen Nobel laureates and academics and institutions around the world have declared support for the university. The law threatening its existence has been rebuked by the European Parliament, which started infringement proceedings against Hungary, prompting tens of thousands of protestors to the streets.I think free institutions and academic freedom strike a chord with a lot of people. It is a core democratic value. It is a core European value, says Michael Ignatieff, the president and rector of CEU.

For many of todays Europeans, its discomfiting to see politicians fighting for control of higher education and other cultural institutions. Machcewicz, a historian, says PiS views historic policy as one of its main pillars. He says the Polish government has set out to achieve control in ways that range from censuring art to announcing plans for new historic museums.

In rejecting our exhibition I see a growing anti-EU and xenophobic atmosphere, a rejection of Europe and multiculturalism, he says. While he says he sees a comparison between the Hungarian government's move against the CEU and the Polish government's decisions about his former museum, he characterizes Orbans move as a cynical power grab, while in Poland he suggests that something deeper is stirring. The Polish right wants power, too, but it is more ideological and radical, he says. The current government is striving for a cultural revolution in Poland.

Its not a direction that sits well with some Polish citizens. Sabina Woch is visiting the Gdansk museum with her 10-month-old son and her in-laws, eager to see the museums exhibits before the government makes any changes. World War II did not take place only in Poland or Europe, and its important to know what was happening in other continents, she says. Politicians should not decide who should run such institutions like a museum; its not their role.

Sara Miller Llana contributed reporting to this story from Paris.

The rest is here:

Moves against Polish museum and Hungarian university stir fears of ... - Christian Science Monitor

EXCLUSIVE: Judd Apatow on ‘The Big Sick’ and Clean Movies Censorship: ‘It’s Pretty Sleazy’ – 9NEWS.com

John Boone , ET 10:00 AM. MDT June 21, 2017

Mentorship is not a new hat for Judd Apatow -- after all, he's the guy who helped guide a then-unknown Lena Dunham and Girls to success. Lately though, he's only increased his efforts, with Pete Holmes on Crashing, Paul Rust on Love and now Kumail Nanjiani's first feature film, The Big Sick.

"I think it's among the best movies we've ever been a part of," Apatow says of The Big Sick, out June 23. "It's scary to come out in the summer against all these behemoths, but there's always room for one movie that people go see just because it's awesome. We're hoping that there's a little sleeper appeal."

I sat down with Apatow at the Four Seasons in Beverly Hills, along with fellow producer Barry Mendel (who produced Apatow's Funny People, This Is 40 and Trainwreck, as well as Oscar-nominated films The Sixth Sense and Munich), to discuss their movie and Sony's now-scuttled "clean" movies initiative, which Apatow denounced on Twitter, saying, "Shove the clean versions up your a**es!"

RELATED: How Kumail Nanjiani and Emily V. Gordon Turned Their Heartbreak and Happiness Into 'The Big Sick'

ET: You both have had long careers, including numerous movies you've worked on together. In terms of looking for projects, what do you find inspires you these days?

Judd Apatow: I like human comedies -- or dramedies. More than anything, I'm interested in people just dealing with everyday things that are difficult, and there is more than enough comedy and drama in that. Every once in a while it's fun to do something big and silly, so I also really enjoy when I get a chance to work with Will Ferrell and Adam McKay or with the Lonely Island guys. But I'm always fascinated by people dealing with the everyday difficult stuff in life.

Barry Mendel: For me, it's like, I forgot who said it -- it was maybe Jesse Helms? -- about pornography: "I don't how I describe it, but I know it when I see it." [Laughs] I'm more that way. I don't really have a philosophy about it. In this case, when Kumail came in and told us the story of what happened with Emily, it was just like, "Wow." Just, like, the light goes on.

Do you think a project can ever be too autobiographical?

Apatow: I think the key is that you have to always be aware that it's a movie. The audience doesn't care that most of this happened. They just want a good movie. During development, we definitely said, "Well, that's what happened, but it's kind of boring. So, maybe we could spice that up a little bit." [Laughs] We're not presenting this as an 100 percent accurate story. It's just the inspiration for our movie.

Many of your movies also draw inspiration from your life. Is that something you had to wrestle with in your writing, writing what you know but not being confined by the historical details?

Apatow: I just never thought anything about me was interesting, so I didn't think about writing from my personal experience.

Mendel: It's almost like the opposite journey, of writing about things that were fantastical and moving towards the personal.

Apatow: Yeah, and I think a lot of people do that! It's why people like Louis [C.K.], after decades of work as he got more and more personal, people connected with it more. It's always a big mix between fabricated and real things, as it should be. I mean, it's the only fodder you have to create with.

You are both known for nurturing young talent. And obviously that talent is what catches your eye, but what does someone like Kumail do to keep you invested?

Apatow: I think that he works so hard. I like working with people on their first movies. I think that you never get that level of effort again. And I think that most people only have a couple of amazing stories from their lives, so you're getting the best of them. And I like the passion that people have when they're trying to prove they can make a movie or be a movie star. Later in your career, you just get offered a script and maybe you get a week or two to punch it up, and maybe they rehearse it for a day before they shoot, and that's why a lot of movies don't come out well. But when you do something like this, where we developed it for three or four years before we shoot it, there's so much love and care that goes into it. That's what I like! I like being at the moment of inception for people.

Mendel: I would say Kristen [Wiig on Bridesmaids], Amy [Schumer] and Kumail had never written a script before, so they're panicked every night. They're waking up in the middle of the night with ideas and writing them down. It's like they can't believe they're getting paid to do it. It's not a job. It's the greatest thing that ever happened to them. So, it's so great for us to get to work with people who have that vibe about what we're doing. It refreshes our experience of what we do.

Apatow: Because when you're making your 20th movie, it might be the 20th most incredible thing that's ever happened to you! [Laughs]

Judd, how do you balance producing those projects with writing and directing your own?

Apatow: It always energizes me with my own work. It's always a reminder how much I should care and how truthful I can be. I think in the last few years, I haven't been able to write as much, because I've been working on the TV show with Pete Holmes, Crashing, and Love on Netflix. But that's OK, because I think the world is changing and all that matters is that I'm creating things.

Mendel: You're also working on your third documentary.

Apatow: Yes. I'm working on a documentary about Garry Shandling right now and we have a documentary about the Avett Brothers that's going to be on HBO in January. So, I've been enjoying that format. I'm just happy to make stuff. Ultimately, I don't think it matters what the frequency is of me writing or directing a movie. It doesn't really matter to anybody else. I'm just trying to put good things out there.

You recently called Sony Pictures' clean movies initiative "absolute bullsh*t." What would something like that mean for your movies? [Two films that Apatow produced, Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby and Step Brothers, were of the first films Sony made clean versions of.]

Apatow: Well, it goes against everything you want in your relationship with a studio. The most important agreement you have is that they will not f**k with your movie once it's done. And so it's pretty sleazy to say, "We're going to take the version of the movie you like the least and try to distribute it to even more people." When you edit a movie for television or for an airline, you're doing it very reluctantly. And you don't want people to watch it that way! But it is part of the business that you can't prevent. It preceded you. But they're trying to create a new initiative, and we're allowed to say, "No. We've agreed to ruin our movies for television and airlines and we're hopeful that due to streaming, most people aren't watching it in those formats. We do not want to spread it." And our movies were not built to be made for children. That's the other weird part about it is, Now I can show it to six year olds! Well, even the essence of it isn't meant for six year olds, or whoever you're marketing it to. But it's a real violation of the spirit of our creative relationship, and I'm assuming that they will quickly realize it and not do it.

That basically answers my last question, which was you have the theatrical release and then sometimes an extended or unrated cut. Is there a way to make a PG or PG-13 version of your movie that you'd be happy with?

Apatow: That's not even the question. The question is, Whose decision is it? I could edit it to, like, a six minute short if I want to! But that becomes the decision of the filmmaker. If Martin Scorsese wants to do a 14-minute, clean Wolf of Wall Street for kindergarteners, I guess he should be allowed to do it. But certainly the head of the studio shouldn't be allowed to do that without his approval. That's the issue. And I do think it will get quickly resolved.

Mendel: In France they call it, Le Droit Moral.

Apatow: What does that mean?

Mendel: The moral rights. Of the artist. The artist is implied in the French version.

I kind of want to see that Wolf of Wall Street for kindergarteners. I think if you edited out any scene with swearing or nudity, it would only be 14 minutes anyway.

Apatow: [Laughs] Exactly. I remember watching Goodfellas on a plane once, and every time they said the C-word, instead they would say "Bundt cake." And you could tell it was kind of an eff you from someone in the Scorsese world. Actually, you know what it was? It was Glengarry Glen Ross. [Directed by James Foley.]

Mendel: We did it on Rushmore, too. We did "foot rub" for "handjob." Every time it said "handjob," we just said "foot rub."

Apatow: I think we had one where we were trying to replace every curse in the entire movie with the word "tomato."

[Note: As Apatow predicted, Sony Pictures Home Entertainment soon after announced they would no longer release the "clean version" of a film if the director objected, claiming, "We believed we had obtained approvals from the filmmakers involved for use of their previously supervised television versions as a value added extra on sales of the full version."]

See original here:

EXCLUSIVE: Judd Apatow on 'The Big Sick' and Clean Movies Censorship: 'It's Pretty Sleazy' - 9NEWS.com

Trump thanks teens for ‘standing up’ to yearbook censorship – USA TODAY

USA Today Network Mike Davis, Asbury Park (N.J.) Press Published 7:24 a.m. ET June 21, 2017 | Updated 31 minutes ago

Grant Berardo, a Wall High School junior, saw his image digitally altered with a plain black T-shirt in his yearbook. Mike Davis

Grant Berardo's T-shirt was digitally altered in the Wall (N.J.) High School yearbook. He wore a Donald Trump campaign shirt for his portrait. On Thursday, June 15, 2017, the school district superintendent said the yearbooks will be reissued.(Photo: Provided by Joseph Berardo Jr. via Asbury Park (N.J.) Press)

WALL, N.J. The scandal over censorship of merchandise and quotes from President Trump in a New Jersey high school yearbook has reached the White House.

President Trump and the director of his campaign thanked Wall High School students Montana and Wyatt Dobrovich-Fago, who reported a quote and logo featuring Trump's name removed from their class yearbooks.

The campaign also sent the teenagers a care package with shirts, hats, pins and patches.

More: Trump shirt censored, now school has to re-issue yearbook for everyone

"Thank you Wyatt and Montana two young Americans who arent afraid to stand up for what they believe in. Our movement to #MAGA is working because of great people like you!," Trump posted on Facebook.

In a letter, campaign executive director Michael Glassner commended the students for "voicing their support" for Trump.

"It is more important than ever that we, as Americans, stand up for our beliefs and hopes for a better country," Glassner wrote. "And, as you know, it takes courage to do so. But freedom of expression should never go out of style let's not forget that!"

Wyatt, a junior at the school, wore a sweater vest featuring a Trump campaign logo on the school's picture day. But in the yearbook, his photo was cropped and the logo was barely visible an act Superintendent Cheryl Dyer has ruled was not intentional.

More: N.J. teacher suspended over Trump yearbook censorship

His sister, Montana, picked a quote from Trump to run alongside her freshman class president photo: "I like thinking big. If you are going to be thinking anything, you might as well think big," Trump's quote read.

Traditionally, all Wall class presidents can pick a quote. Montana's was submitted before the deadline and it's not yet clear whether it was purposely excluded, Dyer said last week.

Another student, junior Grant Berardo, saw his picture digitally altered before being published in the yearbook. Instead of the navy blue Trump campaign shirt he wore during the photo shoot, his yearbook photo featured a nondescript black T-shirt an "intentional" alteration, Dyer ruled.

The school board Tuesday voted to formalize a suspension handed down to digital media teacher Susan Parsons, who Dyer suspended through the end of the school year last week.

The board is expected to continue discussing the case in executive session at future meetings, board attorney Michael Gross said.

Parsons, 62, was included on a list of re-hired teachers for the 2017-18 school year with a $92,000 salary, but that list was finalized before the yearbook censorship came to light.

More: Teen's Trump T-shirt censored in yearbook photo

She has not returned multiple calls to her home seeking comment.

In response to the censorship scandal, Dyer last week ordered new yearbooks to be printed and reissued. Private, anonymous donors have contributed "at least $10,000" to cover the cost, Dyer said after Tuesday's board meeting.

But some members of the Wall school community have said it's not enough. Dyer has come under fire for handling the investigation despite last year posting a New York Times opinion article about "bullying in the age of Trump" on the school website.

Wyatt also criticized Dyer for the "blatant anti-Trump stuff that's caused concern" for him.

"I feel like there's something else to the story. One person wouldn't just do this," Wyatt said. "There needs to be a proper investigation into this."

School Board President Allison Connolly disagreed, applauding Dyer and district administrators for "facing this situation head-on."

"We find the allegations of censorship disturbing and are taking the charges that students have had their rights compromised seriously," she said.

Follow Mike Davis on Twitter:@byMikeDavis

Read or Share this story: https://usat.ly/2tsRhum

See the article here:

Trump thanks teens for 'standing up' to yearbook censorship - USA TODAY

Donald Trump thanks school students for ‘standing up’ to yearbook censorship – The Indian Express


The Indian Express
Donald Trump thanks school students for 'standing up' to yearbook censorship
The Indian Express
Donald Trump thanks school students for 'standing up' to yearbook censorship. A student wore a sweater vest featuring Donald Trump's campaign logo on the school's picture day. But in the yearbook, his photo was cropped. 0. Shares. Facebook · Twitter ...

and more »

See the original post here:

Donald Trump thanks school students for 'standing up' to yearbook censorship - The Indian Express

Alarmed by torrent of censorship imposed by administrators? Support student journalists – The College Fix

Alarmed by torrent of censorship imposed by administrators? Support student journalists

This week I saw a preview screening of a documentary about Syrian citizen journalists who chronicled the rise of ISIS before anyone in the West gave a damn about the propaganda-fueled jihadist group.

The heroes of City of Ghosts, which releases commercially next month,are ordinary internal people whose lives are threatened not words are violence threatened, but mortally threatened every time they secretly record the daily atrocities in Raqqa, the ISIS capital.

They feed it out to their still-endangered external compatriots who manage the news operation, known as Raqqa is Being SlaughteredSilently, from abroad.

The first leader of the group, Naji Jerf,who put these young journalists through a crash course in war reporting, was tracked down by ISIS in Turkey and executed during the documentarys filming. Thats how dangerous unfiltered information is to propagandists.

He looks like a college journalism adviser, I thought as I watched the screening, organized by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. (Two of the citizen journalists made a surprise visit. Our questions for them kind of sucked because we were stunned they made it here.)

Naji Jerf was basically working with people many of whom appear to be college age who had non-journalism livelihoods, but felt compelled to shine a light on their besieged city when no one else would.

For those of us safely reporting on absurd things in America, where the main victim is sanity and common sense, our work feels puny compared to the daily life-and-death struggle of Raqqa is Being Slaughtered Silently.

But there are faint shadows of the Syrian citizen journalists struggle in many towns in America, where youngsters operate under the constant threat of punishment and censorship for reporting on their communities.

The Washington Post profiles the important work of the Student Press Law Center, which we occasionally feature and consult for College Fix stories, and its outgoing executive director, Frank LoMonte, who is headed to the University of Florida to do journalism law.

I feel a certain kinship to SPLC because were both tiny shoestring-budget nonprofits working with journalism newbies who are vulnerable to pressure and intimidation from administrators, especially when students are covering their own schools.

As Post media columnist Margaret Sullivan notes, the problems cut across ideology and political lines when SPLC swoops in to defend student journalists:

LoMonte helped a reporter at the student newspaper at New Jerseys Kean University as she tried to pry loose a surveillance video that the universitys police department was wrongly withholding.

At an Omaha high school, the student newspaper wanted to publish a column suggesting that teachers keep their politics out of the classroom. (It observed that some of them were trash-talking Trump, using words such as Nazi and Hitler.)

The school administration found the column unacceptable. Then, when students tried to write about the censorship, that article was killed, too. With SPLCs intervention, both pieces were published and won a state high school journalism award.

Ive gotten people out of jail, Ive gotten cameras back from police this is an urgent-level service, said LoMonte

SPLC is also leading the charge at the state level for statutory protections for student journalists, and it sends out 200-odd lawyer-volunteers who run journalism workshops for students.

LoMonte makes a great argument when he faces off against administrators who want to suppress reporting:

That schools would be acting in their own self-interest to let students publish because, in the social-media era, theyll find a way to get their message out in some other (perhaps less accurate) form, anyway.

Its a little easier for High Schoolers Being Censored Silently to circumvent the powers-that-be than for the brave journalists of Raqqa is Being Slaughtered Silently, thankfully.

Like The College Fix on Facebook / Follow us on Twitter

IMAGE: Shutterstock

About the Author

Associate Editor

Read the original:

Alarmed by torrent of censorship imposed by administrators? Support student journalists - The College Fix

YouTube says LGBTQ+ video censorship won’t happen again – Engadget

YouTube apologized after getting hit by allegations that it censors LGBTQ+ content and fixed the bug that apparently caused the issue. Now, the website has apologized yet again and updated its policies in an effort to reaffirm its "commitment that YouTube is a place where all voices can be heard." YouTube chief Susan Wojcicki said she and her team talked to lesbian, gay, bi, trans and queer/questioning creators, employees and volunteers to get feedback on the platform's policies. As a result, the company has "broadened Restricted Mode guidelines to ensure that non-graphic, personal accounts of difficult events are available."

In a blog post, the CEO wrote:

"For example, personal accounts of individuals who suffered discrimination or were impacted by violence for being part of a protected group will now be included in Restricted Mode, provided they don't contain graphic language or content. Soon we'll have new content in Creator Academy to describe in detail how to make videos that will meet the criteria for Restricted Mode."

If you look at the website's guidelines, you'll now find this section:

"Some educational, straightforward content about sexual education, affection, or identity may be included in Restricted Mode, as well as kissing or affection that's not overly sexualized or the focal point of the video."

...

"We know there is a risk that some important content could be lost if we were to apply these rules without context. We value stories where individuals discuss their personal experiences and share their emotions. Sharing stories about facing discrimination, opening up about your sexuality, and confronting and overcoming discrimination is what makes YouTube great, and we will work to ensure those stories are included in Restricted Mode. "

The Google-owned website admits that the mode might still not work perfectly despite the tweaks that it made, but it promises that its systems will get better at identifying entries that should and shouldn't be filtered out over time. In addition to making guideline changes, YouTube is introducing a permanent spot on its US spotlight channel for LGBTQ+ videos to be refreshed weekly throughout the year. It's also teaming up with The Trevor Project to offer crisis intervention to members of the community and to prevent LGBTQ+ youth suicides.

See the article here:

YouTube says LGBTQ+ video censorship won't happen again - Engadget

In India, Raids Targeting a Prominent News Agency Spark Censorship Fears – The Diplomat

Was a raid on NDTVs offices earlier this month politically motivated?

In the two weeks since Indias Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) launched a raid on the offices and the homes of NDTV staffin India, an important conversation regarding government interference in the media has resurfaced. The atmosphere surrounding the issue remainsmurky and longstanding suspicions of the strong nexus between the investigation agency and the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party have once more been brought to the fore.

On June 5, the CBI conducted its raid, prompting a statement from NDTV declaring that it was based on unproven complaints from a disgruntled former employee. The complaint, on the basis of a loan default, was further dismissed as baseless by the organization, which furnished the proof of repayment along with its statement.

Furthermore, the implication that this raid was based on a year-old complaint that was private in nature sparked concerns that it was politically motivated. Days prior to the raid, as several members of the Indian media have been quick to point out, the ruling Bharatiya Janata Partys spokesperson Sambhit Patra was asked to leave an NDTV debate for his accusations against the channel in the face of criticism.

Minister of State for Information and Broadcasting Rajyavardhan Rathore responded to this by saying that while the government was committed to protecting freedom of expression, it was also responsible for preserving the law of the land. While voices within the media have indicated that there may well be a case for this raid and that it was premature to cast this as retaliation for government criticism, several prominent members have a different opinion.

The Editors Guild of India has since issued a statement implicatingthis move as a violation ofthe principle of the freedom of the press within a democracy, pegging it as a possible attempt to silence the media. The Press Club of India subsequently organized a meeting to protest the raid. The CBI, in turn, responded with the argument that NDTV was not singled out in this raid process. Explaining that this raid was not about loan default as much as a larger list of violations of banking sector guidelines, the organization placed this investigation along the spectrum of a long list of others on the issue of banking fraud.

However, the absence of a preliminary inquiry ahead of this raid has not silenced the criticism. The Press Club meeting for instance was the site of incensed conversation. Prominent media figures like Kuldip Nayyar and Arun Shourie even discussed parallels between the current governments attitude towards the media and the time of Emergency under former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. The ensuing discussion expressed worry at the majoritarian tendencies of the government, a need to move beyond institutional affiliations in the interest of preserving shrinking spaces for dissent, and the absence of protocol in the investigation.

The space for dialogue regarding the actions of the army in Kashmir, the anti-beef agenda, moral policing to name just a few issues has been fast shrinking amid perceptions that the government will seek to retaliate. Comparisons to the Emergency, while perhaps hyperbolic, are nevertheless worrisome as they are indicative of the beginnings of a trend towards heightened censorship in India. The defensiveness of the ruling party in the face of criticism has been on the rise in the past few years, and the NDTV has faced unexpected consequences for the second time in a year, following its24-hour blackout in November 2016.

The recent raids, in keeping with this trend, inspire a feeling of unease and worry regarding what they might foretell.

Read more here:

In India, Raids Targeting a Prominent News Agency Spark Censorship Fears - The Diplomat

LETTER: Defense of censorship was nauseating – Richmond County Daily Journal

To the editor:

As we are in the season of graduation, I hope you will allow this retired educator to reflect on the Early College yearbook fiasco.

First, let me address the nauseating defense of censorship offered up by John Robich (Richmond County Daily Journal, June 3-4). His attempts to ingratiate the reader by extolling the virtues of the Early College at the expense of censorship is an abysmal failure. He delights that school officials put down the yearbook as if free speech were a rabid dog.

Mr. Robich reinforces his moralistic rant stating the potential threat of information that neither he or any of the public had access to, yet he claims that information potentially inflammatory, controversial and offensive.

Sir, you need a refresher course in Constitutional Law 101.

His most laughable observation goads the reader to be concerned over how posterity might perceive the yearbook in question. Yes, Mr. Robich, the students will remember the yearbook, but not for the reasons you so smugly suggest.

They will recall how obsessed school officials used collusion to steal the work of a year of collaboration. Where are they confiscated books? Have they been destroyed? At least the Nazis burned their books in public. Oh, that one copy still copy still exists to be downloaded to the freedom of the internet.

In his arrogantly condescending tone, Mr. Robich admonishes those who disagree with him to consider the big picture.

Yes, we see the big picture. The educational caste system is alive and well in Richmond County. Do you really think our citizens will acquiesce to such thinking?

At every turn, he insults the intelligence of the readers ability to make their own moral choices. That Principal Waddell made the right and morally good decision would make it astounding that students and parents can make these choices at all! Its a sure bet that next years publication will be closely scrutinizedoopssanitized.

Our superintendents failure to publicly weigh in on the crisis has been noted. Her silence speaks volumes. With the national spotlight on our school system, Dr. Goodman missed an opportunity for transparency in her administration.

Some would want to maintain the status quo. Sorry folks. Pandoras Box has been opened and things will never be the same again.

In recent months, we have witnessed massive student walkouts in our state over social issues. It is to their credit our students chose not to disrupt their education.

Are you listening administrators? Who are the adults in this scenario?

Congratulations to the graduates of Early College. Despite the despicable act of betrayal perpetrated on you, you still hold the promise of a democratic society. Never let anyone or group of people put braces on your brains. My prayer of you, in the words of one spiritual revolutionary, is to continue to ask, seek and knock all the days of your life.

I applaud the Daily Journal for keeping the issue in the forefront. Although our school officials are on report, you can be sure you have not heard the last of their draconian antics.

Vigilance is the price we pay for freedom. I hope Richmond Countys motto Fiat Justicia, (Let Justice Be Done) will prevail in the end.

Eddie Russell

Rockingham

http://www.yourdailyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/web1_letter_web-6.jpg

.

Read the rest here:

LETTER: Defense of censorship was nauseating - Richmond County Daily Journal

LETTER: Wrong lesson learned by yearbook censorship – Asbury Park Press

Subscribe today for full access on your desktop, tablet, and mobile device.

Let friends in your social network know what you are reading about

What teacher in Wall will want to do anything more than teach their classes?

Try Another

Audio CAPTCHA

Image CAPTCHA

Help

CancelSend

A link has been sent to your friend's email address.

A link has been posted to your Facebook feed.

1:48 p.m. ET June 20, 2017

High school yearbooks that featured digitally altered photographs of students supporting President Donald Trump will be reissued.

So, Wall taxpayers will be footing the bill for new yearbooks because some kid decided to wear a Trump T-shirt for his yearbook photo and it was edited because someone on the yearbook staff thought it was inappropriate? (Trump censorship: Wall H.S. to get new yearbooks, June 15).

First of all, what student would wear a T-shirt for his yearbook photo?

But he does learn a lesson. If he stomps his feet and holds his breath he can get daddy to rally round the poor choices. Maybe the lesson should have been, Sorry Charlie. You made a poor choice in your attire. Live with it.

What teacher in Wall will want to do anything more than teach their classes? Why take a chance that some misguided youth and his righteous dad will raise a stink and tag some inflammatory description on the decision. There is censorship in schools every day. Its part of the learning process.

Chuck Person

Barnegat

Read or Share this story: http://on.app.com/2tK2mX7

More here:

LETTER: Wrong lesson learned by yearbook censorship - Asbury Park Press

Broadcasters Promote News Freedom via "Bypass Censorship" website – PR Newswire (press release)

BBG CEO, John F. Lansing said:"The right to seek, and impart, facts and ideas is a universal human right which many repressive governments seek to control. This website presents an incredible opportunity to provide citizens around the world with the resources they need to access a free and open internet for uncensored news and information essential to making informed decisions about their lives and communities."

The broadcasters supporting theBypass Censorshipsite are part of the DG7 group of global media organizations supportive of UN resolutions on media freedom and the safety of journalists.

The Broadcasting Board of Governors is an independent federal agency, supervising all U.S. government-supported, civilian international media, whose mission is to inform, engage and connect people around the world in support of freedom and democracy. BBG networks include the Voice of America, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, the Middle East Broadcasting Networks (Alhurra TV and Radio Sawa), Radio Free Asia, and the Office of Cuba Broadcasting (Radio and TV Marti). BBG programming has a measured audience of 278 million in more than 100 countries and in 61 languages.

CONTACT: BBG Public Affairs, 202-203-4400

To view the original version on PR Newswire, visit:http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/broadcasters-promote-news-freedom-via-bypass-censorship-website-300476174.html

SOURCE Broadcasting Board of Governors

https://www.bbg.gov/

Go here to see the original:

Broadcasters Promote News Freedom via "Bypass Censorship" website - PR Newswire (press release)