Twenty three international media freedom, freedom of expression and journalists organisations today called for the immediate dismissal of the bill on disinformation and fake news which was submitted to the parliament on May 27 by the governing alliance of Justice and Development Party (AKP) and Nationalist Movement Party (MHP).

The bill threatens up to three years imprisonment for those found guilty of the deliberate publishing of disinformation and fake news intended to instigate fear or panic, endanger the countrys internal or external security, public order and general health of Turkeys society.

Such a bill, where the definition of disinformation and intent is left so vague, puts millions of Turkeys internet users at risk of criminal action for posting information that the government disagrees with.

Placed in the hands of Turkeys highly politicized judiciary, the law would become another tool for harassing journalists and activists and may cause blanket self-censorship across the internet.

The bill would also increase any sentence by 50% where information is published from anonymous user accounts. This severely undermines anonymity on the internet and further intimidates those wanting to publish evidence of corruption and wrongdoing but are afraid of the consequences of being publicly identified.

The governing alliance claim the bill is in line with the European Unions Digital Services Act and General Data Protection Regulation, however there are no such provisions under either of these laws.

The law would also bring news sites under the Press Law (Basin Kanunu). This gives their journalists access to the official press accreditation and also to public advertising funds through the official Press Advertising Agency, Basin Ilan Kurumu (BIK). In practice however this will simply enable the government to fund pro-government news sites while banning critical media deemed to have breached the disinformation law.

In the drafting stage, the government reportedly organized a consultation with international digital platforms yet it failed to hold any meetings with media representatives, editors, journalism associations or unions, despite these groups, and their members, being the most affected by the legislation.

The draft bill is currently before the Parliament. However the role of parliament has been so heavily undermined by the Presidential system that the bill is being rushed through without proper scrutiny or debate and expected to be passed swiftly into law within days.

Disinformation is an important issue and needs to be combatted but not at the price of restricting journalists rights and the publics rights of freedom of expression. Any such initiatives should be developed in close consultation with media and other stakeholders and include sufficient safeguards for free speech and independent journalism that can prevent their abuse by the government to impose arbitrary censorship.

We, therefore, call on all Turkeys parliamentarians who believe in the parliamentary process and the free flow of ideas and information as central to a democratic society, to vote down this bill.

Signed by:

International Press Institute (IPI)

ARTICLE 19

Articolo 21

Association of European Journalists

Committee to Protect Journalists

English PEN

European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)

European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)

IFEX

International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)

Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA)

Media Research Association (MEDAR)

OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)

PEN America

PEN International

PEN Norway

Platform for Independent Journalism (P24)

Reporters sans frontires (RSF)

South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)

Swedish Pen

The Coalition For Women In Journalism (CFWIJ)

Turkey Human Rights Litigation Support Project

World Association of News Publishers (WAN-IFRA)

See more here:

RSF and international groups call on Turkey's parliament to reject the disinformation bill as a tool of digital censorship | RSF - Reporters sans...

Advertisement

This is part two of a two-part investigation into the SSSs increasing repression of Uzbekistans journalists. Part one is available here.

TASHKENT, UZBEKISTAN: An 11-week investigation into freedom of the press in Uzbekistan found that one of the biggest challenges journalists and bloggers face is pressure from the State Security Services (SSS). Journalists and bloggers say the SSS threatens and intimidates them and their families, and compels them to delete stories. The SSS demands that journalists and bloggers stop covering certain topics, such as high-level corruption within the government, the dealings of wealthy businessmen, religious practices, or anything vaguely disrespectful to the president or his family.

The investigation was blessed by the government of Uzbekistan which welcomed me as an American journalist and U.S. Fulbright Scholar a research grant from the U.S. State Department to research challenges journalists in this country face in reporting about corruption and government malfeasance. From March to June, I interviewed more than 40 journalists, bloggers, human rights activists, media watchers and government media monitors. I had previously interviewed nearly 100 journalists about obstacles to press freedoms in eight other post-Soviet countries.

Journalists in other post-Soviet countries face problems with intimidation, police overreach, court citations, fines, arrests and blocked websites. For example, in Belarus, the KGB openly films protesters and makes no secret of following journalists. But here, the SSS operates mostly in the shadows. Their threats and intimidations stifle journalists from reporting about corruption and problems that the newly elected president says he needs to know about to make reforms. The result is a media that is timid and self-censoring, a populace that is afraid to speak out, and a country that promotes the faade of a free press when in reality it is a country in the grip of propaganda.

Get briefed on the story of the week, and developing stories to watch across the Asia-Pacific.

Despite repeated requests, the SSS refused to meet with me in the course of reporting this story.

Enjoying this article? Click here to subscribe for full access. Just $5 a month.

Rost 24 Threatened

Rost 24 editor, Anora Sodikova, announced on April 14 that she and her colleagues had been threatened with harm if she didnt delete a story and video about Uzbekistan businessman Jakhongir Usmanov. His name came to Sodikovas attention in the big data leak known as the Pandora Papers, which listed him as an owner of an offshore company, according to the story. Sodikovas report also linked Usmanov to a charity fund that allegedly channeled large sums of money through this offshore account.

Sodikova refused to say publicly who was threatening her, even to Ezgulik, Uzbekistans only independent registered human rights organization, which is backing her. But she told me: It was the SSS who made the threats.

Anora Sodikova started her own media platform, Rost 24, a year-and-a-half ago after she was fired from a state-run news agency for posting a story on Facebook about residents reactions to a dam collapsing. Photo provided by the author.

If I say it was the security forces, there will be a problem, she said. Besides, how can I prove it?

At the same time Sodikovas colleague received threatening phone calls, a sniper blogger began a smear campaign against her on social media alleging she was having an affair.

This sniper blogger said the next time he would show pictures, she said. Just like they did with Feruza.

Last year a female journalist from Qalampir.uz, Feruza Najmiddinova, was the target of a smear campaign when someone spread a video of a woman having sex with a man on a balcony. The anonymous poster said it was Najmiddinova having sex with a man who wasnt her husband. Since then, Sodikova, a Muslim, has feared the SSS would use this tactic to ruin her reputation.

This was the third time the SSS had pressured Sodikova to take down a story. The first time she ignored the threats. The second time, in May 2020, an SSS officer called her husband, she said. That time she took down the article.

After the second SSS encounter, Sodikovas husband separated from her for six months because he said he was afraid for their childrens safety.

Enjoying this article? Click here to subscribe for full access. Just $5 a month.

My husband said to me, If you want to live with me, if you want to keep our family safe, if you love me and our children, you should give up your job. I told him I love my family and my friends. I cant give up my job. I like my job also.

She and her husband reunited in October 2020. Recently her oldest son Googled her name and asked: Mom, are you really in danger?

I told him Im okay.

But later Sodikova learned that the Uzbekistan Creative Union for Journalists had gotten involved in her case.

As the head of the union, I cant skip this case, said Olimjon Usarov, who until a year ago was the government spokesperson for the Uzbek Supreme Court. I asked the prosecutor to investigate the case. To threaten a journalist is unlawful and criminal. If that person actually exists who threatened her, he will be found.

Usarov said the police pulled phone records from her phone and her colleagues phones. They pulled surveillance videos near her home and office trying to find the man who came up to her in a restaurant and told her to take down her story. Police asked to speak with her husband.

Anora asked us to take back the case, Usarov said. That was interesting for me.

Sodikova did not welcome the unions involvement. Instead, she worried that the government was trying to set her up. That is why she asked them to stop the investigation. She said she also fired her reporters at Rost 24 because she suspected they might be working with the SSS.

They are trying to say that I did this for PR for my media company, Sodikova said.

A high-level media official close to the investigation who asked that his name be withheld told me he thought Anora made up this story.

The investigation showed that there were no records of such people and no calls, he said. There were no threats. We are actually wondering why this happened and why Anora claimed this and what was behind all this.

The high-level media official said that a public announcement and press conference about the results of the investigation would happen soon.

Mad Dogs

President Shavkat Mirziyoyevs disdain for the SSS is well known. He has called them mad dogs and unscrupulous people in uniform. He has said he doesnt trust any security official and would rip off their epaulets if I have to. In February 2018, Mirziyoyev said he had received evidence of the torture of two local businessmen in SSS custody in the Bukhara region and promised that the officers would be held accountable.

What the president was talking about was the torture of Dilfuza Ibodovas two brothers, Ilhom and Rahim Ibodov, while in SSS custody in 2015. Ilhom was beaten to death by SSS officers and other prisoners. Rahim was sentenced to eight years in prison. Even while Dilfuza and her mother were writing letters begging government officials to investigate her brothers case, the SSS threatened her not to discuss the case.

Enjoying this article? Click here to subscribe for full access. Just $5 a month.

Dilfuza Ibdova is a blogger and owner of the website tezkor-yangiliklar.uz in Bukhara. She investigates those who say they were wrongly charged or convicted. She says the SSS do not bother her because several went to prison after they severely beat and tortured her two brothers, killing one. Photo provided by author.

But Dilfuza didnt back down.

I was not afraid of anything because I had nothing to lose, she said.

When the president personally took an interest in the Ibodov case, the perpetrators were brought to justice: six officers and four prisoners were sentenced to prison for up to 18 years; two other officers were found guilty of exceeding their authority, according to the U.S. government and human rights reports. The court proceedings were closed and the decisions were not made publicly available.

Feeling she had the personal protection of the president, Dilfuza, a former kindergarten teacher with no training in journalism, started blogging. In 2020, she registered her media platform with the Agency for Information and Mass Communications, the governments media monitor. She is the sole reporter. She reports on news, current events and, for a fee, she investigates criminal cases to determine if the charged are guilty. She said shes not afraid to write about government officials.

The state security forces are afraid of me, she told me. What do you expect when eight of them went to prison? I can write about anything.

But Dilfuza is one of the few bloggers and journalists who feel this way.

Shuhrat Shokirjonov is the bureau chief of Kun.uz in Samarkand and has 14,000 followers on Twitter. Photo provided by author.

Shuhrat Shokirjonov is the bureau chief for Kun.uzs Samarkand office. He also blogs on Telegram, Facebook, Twitter, and TikTok. On his social media accounts, he mostly posts his opinions about various social issues and then embeds links to his factual stories on Kun.uz.

Occasionally, he says, the SSS contacts him and tells him to delete material. Two years ago, on May 9 what used to be called Victory Day and now is called Memory Day he criticized the government for having a parade. He said the SSS told him to delete the story. They said that criticizing the parade caused misunderstanding between post-Soviet countries. I didnt change my mind, but I deleted.

Shikirjonov avoids writing about the SSS because he knows he will face pressure if he does. Otherwise, he feels mostly free to criticize the government because he always has a reason and provides proof. Still, he says, I am afraid to be blamed for no reason by the security services. He is afraid that free expression in the media can be taken away, just like in Russia when President Vladimir Putin suddenly outlawed all media dissent about the war in Ukraine.

Another blogger from Samarkand said he recently moved to Tashkent in part because of the SSS and police surveillance in his hometown. At the beginning of the war, Farukh Turamurodov, who goes by the name Samarkandi online, said he posted on his Facebook page a picture of a car with the symbol Z on its back window. The symbol has become one of support for Russia in its war in Ukraine.

Farukh Turamurodov goes by the name Samarkandi online where he blogs in his spare time about social issues. He said he recently moved from Samarkand to Tashkent because of police and SSS intimidation. Photo provided by author.

An hour later, the SSS contacted him and asked him to delete it.

In 2020, the SSS told him he shouldnt criticize higher class workers, such as government officials, the president and his family, police and the SSS.

Enjoying this article? Click here to subscribe for full access. Just $5 a month.

He wrote a post that didnt name the president but referred to him as the the man wearing the black suit. The SSS contacted him and told him to take it down because it wasnt respectful.

Then last November he complained online about a government app that wasnt working and he was summoned to the police station. He later learned that two other bloggers were also summoned the same day. It was then that he decided to leave Samarkand.

Bloggers in other regions of Uzbekistan report that they are followed and frequently questioned by the SSS. When I traveled to the Fergana region, the journalists I interviewed and the manager of the hotel where I stayed were contacted by the SSS and asked questions about what I did, where I went, and who I spoke with.

Pressure from the security services has only gotten worse over time, explains Bahodirxon Eliboyev, a journalist-turned-blogger in the Fergana region. Government spying and monitoring has had a chilling effect on both journalists and citizens, he said.

The security services can buy some journalists, Eliboyev said. If the authorities order, journalists write everything that officials want. Thats not journalism. Thats propaganda. Censorship is now in our minds and our hearts.

Bahodirxon Eliboyev runs a Telegram channel blog from Fergana called Ma-News Agency. He was formerly fired from two journalism jobs for writing about controversial topics. He started two magazines but they were also shut down for coverage of controversial topics.

On July 24, 2018, Mirziyoyevs birthday, Eliboyev said he wrote a blog post wishing the president a happy birthday and asked him not to forget the millions of Uzbek migrant workers in Russia and other countries because they cant make a living in their home country.

That afternoon four SSS officers pounded on the door of his garage apartment where he was napping, he said.When they saw I was living out of a garage, they asked; Dont you have a home? He said he told them: I cant work as a journalist. So where can I live? I cant earn money at the one thing Im good at.

They warned him he would go to jail if he kept writing about forbidden topics.

He told them: I can write whatever I want because your jail is like my garage. But your jail is more comfortable because I dont need to find bread. You bring me bread. Your jail is for me freedom. Two hours after our interview, Eliboyev sent me a text. Hed just gotten off the phone with the SSS. They wanted to know what he told me, he said.

First-hand Experience With the Censors

When I came to Tashkent in March, I met with various editors and owners of independent newspapers, including Kamariddin Shaykhov, part owner of the Qalampir.uz media platform where the walls are covered with photos and illustrations of human rights issues, such as domestic violence and government repression. Shaykhov said his media outlet routinely receives letters and warnings from the Agency for Information and Mass Communications telling them to either take a story down or to remove comments on stories.

Once we get a letter from the Agency, for the next two to three hours, our articles are under three to four times more self-censorship, he said. Psychologically it takes a few hours before we are logically thinking. You must fight self-censorship or leave with bruises.

Kamariddin Shaykhov standing before one of the walls in Qalampir depicting Uzbekistani journalists from history.Photo provided by author.

After our meeting, I thought it would be insightful to write for an independent media outlet and see what happened, especially one that was fighting for freedom of speech, as Shaykhov professed. I proposed writing a weekly guest column for Qalampir about my interviews with Uzbekistani journalists. Shaykhov agreed since the government had approved my research.

Enjoying this article? Click here to subscribe for full access. Just $5 a month.

But when I turned in my second column about SSS pressure faced by journalists, including myself, in the Fergana Valley, I was summoned to the Qalampir offices and told that they couldnt run a story about the SSS. Shaykhov and his silent business partnerwhose famous singer wife, according to documents, owns 75 percent of Qalampirdefended the actions of the SSS for two hours. How do you know the security services officers werent just trying to protect you? How do you know their motives were bad? both men asked.

It was the last I heard from Qalampir.

In an attempt to be fair, I repeatedly requested an interview with the SSS. I sent letters to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Agency.

Dilshod Saidjonov, from the Agency, characterized my request as nave.

They are so secret they dont even have a website, he said. Even if you got an interview with the security services, there would still be the same problems in Uzbekistans media: no will to improve; weak education; and lack of analytical skills.

Still, I persevered. I asked journalists who knew SSS officers to request an interview for me. I even wrote a blog post on my website about my quest for an interview with the SSS, had it translated into Uzbek, and had several bloggers targeted by the SSS to post it on their blogs. I still did not hear back.

Read more:

Uzbekistan's Journalists: 'Censorship in Our Minds and Hearts' - The Diplomat

Margaret Atwood tried burning the new, fireproof version of her novelThe Handmaid's Talewith a flamethrower. Courtesy Rethink / Penguin Random House

First released in 1985, Margaret Atwoods The Handmaid's Tale is a longtime bestseller and a longtime object of censorship. The futuristic, dystopian novel about patriarchy run wild has long been one of the United States most-banned booksfodder for those who would censor or even burn its searing words.

Now, Atwood has partnered up with her publisher, Penguin Random House, to create a version of the book thats impossible to ignite anything other than heated debate. Its fireproof.

On Thursday, auction house Sothebys sold the unburnable book for $130,000. Proceeds will go to PEN America to support its advocacy for free expression and fight against book banning.

According to the group, The Handmaids Tale is a favorite scapegoat for those who would forbid books, and is often targeted for its sexual and health-related content.

The Handmaid's Tale has been banned many timessometimes by whole countries, such as Portugal and Spain in the days of Salazar and the Francoists, sometimes by school boards, sometimes by libraries, the Canadian author said in a statement.

In its recent report Banned in the USA, PEN documents 1,586 cases of a variety of reported book bans in the United States in 2021, spanning 26 states and 86 school districts. According to the report, a disproportionate number of bans target stories about people of color or LGBTQ+ people.

Out of all the bans listed, 98 percent deviated from reconsideration guidelines recommended by the American Library Association and the National Coalition Against Censorship, per PEN.

It is not just the number of books removed that is disturbing, but the processesor lack thereofthrough which such removals are being carried out that is cause for alarm, the group writes. The state with the greatest amount of book bans last year was Texas, with 713 prohibited books per the report, followed by Pennsylvania, Florida and Oklahoma. In 2021, Texas governor Greg Abbott requested school boards to discard books he referred to as "pornography," Sharif Paget and Nicole Chavez report for CNN.

Though Atwoods novel has often faced bans itself, the group says its symbolic of an entire modern-day movement to stifle literary expression.

In the face of a determined effort to censor and silence, this unburnable book is an emblem of our collective resolve to protect books, stories and ideas from those who fear and revile them, PEN America CEO Suzanne Nossel said in a statement.

The Handmaids Tale debuted to mixed reviews. But over the years, it has become a classic, touted by some as a frighteningly prescient prediction about the trajectory of American society. It depicts life in the Republic of Gilead, the repressive, totalitarian religious state that replaced the U.S. in a fictitious future, putting men in charge and relegating women to lives of subservience as sexually subjugated handmaids.

The books main character, wrote author Mary McCarthy in a 1986 review in the New York Times, has an unwillingness to stick her neck out, and perhaps we are meant to conclude that such unwillingness, multiplied, may be fatal to a free society. Since its publication, the book has been translated into over 40 languages, per a 2017 essay by Atwood in the Times.

Although it might look like an ordinary 384-page book, the fireproof edition is mostly made from Cinefoil, a specially treated aluminum foil, and contains other products such as fire-resistant inks and nickel wire. The technologywhich protects the book even when heated to 2,200 degrees Fahrenheitwas designed by the creative agency Rethink and the graphic arts studio The Gas Company, Inc.

The 82-year-old author has published her works in more than 45 countries and has written over 50 books. Now, The Handmaids Tale is an award-winning TV series that can be streamed on Hulu.

In her 2017 essay in the Times, Atwood wrote that she is often asked if her bleak book is a prediction about where American society is headed. Lets say its an antiprediction: If this future can be described in detail, maybe it wont happen, she wrote. But such wishful thinking cannot be depended on either.

I stopped writing [the novel] several times, because I considered it too far-fetched," she wrote for theAtlanticlast month.Silly me. Theocratic dictatorships do not lie only in the distant past: There are a number of them on the planet today. What is to prevent the United States from becoming one of them?

In a launch video presenting the fireproof book, Atwood tries and fails to burn a prototype with a flamethrower. And she is just as evasive about the future of literary censorship.

Let's hope we don't reach the stage of wholesale book burnings, as in Fahrenheit 451, Atwood said in a statement referencing the classic Ray Bradbury novel. But if we do, let's hope some books will prove unburnablethat they will travel underground, as prohibited books did in the Soviet Union.

Recommended Videos

Continued here:

Margaret Atwood Triedand Failedto Burn a Copy of 'The Handmaid's Tale.' Here's Why - Smithsonian Magazine

Ashland library board challenged on books about sexuality

Community members present a statement regarding the display of books they contend are inappropriate for children in the library.

Tom E. Puskar, Ashland Times Gazette

ASHLAND Whether or not nudity should be allowedin children's books was debatedThursday among some patronsand board members ofthe Ashland Public Library.

The five books in question are still in circulation and willstay there,Heather Miller, the library's director, assured everyone during theregular libraryboard meeting.

Commissioners OK tax break: Ashland County Commissioners approve tax abatement for Charles River's $212M project

And the four Ashland County residents who visited the meeting made it clearthey considerthe books to be pornographic in nature, and that their presence in the library stacks createsan unsafe environment for children.

Thursday's discussion was the third to be held about the five new books,Sandra Hedlund Tunnell, president of the library's Board of Directors, explained.

Among the titles are "Own Your Period: A Fact-filled Guide to Period Positivity" by Chella Quint and "MakingA Baby" by Rachel Greener.

The books started causing a ruckus at the start of the year when they reached the new arrival shelf of the children's section. Since they are now six months old, the titles have recently been moved from that display and placed onto the shelves with all of the other books.

As far as Tunnell can remember, it'sthe first batch of books to trouble some local residents.

"I appreciate their concerns," Tunnell said. "I think censorship is a slippery slope. I don't want to start going down the road where we start just picking books off the shelf willy-nilly because a couple of people have complained out of the thousands and thousands and thousands of people who use our library."

The charge to have the books removed is being led by two pastors and a set of parents.

The first to speak was Laura Brenning, a mother of two who was accompanied by her husband, Jeremy.

"It makes me sad because this is the first year we have not been able to do the summer reading program," Brenning said. "I don't feel safe letting them peruse the children's section."

Gas tops $5 per gallon: Gas prices reach new record high at more than $5 a gallon for regular

After evaluating the content ofthe five new books, she's concerned what materialmight be in other books she has yet to screen.

Brenning said one book had"many pictures of genitals and also discusses masturbation." Another "shows a couple in the act of having sex," and the others contained nudity, profanity"and other adult themes."

She said the books were labeled as being recommended for children as young as 5.

The Rev. John Bouquet, pastor ofBethel Baptist Church, told the library's leaders thathe is"beyond shocked to find the following materials in our public library in a children's section."

He asked that the books be removed, or at least taken out of the children's section.

"Parents are entrusted with the right to teach their children about sexuality and gender, not the library and not our public schools," Bouquet said. "Protect their innocence."

He said the adult section of the library would be the appropriate place to store reference material that might contain "adult-level content."

"Making babies is the title, but the pictures in the book are pornographic and obscene," Bouquet said. "To display naked men with childrenin a shower exposing body parts is just plain wrong and should not be done for children ages 5through 9."

The concerned residents' evaluation of the books doesnot accurately depict their content,Mike Zickefoose, secretary of the library board, maintains.

He examinedthe five titles,initially concernedthere might be a photo of a nude man instead, he found an educational illustration.

"It's not a sexual depiction of a man," Zickefoose said. "It's a reference book. It's science. These books are talking about puberty and what people go through."

Zickefoose urged those concernedto read the text around the images and consider the educational content being illustrated.

Bouquet argued most young children would not be reading the books, they would be flipping through them looking at pictures.

"They're not drawn to the words first, and you know that. They're drawn to the pictures," he said. "There is a definite societal fallout to this."

Professionals evaluate new materials to ensure they are accurate and provide education to the public, the board president explained.

"If the parents don't want their children to read them or to touch them, that's up to them," Tunnell said.

She said the library's job is not to protect, but to makeinformation readily available to everyone.

More: Tornado causes damages at Meijer facility in Tipp City. See photos, videos here.

"We have children in our community who do not have parents available to talk to them about things like puberty," Tunnell said.

Of the more than 90,000 books in the library's circulation, she said, she isn't worried that only five might offend someone, and that the books willremain.

"That's the first step toward censorship," Tunnell said. "You talk about freedom and liberty, but I don't think censorship and freedom can coexist."

Reach Zach at 419-564-3508 or ztuggle@gannett.com

On Twitter: @zachtuggle

Read this article:

'Censorship is a slippery slope.' Ashland library rejects call to remove five books - Wooster Daily Record

Sign up for The Brief, our daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton wants his office to help defend Llano County officials being sued for restricting and banning books from their public library system.

In a court filing Wednesday, Paxton asked Austin-based federal district court Judge Robert Pitman to let the state intervene in the lawsuit, which was filed by seven Llano County residents in April.

If Pitman grants the motion, Paxtons office could aid the county judge, county commissioners and library director in fighting the lawsuit.

In this weeks filing, Paxton notes that the plaintiffs are represented by nine lawyers, six of whom work for San Francisco-based law firm BraunHagey and Borden LLP. On the other hand, the Llano County Attorneys Office has only two lawyers.

With such a small number of lawyers, Llano County might not have the resources to handle daily legal obligations plus stand against lawyers whom Paxton describes as oriented toward systemic change rather than the resolution of a single lawsuit, according to his offices filing. However, the resources Paxton would bring from the Office of the Attorney General would be sufficient to ensure that the plaintiffs claims are fully and fairly explored and presented to the court, his office argues.

According to the lawsuit, Llano County officials removed several books from shelves, suspended access to digital library books, replaced the library board members with people who favor book bans, halted new book orders and allowed the board to close its meetings to the public in a coordinated censorship campaign that violates the First and 14th Amendments.

At the time, the plaintiffs said their constitutional rights were violated when public officials censored books based on content and failed to provide proper notice or an avenue for community comment, according to previous reporting by The Texas Tribune.

Attorneys for the residents either could not be reached or were unavailable to comment. Paxtons office could not immediately be reached for comment.

Books removed from the library include Maurice Sendaks In the Night Kitchen, Susan Campbell Bartolettis They Called Themselves the K.K.K.: The Birth of an American Terrorist Group and Jazz Jennings Being Jazz: My Life as a (Transgender) Teen.

Since last year, Texas Republican officials and grassroots conservatives have waged a battle against what they portray as indoctrination and obscenity in school and public libraries. Last fall, one state lawmaker compiled a list of some 850 books about race and sexuality that he sent to school districts, asking how many are available on their campuses.

This came after the Texas Legislature passed a law limiting how race, slavery and current events are taught in schools. They dubbed it the critical race theory bill, even though the legislation never mentioned the term. Critical race theory is a university-level concept that examines how racism shapes laws and policies. Public education experts, along with school administrators and teachers, say the theory is not taught in public schools.

Gov. Greg Abbott and Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick have made parental rights a priority as they both seek reelection in November. Patrick has also vowed to push for a Dont Say Gay bill in Texas, mirroring Floridas conservative push to limit classroom discussions about LGBTQ people.

Join us Sept. 22-24 in person in downtown Austin for The Texas Tribune Festival and experience 100+ conversation events featuring big names you know and others you should from the worlds of politics, public policy, the media and tech all curated by The Texas Tribunes award-winning journalists. Buy tickets.

View original post here:

Ken Paxton wants Texas to help defend Llano County officials being sued for banning books - The Texas Tribune

I dont tweet. I probably never will. As a former English professor, I am too steeped in the idea that you must provide well-reasoned support for your assertionsnot just blurt them out rapid-fire with as many typos as you can manage.

Despite my lack of interest in the venue, however, I have noticed the recent uproar surrounding Elon Musks takeover of Twitter. The left is furious because it appears that Musk will disallow the censorship of which they had grown so fond. No more can they rest easy in the knowledge that their poorly formed ideas and false narratives will be unequivocally protected from dissidents by thought-police algorithms and official banishments.

Meanwhile, the right, being the hand most often slapped by the corporate dictatorship that was Twitter, is eating its popcorn now and watching with glee the recent turn of events in Dystopia. It is cheering Musk on and preparing all its pent-up one-liners for the new free-speech-friendly virtual world.

I admit there is satisfaction in seeing the smug enraged, but that is a base, sectarian satisfaction, which probably misses the forest for the trees. Free speech is a double-edged axe, as is censorship. Unbridled free speech is an open marketplace for ideas, not all of which are good for people and some of which are downright dangerous for both body and soul. Sure, you can say, as the free-market economists do about corporations, that the bad will be defeated by their betters in the free market of discourse, but this is nave. In a very truly well-educated society, the best ideas may prevail, for the citizens of that land have the tools to evaluate arguments on their merits. But we do not live in a well-educated society, not by a long shot, and the peddlers of bad ideas are often expert propagandists. They need not defeat their opponents (those with good ideas) in open debateindeed, they are incapable of winning on those grounds. They need only control positions of power: in the media, including social media and entertainment, in education, medicine, agriculture, politics, and so on.

With a poorly educated, highly indoctrinated society such as we have, it is not the better ideas that will prevail in a free-speech environment; it is the more pervasive propaganda. Admittedly, censorship offers no better an alternative. As we have seen with Twitter and other big-tech entities during the so-called pandemic and 2020 elections, censorship is executed by the powerful, not the wise.

In the hands of a wise parent, however, censorship of what comes into the home and into the minds of the children is not just a useful tool; it is essential for the familys healthmental, physical, and spiritual alike. So too with a wise government, with wise teachers, with wise editors of media outlets, with a wise religious authorityall potentially disseminators of truth and protectors of persons. In their hands, strict limitations on the flow of harmful ideas into society can only serve to limit the damage and carnage on a fallen, and therefore vulnerable, race.

The problem, of course, is that we do not have many wise people in government, in education, in media, or in religious authority at present, and, in fact, a great many of them are actively engaged in the destruction of the moral and political orders. Therefore, the censorship they impose is exactly the wrong kind: they cancel truth rather than lies.

Which brings us back to Twitter: a dictatorially leftist organization controlling the lions share of bellicose one-liner communications. Not only does the platform itself inhibit real debate, but its owners could not resist flexing the muscle of their market domination, and they started openly banning users who did not align with their weak-minded politics. To focus on their acts of censorship, though, and to cheer Musks alleged intention of bringing free speech back to the playing field is to miss the point of the problem.

The real offense of Twitter is not censorship. It never was a kindly, public-service endeavor meant beneficently to allow folks everywhere to speak their minds and be heard. It was about money and political power, and the owners of political power do not typically give equal time to their opponentsnot in their own backyard. And if you think about it, why should they?

The trouble with Twitter is not censorship but false advertising, a bait-and-switch scam. Come on in, everyone! The water is fine, and the speech is free. You can make a splash and spar with anyone about anything you like. There is the appearance of no vested interest behind the offering.

That Elon Musk just paid $44 billion dollars for it should shatter that illusion.

Michael Larson

Top image by Mohamed Hassan, Pixabay

Follow this link:

The Trouble with Twitter - Chronicles - A Magazine of American Culture

Technology is tampering with freedom of speech, and we dont know what to do about it. At issue are the global platforms Facebook, Twitter and Instagram and the disturbing propaganda, disinformation and lies propagated on them.

The inclination, on the left and the right, is to censor. It is a terrible solution, more toxic and damaging to the body politic than the disease.

The left would like to shut down Fox Cable News and its principal commentator, Tucker Carlson. The right would like to have Twitter sold, presumably to Elon Musk, so that it stops blocking tweets from the right, notably those from former President Donald Trump.

How our society and others deal with the downside of social media racial incitement, disinformation, mendacity and opinions that are offensive to a minority, whether that is the disabled or an ethnic group is a work in progress. The instinct is to shut them down, shut them up. The tool that old monster solution is censorship.

The first trouble with censorship is that it has to define what is to be eradicated. Take hate speech. The British Parliament is struggling with a bill to limit it. The social networks seek to exclude it, and there are U.S. laws against crimes inspired by it.

How do you define it, hate speech? When is it fair comment? When is it satire? When is it truth taken as hate?

I say if you can untie that knot, go ahead and censor. But I also know you cant untie it without savaging free speech, doing violence to the First Amendment, arresting creativity and hobbling humor.

The censor is often as much clothed in moral raiment as in political garb. Take Thomas Bowdler and his sister, Henrietta, who in 1807 published an expurgated version of the works of Shakespeare. Henrietta did most of the work on the first 20 plays, later Thomas finished all 36. They expunged sex, blasphemy and double entendre. Thomas was an admired scholar, not a crackpot, although that might be todays judgment.

Oddly, the Bowdlers are credited with increasing the readership of Shakespeare. People reached for the forbidden fruit; they always do.

Likewise, many a novel would have avoided success if it hadnt been serially banned, like D.H. Lawrences Lady Chatterleys Lover. The moral censorship of movies by the Hays Office, starting in 1934, didnt save the audiences from moral turpitude. It just led to bad movies.

The censors often begin with specific words; words, which it can be argued, represent offense to some group or some social standing. So specific words become demonized whether it is the naming of a sports team or a colloquial word for sex, the urge to censor them is strong.

Jokes, like the English ones about the Welsh or the Scots ones about the English, became victim to a newly minted sensitivity, where political activists sell the idea that the joked about are victims. The only victim is levity, to my mind.

When you start down this slope there is no apparent end. Euphemisms take over from plain speech, and we live in a society in which the use of the wrong word can suggest that you are not fit for public office or to teach. Areas around ethnicity and sexual orientation are particularly fraught.

Until the 1960s and the civil rights movement, newspapers de facto censored people of color: They ignored them a particularly egregious kind of censorship. At The Washington Daily News where I once worked, a now defunct but lively evening newspaper in the nations capital, some of us once ransacked the library for photos of Blacks. There were none. From its founding in 1927 until the civil rights movement took off, the newspaper simply hadnt published news of that community in a city that had a burgeoning African-American population.

That was collective censorship as pernicious as the kind that both political extremes would now like to impose on speech.

Alas, censorship banning someone elses speech isnt going to redress the issue of the rights of those maligned or lied to or excluded from social media. In print and traditional broadcasting, libel has been the last defense.

Libel laws are clearly inadequate and puny against the enormity of social media, but they are a place to begin. A new reality must, and will in time, get new mechanisms to contend with it.

One of those mechanisms shouldnt be censorship.It is always the first tool of dictatorship but should be an anathema in democracies. For example, it is an open issue as to whether Russian President Vladimir Putin would have been able to invade Ukraine if he hadnt first censored the Russian media.

Read the rest here:

Censorship Isn't the Solution to Social Media's Ills InsideSources - InsideSources

Good morning! The clash of competing social media rulings is setting up a potential Supreme Court showdown that would have lasting consequences for tech platforms. Meanwhile, the video game industry is facing its own showdown: between giant studios and their unionizing workforces. Lets dive in.

Floridians who want to stick it to Big Tech will have to wait another day, after an 11th Circuit appeals court found that the crux of the states anti-social media censorship law violates the First Amendment.

Earlier this month, a 5th Circuit court of appeals lifted an injunction on a very similar law in Texas, without offering an opinion. That decision allowed the Texas law to take effect immediately, causing chaos for just about every major tech company. The fate of that law is now before the Supreme Court, which could reply to an emergency application on its shadow docket any day now.

The Florida opinion could offer the justices a road map. Heres what the court said about the law:

This could tee up the Supreme Court for a much bigger ruling. Its decision in response to the emergency application will only decide whether Texas law stays in effect while the 5th Circuit appeals case remains ongoing.

The impact of that decision would be an earthquake for tech platforms and would have huge ramifications for their users.

Until this week, not a single major American game developer had a unionized workforce of any kind. That just changed.

Workers at Raven Software voted to unionize on Monday. A group of more than 20 employees at the Activision Blizzard-owned company cast ballots in a NLRB-sanctioned election to determine whether Raven management would be forced to recognize the group. The union won, 19-3, making the Game Workers Alliance the first of its kind at a major American game studio.

The union was spurred by layoffs and Activision Blizzards ongoing crises. In December, Raven quality assurance testers went on strike for five weeks to protest layoffs. Parent company Activision, which is in the process of being acquired by Microsoft, is in the midst of its own turmoil.

Activision Blizzard has one week to appeal the decision before it must begin bargaining in good faith over a union contract. But statements and internal messages to staff make clear that management is not happy. However the company reacts, the GWAs union contract will have a ripple effect throughout the industry and its fast-growing labor movement.

Project Shield protects news and human rights organizations, government entities, and more from Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks. These digital attacks are used by bad actors and cyber criminals to censor information by taking websites offline.

Learn more

Intel CEO (and former VMware CEO) Pat Gelsinger is mixed on Broadcoms potential acquisition of VMware:

Early Twitter exec Jason Goldman thinks Elon Musk is chaos for the company:

And Gwynne Shotwell defended Musk against allegations of sexual misconduct:

Terra investor Hassan Bassiri is certainly committed to the cause:

Adrian Cockcroft is retiring from Amazon after close to six years with the company. Cockcroft was most recently vice president of Sustainability Architecture.

Chime named Vineet Mehra chief marketing officer. He previously led growth and experience at Good Eggs.

Xiaomi inked a long-term partnership with Leica. Their first collaboration will be a smartphone released in July.

The worlds 50 richest people lost half a trillion dollars between them so far this year at least on paper. Elon Musk alone has lost close to $70 billion, or about 1.5 Twitters.

Klarna is laying off 10% of its workforce of about 6,500 employees. The news follows reports that its valuation fell by 30% to $30 billion. PayPal is also laying off workers.

Snap will miss its revenue and earnings guidance for the quarter. It will slow hiring in response.

Andy Jassy has a big AGM to deal with on Wednesday. He'll face shareholder questions about Amazon's working conditions, executive pay and tax.

Broadcom might pony up as much as $60 billion for VMware, according to the WSJ.

Shareholders of Didi voted to delist the company from the New York Stock Exchange.

Samsung said it would invest $350 billion over five years in next-generation technologies, mainly in South Korea.

Airbnb is reportedly planning to exit China. The company is expected to take down all listings in the country this summer.

Meta will give researchers access to targeting data for political ads, finally giving the academics the access theyve wanted for years.

D.C. Attorney General Karl Racine is suing Mark Zuckerberg over his responsibility for the Cambridge Analytica scandal.

The tech job market isnt cooling off (yet), but the economic downturn could change the way workers get paid. Fat salaries arent disappearing anytime soon, but tech companies will look to cut costs in other ways.

Cushy benefits packages and huge annual merit increases are easy places to cut back, according to compensation consultants. The amount of equity companies give to employees and the frequency of stock grants will also be scrutinized.

But experts also say the time is ripe for startups to land top talent. Many tech giants plan to slow hiring or freeze it altogether this year, which will make the market less competitive. And Big Tech workers looking for a fresh challenge might want to jump ship for an exciting growth opportunity.

Google's Threat Analysis Group (TAG) is a team that investigates threat actors and combats cyber crime to help keep everyone safe online, including high-risk users, by increasing protections based on attacker techniques and through regular updates to the security community.

Learn more

Thoughts, questions, tips? Send them to sourcecode@protocol.com, or our tips line, tips@protocol.com. Enjoy your day, see you tomorrow.

See the original post here:

The social media censorship showdown - Protocol

A record number of books have been banned or challenged in the U.S. in the last year, part of a push by conservatives torein in discussionof issues that some find distasteful. Now, author Margaret Atwood is responding to the rise in censorship by auctioning a fireproof edition of her novel "The Handmaid's Tale," which ranks among the most frequently banned books in the U.S.

In a video posted onSotheby's sitefor "The Unburnable Book," Atwood is shown with a flamethrower as she takes aim at the edition, which is printed on pages made from heat-resistantCinefoil, sewn together with nickel wire. The flames lick at the book, but the pages remain intact.

"I never thought I'd be trying to burn one of my own books ... and failing," Atwood said in a statement.

The edition is "designed to protect this vital story and stand as a powerful symbol against censorship," the auction site notes.

The auction, which places the expected sale range at $50,000 $100,000, will direct all proceeds to PEN America, a group that advocates for free expression and that plans to use the money to support those efforts. "The Handmaid's Tale," first published in 1985, is a dystopian vision of a future America where women are stripped of their rights and live under a theocracy that prizes them strictly for their reproductive abilities.

Interest in "The Handmaid's Tale" has increased amid a leaked Supreme Court draft opinion that, if finalized, would pave the way for states to severely curtail abortion rights in the U.S. The prospect Roe v. Wade being overturned has sparked observations about the book's prescience and relevance to modern events.

"The Handmaid's Tale" has been among the most challenged publications in America, with the American Library Association (ALA) noting that it has been targeted for "vulgarity and sexual overtones."

Efforts to ban books have surged in the past year, with the ALA finding there were a record 729 challenges to more than almost 1,600 titles in 2021, double the number in 2020.

Atwood said in the statement that her book has been banned "by whole countries, as Portugal and Spain in the days of Salazar and the Francoists, sometimes by school boards, sometimes by libraries." She also expressed hope that society doesn't get to the point of "wholesale book burnings, as in 'Fahrenheit 451'," referring to the Ray Bradbury classic.

More recently, Barnes & Noble has faced pressure from a Virginia lawmaker and a congressional candidate to restrict sales of two books deemed "obscene" to minors without parental consent. The candidate, Tommy Altman, said he is running for Congress to protect freedom, including the right to free speech. One of the books the pair is aiming to restrict is the most challenged book of 2021, the memoir "Gender Queer" by Maia Kobabe.

"To see [Atwood's] classic novel about the dangers of oppression reborn in this innovative, unburnable edition is a timely reminder of what's at stake in the battle against censorship," Penguin Random House CEO Markus Dohle said in a statement.

Trending News

Go here to read the rest:

Fireproof "Handmaid's Tale" edition is up for auction: A "symbol against censorship" - CBS News

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

FIRST ON FOX: A conservative nonprofit is launching a new ad campaign targeting Big Tech over online censorship.

Common Sense Leadership Fund (CSLF), a conservative nonprofit, launched the new seven-figure ad buy on Monday, railing against two pieces of legislation making their way through Congress.

CSLF president Kevin McLaughlin told Fox News Digital the "last thing we need is the federal government codifying into law Big Techs ability to silence anyone they happen to disagree with politically."

NEW CONSERVATIVE GROUP TARGETS HASSAN, KELLY OVER DEMOCRATS $3.5 TRILLION SPENDING PUSH

Two bills targeted in the ad campaign are the American Innovation and Choice Online Act and Open App Markets Act. (istock)

The ad, first obtained by Fox News Digital and titled "Big Brother," focuses on the loopholes in two bills, the American Innovation and Choice Online Act and Open App Markets Act, that loosely uses the word "safety."

One provision in the American Innovation and Choice Online Act creates a legal defense for tech companies potential censorship if the measure they implement is to "protect safety, user privacy, the security of non-public data, or the security of the covered platform."

A similar "digital safety" provision also exists in the Open App Markets Act.

"Dont have the right opinion? Censored!" the ad says. "Are your facts an inconvenient truth? Banned!"

"No, its not big brother. Its Twitter. Facebook. YouTube. Apple," the voice-over continues. "They do it behind closed doors and answer to no one."

CSLFs ad warns that the two bills "would enshrine their censorship power in federal law" and that "Big Tech needs tough regulation not more rules that allow them to control your online speech."

"Tell Congress to reject Senate Bill 2922 and 2710 or you might be next," the ad concludes.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer speaks to the media after a Democratic policy luncheon, Oct. 19, 2021, on Capitol Hill. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)

Conservative commentators warn that the bills would harm U.S. businesses by radically altering antitrust laws and changing ecommerce itself.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said he wants to bring the American Innovation and Choice Online Act up by early summer.

Schumers move to bring the measure up for a vote comes the week after President Bidens disinformation board bit the dust.

Read the original post:

Conservative nonprofit launches ad campaign targeting bills over Big Tech censorship - Fox News