Written by Surbhi Gupta, Edited by Explained Desk | New Delhi | Updated: July 21, 2020 6:57:26 pm Directed by the acclaimed Pakistani filmmaker Sarmad Khoosat, Zindagi Tamasha won the prestigious Kim Ji-Seok Award at the Busan International Film Festival last year. (Still from the trailer)

Last week, Pakistans Senate Committee for Human Rights approved the release of the film Zindagi Tamasha, dismissing all objections raised against it. Senator Mustafa Nawaz Khokhar of the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), who chairs the panel, said in a tweet on July 14 that the committee had found nothing wrong with the film, and that the Pakistani censors could now go ahead to release it post-Covid.

Two days later, however, a petition was filed in a Lahore court seeking a lifetime ban on the film. Following a short hearing, the Additional Sessions Judge asked for a reply from the makers of the film, and adjourned the hearing until July 27.

Directed by the acclaimed Pakistani filmmaker Sarmad Khoosat, Zindagi Tamasha won the prestigious Kim Ji-Seok Award at the Busan International Film Festival last year. A bilingual film that is mostly in Punjabi, it stars Arif Hassan, Eman Suleman, Ali Qureshi, Samiya Mumtaz, and Imran Khoosat.

The films scheduled release on January 24 this year was stalled, and a series of protests, open letters, and multiple reviews by the censors followed.

What is the film about?

An exploration of many themes, Zindagi Tamasha tells the story of Rahat Khawaja (played by Arif Hassan), a naat khawan a poet who recites poetry in praise of the Prophet. In an introduction of the character, the filmmakers said that Rahat Khawaja enjoys a celebrity status amongst the community in the old city of Lahore, and is a devout Muslim, who, in the eyes of everyone is a superhuman incapable of any sacrilege. Hence, when he does wrong there is no forgiveness for him.

From the trailer of the film it appears that Khawaja and his family find themselves ostracised after a certain video featuring him becomes public. The contents of the video are not clear. The trailer appears to hint at the misuse of Pakistans infamous blasphemy law. Sarmads sister Kanwal Khoosat, who has co-produced the film, has said that tolerance is the overarching theme, and main takeaway of the film.

Who is Sarmad Khoosat, the films director?

Khoosat, 41, is a critically-acclaimed filmmaker, and considered by many to be among Pakistans best. After directing TV shows and telefilms for some years, Khoosat made his big screen directorial debut with Mantoin 2015. The critically and commercially successful film had Khoosat himself playing the role of the novelist and playwright Saadat Hasan Manto.

Khoosat has been active in the Pakistani entertainment industry for well over a decade, and has directed the popular TV drama Humsafar, starring Fawad Khan and Mahira Khan, and Shehr-e-Zaat. He was awarded the Pride of Performance, the highest national literary honour by the Pakistani government, in 2017.

Who is opposing the release of the film?

After the film was cleared by the censor board, the Islamist political party Tehreek-e-Labbaik Pakistan (TLP), began protests against its release. Even after the board reviewed and cleared the film for the second time after asking for a few cuts, the TLP called for mass rallies across the country.

The characterisation of the naat-reader in the film is such that it can cause discomfort to the public and might lead them to deviate from Islam and Prophet (Muhammad), the TLP had said in a statement. Thus this movie must not be released as it could otherwise be a grave test of the Muslims of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

The party was founded by the Barelvi preacher Khadim Hussain Rizvi after the 2016 hanging of Mumtaz Qadri, a commando who had been assigned to protect the former Governor of Punjab province Salmaan Taseer but who had, in 2011, killed the Governor as alleged retribution for Taseers statements in favour of Asia Bibi, a Pakistani Christian woman who had been convicted of blasphemy.

The TLPs main agenda has been the opposition to attempts at changing or diluting the blasphemy laws. It has held several protest rallies and demonstrations to this end, and has shown its ability to gather massive crowds. The TLP contested the elections in Pakistan in 2018, and won three seats in the Sindh provincial assembly.

What position has the government taken?

While the film was cleared by all three censor boards (the CBFC, Punjab, and Sindh boards) in Pakistan, the Sindh Board of Film Censors put a ban on Zindagi Tamashathree days before its scheduled release, as it anticipated that it could cause unrest within a segment of the society. The censor authorities in Punjab followed suit.

Firdous Ashiq Awan, who was then adviser to Prime Minister Imran Khan on Information and Broadcasting, tweeted that the producer of the film had been told to delay the release until the censor board had consulted with the Council of Islamic Ideology (CII), a constitutional body that advises the legislature on Islamic issues. This was the first time in the history of Pakistani cinema that the approval of the CII was sought on the content of a film.

Express Explainedis now onTelegram. Clickhere to join our channel (@ieexplained)and stay updated with the latest

How did the filmmaker respond?

In an open letter written a few days before the scheduled release, and addressed to the countrys President, Prime Minister, Chief of the Army Staff, Chief Justice, Ministry of Information, and the public at large, Sarmad Khoosat said that he wanted to explore themes like gender constructs, class divisions and human experiences.

There was never any intention to attack, to point fingers at or humiliate any individual or institution, he said.

Khoosat subsequently tweeted that he had been getting dozens of threatening phone calls and messages, and published a second open letter, in which he reiterated that the film was about a good enough Muslim there was/is no mention of a sect, party or faction of any sort. Neither in the uncensored nor the censored version. He said that his film was an empathic and heartfelt tale of a bearded man who is so much more than just that.

How has Pakistani civil society reacted?

Civil society, the film fraternity, and sections of the media have come out in support of Khoosat, and criticised the government for succumbing to pressure from extremist elements. Among those who have backed Khoosat is the acclaimed British-Pakistani writer Mohammed Hanif (who wrote A Case of Exploding Mangoes), who has seen the film, and who wrote a blog for Samaa TV in an a bid to clarify some points.

The film, Hanif said, was not about child molestation, as had been alleged. The subject doesnt figure at all in the plot, nor is it a part of the subplot. Its neither mentioned nor alluded to, he wrote. He said that there was one line in which the main protagonist says, But what about those who molest children? And the censor board had ordered even that line deleted, he said.

Hanif also said that there were no ulema in the film, and that the protagonist was a small property dealer. He is a compassionate man, who helps out the needy, composes and reads sehras at weddings and makes halva at Eid Milad un Nabi and distributes it. He is not a professional naatkhwan, but he loves reciting naats.

According to Hanif, the only taboo the film breaks is showing a man with a beard doing household chores. I cant remember the last time a bearded man or any man was shown in a film cooking, doing laundry, doing his ailing wifes hair. Is showing a bearded man doing house chores an insult to our faith? he wrote.

Which films have been banned in Pakistan?

Pakistani censors have repeatedly banned Indian films, including Padman, Raazi, Raees, Udta Punjab, Neerja, Haider, Bhaag Milkha Bhaag, among many others. They also banned The Da Vinci Code in 2006 after protests from the Christian community.

The Indian Express is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel (@indianexpress) and stay updated with the latest headlines

For all the latest Explained News, download Indian Express App.

See the rest here:

Explained: The controversy around the Pakistani film Zindagi Tamasha - The Indian Express

Metacritic is implementing a 36-hour review delay to ensure that people actually had enough time to play a game before sharing their thoughts about it online.

Speaking to Game Spot about the new policy, a spokesperson for Metacritic said

We recently implemented the 36 hour waiting period for all user reviews in our games section to ensure our gamers have time to play these games before writing their reviews. This new waiting period for user reviews has been rolled out across Metacritics Games section and was based on data-driven research and with the input of critics and industry experts.

Although Metacritic says the delay isnt in response to user reactions to any particular game, the announcement does come a few weeks after The Last of Us Part II was released. The game was review bombed on the site.

Review bombing happens when users give a large number of negative reviews to a game, typically as low as possible, in order to drop its overall score. The popularity of the game is then harmed, which has an impact on sales and the revenue it can generate.

Its worth noting that a lot of negative reviews on Metacritic (and other review sites) are based on reactions to leaks regarding games, not people actually playing them.

By delaying user reviews, anyone visiting the site after the release of a game wont be bombarded by unfounded hate towards it. And reviews from critics and gaming publications wont get lost in the noise.

Review bombing has been a major problem for every site which aggregates scores based on reviews of video games, films, TV shows and music albums. The most notorious incident being an attempt to drag down Captain Marvels score on popular review site Rotten Tomatoes.

Some gamers might view the move as an attempt to stifle their opinions, and perhaps it is. But is that really a bad thing?

Ever since the rise of social media, Joe Public has been given a platform to shift the narrative in various areas of the entertainment industry. It only takes a second for a seemingly harmless comment or tweet to spiral out of control, forcing studios to change their CGI graphics, fire a director or change their casting choice.

The truth is cancel culture hides under the guise of an opinion, which everyone is entitled to, regardless of the facts laid out in front of them.

However, there needs to be a line drawn between the need to express and opinion and causing financial ruin to a company. A few cranky gamers shouldnt have the power to create multiple accounts and bombard a platform with low scores, essentially destroying something that doesnt belong to them.

Perhaps Metacritic is leaning toward censorship, but what we really should be wondering is why arent we doing it everywhere else too?

Read more:

Is Metacritics New Review Decision Leaning Towards Censorship? - Fortress of Solitude

Israel's fight against the second wave of the coronavirus is thoroughly out of control.

Regulations are pulled out of thin air (shutting restaurants only to open them again too late to save the ditched produce), there is no organized database upon which to make decisions, people are confused due to the clueless leadership, and above all there is dwindling public trust in the government.

At war: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Likud MK Yifat Shasha-Biton

(Photos: Adina Wellman and Alex Kolomoisky)

To those who are looking for political motive behind every struggle or argument, this is no longer about left or right, it is about life itself.

This theater of the absurd reached a crescendo on Saturday night, when Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu decided to fire his own Likud party's head of the Knesset coronavirus committee, MK Yifat Shasha-Biton, after she made it clear she was not going to automatically agree to every government decision.

Finance Minister Israel Katz also decided to reprimand his ministry's director-general Karen Turner-Eyal after she defended the head of the budget department Shaul Meridor against social media attacks from Netanyahu and other Likud members.

Meridor came under fire for daring criticize Netanyahu and Katz's plan to distribute money "to everyone" as part of their financial aid program.

The prime minister's son Yair Netanyahu even went so far as to brand anyone at the Finance Ministry who thinks before automatically reciting his father's talking points as "terrorists."

Under fire: Shaul Meridor

(Photo: Rafi Kotz)

It is not for nothing that Turner-Eyal said the comments directed at her colleague Meridor were "extremely violent."

Shasha-Biton, Turner-Eyal and Meridor are people who decided as part of their job to voice their concerns and expert opinion on the government's decisions decisions which are often controversial or downright motivated by foreign interests and political schemes.

They refused to align themselves with the narrative imposed on them from above. Yes, such officials might be a bit more "courteous" and express their thoughts via channels other than social media.

But to go for their heads? Is that how the Israeli government plans to fight the coronavirus pandemic?

Finance Minister Israel Katz and Director-General Karen Turner-Eyal

(Photo: Orel Cohen)

The preoccupation with what Meridor says or what Turner-Eyal is is tweeting is characteristic of a leadership that does not know how to handle a crisis such as the coronavirus.

True, the fight against the contagion is a tough one. It is much easier to blame political rivals, threaten anyone who does not toe party line and pit one against the other.

The politicians and the financial experts who criticize the government's decisions and warn of ill-advised plans are those certain they are doing their jobs as part of the fight against the contagion.

You can criticize them or disagree with them, but that is not the issue.

The problem is that anyone who thinks differently is being figuratively burned at the stake.

With such an attitude, it will be impossible to defeat the coronavirus.

Visit link:

Censorship in a time of coronavirus - Ynetnews

SHANGHAI To protest censorship during the COVID-19 outbreak, a Chinese artist known as Brother Nut kept his mouth shut for 30 days, using metal clasps, gloves, duct tape and other items.

In the project #shutupfor30days he also sealed his mouth with packing tape with 404, the error code for a webpage not found, written across it, a nod to the blocking of online content that is common in China for sensitive issues.

If you ask me how an artist should digest unfair treatment, such as violence or censorship, my first reaction is: keep fighting, with art, said Brother Nut.

The 39-year-old artist has built a reputation for statement-making projects in a country where the room for dissent has shrunk and censorship has intensified under President Xi Jinping.

China faced a barrage of criticism over the virus that emerged late last year in Wuhan, from being slow to sound the alarm to the treatment of a doctor who tried to alert authorities about the outbreak but was reprimanded by police for spreading rumors.

The doctor, Li Wenliang, became a symbol of the outbreak in China and later died from coronavirus.

Sometimes I feel my job is similar to that of an NGO or a journalist seeking to raise awareness of social issues and the moves to counter them, said the soft-spoken, long-haired artist during an interview at a cafe in Shanghais M50 art district.

Brother Nuts previous performances include tugging a battery-powered vacuum cleaner around Beijing and creating a solid brick from polluted air.

In 2018, he invited a heavy metal band to play in a village polluted with heavy metals, prompting local environmental authorities to investigate the contamination.

To speak up for investors who lost their savings in a financial scam, Brother Nut staged a torch relay dubbed Good Luck Beijing, which in Chinese sounds similar to Beijing Olympics.

He was later detained for 10 days by police.

Threats and calls from police are commonplace, which he said makes him angry, rather than fearful, although he does not want his real name to be published.

Brother Nut acknowledged that during last months project to maintain silence, he sometimes spoke to himself while eating.

We need expressions of art whenever and wherever. Theyre like flowers growing in cracks and allow us to dance in the most desperate time, he said.

Read the original:

Artist holds his tongue in protest of pandemic censorship in China - New York Post

July 29th, 2020

9:00 AM - 10:00 AM PDT

Greenberg Glusker and Farrer & Co are delighted to present a joint webinar during which reputation management and media specialists from both firms will discuss:

On both sides of the Atlantic, the role of social media and search engines has been dominating the news agenda.

The debate over the extent to which Big Tech should be policing content on its platforms is one that has been bubbling for some time, but has recently exploded into the open with Donald Trumps decision to sign an executive order aimed at removing protections for social media platforms and the UK governments plans to introduce legislation to address Online Harms.

Set alongside that is the decision of a number of multinational corporations to cease advertising on Facebook and other platforms in protest at the perceived failure to do enough to remove racist, hateful and knowingly false content.

All this takes place in the context of a global pandemic (where conspiracy theories have abounded), the Black Lives Matter movement and, of course, a forthcoming Presidential election in the United States.

More here:

[Webinar] #FreeSpeech: Perspectives from the UK and the US on Social Media Liability for Fake News, Damaging Content and Censorship - July 29th, 9:00...

TORONTO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--TunnelBear has today partnered with four Non-Governmental Organizations (NGO) to campaign against censorship threats which have impacted communities and activists across the world since the COVID-19 pandemic and global protests. In total, twenty thousand free VPN accounts have been distributed to these organizations which include Access Now, Frontline Defenders, Internews, and one other undisclosed participant.

This unique and timely program aims to empower individuals and organizations with the tools they need to browse a safe and open internet environment, regardless of where they live. The VPN provider is encouraging other NGOs or media organizations across the world to reach out if they too are in need of support.

At TunnelBear, we strongly believe in an open and uncensored internet. Whenever we can use our technology to help people towards that end, we will, said TunnelBear Cofounder Ryan Dochuk.

He continued, We also understand that the protests happening all over the world mean that safe digital spaces are now more important than ever. We are happy to provide these accounts to human rights defenders at no cost to them.

TunnelBear encrypts its users internet traffic to enable a private and censor-free browsing experience.

"Access Now's Helpline provides incident response assistance and direct technical support on digital safety to at-risk users from civil society across the globe. We always advise our constituents to think critically about their security, and to pick the tools and services that best respond to their specific needs. When it comes to VPNs, trust is key. TunnelBear's approach to securityincluding annual security audits, easy to read privacy policy and regular transparency reportsprovides a solid foundation to cultivate trust," said a Spokesperson for Access Now.

"By undergoing and releasing independent audits of their systems, adopting open source tools, and collaborating with the open source community, TunnelBear has proven itself to be an industry leader in the VPN space and a valuable private sector partner within the internet freedom movement. Internews is happy to support TunnelBear in extending its VPN service to the media organizations, journalists, activists, and human rights defenders around the globe who can benefit from it," said Jon Camfield, Director of Global Technology Strategy at Internews.

TunnelBear has so far given away a total of 20,000 accounts, and is open to requests from organizations who can help their networks with free secure internet. Visit this webpage for more information and to submit a request for support.

This program marks the beginning of a company-wide initiative to combat online censorship, stay tuned for whats next.

TunnelBear is a very simple virtual private network (VPN) that allows users to browse the web privately and securely. It makes sure that browsing is safe from hackers, ISPs, and anyone that is monitoring the network. TunnelBear believes you should have access to an open and uncensored internet, wherever you are.

See more here:

TunnelBear Kicks Off Anti-Censorship Initiative With Free Accounts for Activists - Business Wire

Progressive intellectuals Try to Stop the Censorship Monster They Created (EFE).

Spanish In an open letter, 153 prominent academics, writers, and intellectuals, mostly from the left, called for an end to the radicalization of censorship promoted by activists for social justice causes. They warn that the freedom to write, to express an opinion, is in danger.

The free exchange of information and ideas, the lifeblood of a liberal society, is daily becoming more constricted, the letter states, warning of an intolerance of opposing views, a vogue for public shaming and ostracism, and the tendency to dissolve complex policy issues in a blinding moral certainty.

We refuse any false choice between justice and freedom, which cannot exist without each other, it continues. As writers, we need a culture that leaves us room for experimentation, risk-taking, and even mistakes, the letter adds.

Black Lives Matter has succeeded in creating a climate of intersectionality. The founders of the movement converge trans-feminism and racial justice. Intersectional movements have achieved everything from removing books to firing writers, and they have also conducted massive cancellation campaigns.

And it is not limited to the mockery of right-wing figures who question the collectivist ideology and identity politics; it also affects progressives, leftists, and even feminists.

For example, J. K. Rowling, the author of Harry Potter, has been accused of transphobia for saying that people who menstruate used to be called women.

In 2020, saying something so obvious and biologically demonstrable is tantamount to a hate crime and the outright accusation of transphobia. Reducing femininity to biology is seen as an attack on transsexual, transvestite, and transgender people who identify as women.

The need for a message of self-criticism from progressive intellectuals is exposed by the fact that one of the signatories of the letter has already had to apologize. Trans activist Jennifer Finney Boylan highlighted the presence of socialist intellectuals such as Noam Chomsky and feminists Gloria Steinem and Margaret Atwood. But she regretted that she was not aware of the presence of other signatories. Among them is the transphobic J. K. Rowling.

I did not know who else had signed that letter. I thought I was endorsing a well meaning, if vague, message against internet shaming. I did know Chomsky, Steinem, and Atwood were in, and I thought, good company.

The consequences are mine to bear. I am so sorry.

Jennifer Finney Boylan (@JennyBoylan) July 7, 2020

A video by John Stossel for the libertarian platform Reason TV explained the extent of cancel culture and the restrictions on debate by far-left activists.

Campaigns by activists calling for the dismissal of professionals, censorship as the norm, and even the mass removal of books can be described as internet mobs.

Leftists incapable of living by neutral principles. The digital mob led by NYT columnist Paul Krugman arrived at the Univ of Chicago pressuring to remove Professor Harald Uhlig as editor of Journal of Political Economy, after criticizing Black Lives Matter https://t.co/x8GkbjdVk4

Fernando Amandi Sr. (@FernandoAmandi) June 12, 2020

His crime? He said that the Black Lives Matter campaign was making a mistake by joining the campaign to defund the police.

There was nothing racist or discriminatory in how he said it, says Reason magazines senior editor, Robby Soave, who is covering the recent protests. But because he has some different views from the protesters, he must be a racist, he says.

Soave points out that the most worrisome aspect of these activists actions is that they advocate an ideology where different opinions are assumed to be dangerous to the extent that they justify censorship as an act of self-defense.

They even highlight how professionals have been fired because of the actions of their relatives, such as the case of a footballer who was fired because of what his wife said something against Black Lives Matter on Instagram.

Therefore, more than a hundred intellectuals, particularly writers, joined the call. Most of them are left-wing, progressives, including Mexican historian Enrique Krauze.

But they dont have the backing of their co-conspirators. The New York Times published an article titled Artists and Writers Warn of an Intolerant Climate. The reaction was quick. The NYT article compiled criticism of the authors, including accusations that they are afraid of losing their relevance.

The letter makes it very clear that it does not seek to delegitimize the actions of Black Lives Matter or any civil protest. They simply fear the persecutory nature it has taken.

Being progressives, the letters signatories warn how the radicalization of the left benefits the right, particularly the U.S. president.

The forces of illiberalism are gaining strength throughout the world and have a powerful ally in Donald Trump, they exclaim. And they invite their co-conspirators to avoid letting their resistance become its own kind of dogma or coercion, which right-wing demagogues are already exploiting.

The democratic inclusion we want can be achieved only if we speak out against the intolerant climate that has set in on all sides, they say.

The free exchange of information and ideas, the lifeblood of a liberal society, is daily becoming more constricted. While we have come to expect this on the radical right, censoriousness is also spreading more widely in our culture: an intolerance of opposing views, a vogue for public shaming and ostracism, and the tendency to dissolve complex policy issues in a blinding moral certainty, the letter adds.

The letter issued by these intellectuals takes us back to the poem by Niemller, a religious Lutheran persecuted by Nazism in its final stage. The letter highlights how he remained silent when others were being persecuted and stresses the importance of calling out ideological persecution before it knocks on your door.

Otherwise, your own story will end like the poem: When they came for me, it was already too late.

More here:

Progressive intellectuals Try to Stop Censorship Monster They Created - PanAm Post

The cartoon shows a bearded man in paradise, reclining on a couch in a tent, with a virgin on either arm. God pokes his head in. Do you need anything? he asks. Yes, Lord, the man replies. Get me some wine and tell Gabriel to bring me cashews. Take the empty plates with you. And put a door on the tent, so next time you can knock before you come in, your Immortalness.

Four years ago, Nahed Hattar, the Jordanian writer and intellectual, shared the cartoon on Facebook, captioning it The God of Daesh. He was charged with inciting sectarian strife and racism and insulting Islam. In September 2016, outside the Amman courthouse where he was about to stand trial, Hattar was shot dead by a Salafist gunman.

Telling jokes in the Arab world is no laughing matter. Yet as a new book, Joking About Jihad, shows, poking fun at Islamists and jihadists has become an essential part of Arab culture. Comedians and cartoonists, the authors Gilbert Ramsay and Moutaz Alkheder observe, play an important role in shattering once seemingly inviolable taboos, transgressing the boundaries of consensus while somehow also enabling conversations where they once seemed impossible.

The context of the free speech debate is very different in the west. Many of the questions facing writers and artists and comedians are, however, similar. What is taboo? How far can we upset people? Should we transgress consensual boundaries?

In the Arab world, those pushing the boundaries of speech work within brutally dictatorial states and know the dangers of provoking popular outrage. Hattar is only one of dozens of writers and artists who have lost their lives in recent years for transgressing taboos. It takes immense courage to stand up for free speech in Jordan or Egypt or Saudi Arabia.

'Cancel culture' is not particularly useful in helping us think about the different forms of silencing that people face

In the west, writers and artists also face murderous threats, from the fatwa imposed on Salman Rushdie to the mass killings of Charlie Hebdo staff in January 2015. But there is also, unlike in most of the Muslim world, a general presumption of freedom of expression and laws and institutions that broadly protect free speech. This has made many sanguine about threats to speech.

After the Charlie Hebdo massacre, there were protest marches and words of outrage from politicians. But many liberals and the left felt uncomfortable about defending, even in death, figures associated with Charlie Hebdo. Three months after the attack, a host of prominent writers boycotted the annual gala of PEN America in protest at its decision to award the magazine a courage award.

Compare that with the response in the Arab world. Writers and artists, even those critical of the magazine, were, as the Beirut-based critic Kaelen Wilson-Goldie observed, unequivocal in their support because they saw the killings as part of a broader threat. At a vigil for Charlie Hebdo in Beirut, people added on to the Je suis Charlie hashtag: Je suis Samir Kassir, Je suis Gebran Tueni, Je suis Riad Taha, Je suis Kamel Mroue. All were writers, cartoonists or intellectuals assassinated for their work.

Arab activists recognise that censorship aids the powerful, while free speech is a vital weapon for those struggling for change. Its a point often forgotten in the west.

Consider the furore over the recent letter in Harpers magazine in defence of free speech signed by 153 public figures. A key criticism of the letter is that it is the voice of privilege.

Its true that few of the signatories have been silenced (though its also worth pointing out that Kamel Daoud, for one, still faces a death fatwa). Its the little people without power or platforms whose lives are particularly disrupted if they say the wrong thing, whether that be Muslim students in Britain, Mexican-American truck drivers, childrens authors, shopworkers, anti-Israel protesters or political activists.

These are all distinct cases and the now-fashionable term cancel culture is not particularly useful in helping us think about the different forms of silencing that people face. Nor are the conditions of censorship in the west comparable to those under which Arab writers and activists operate. The point, rather, is that the harsh conditions make Arab activists aware of the significance of free speech in a way that many in the west no longer seem to be. Would many of the jokes or cartoons for which Arabs risk their lives be published in the west without facing considerable pushback from liberals? I doubt it.

Being able to dismiss concerns about censorship? Now, thats the voice of privilege.

Kenan Malik is an Observer columnist

Go here to see the original:

It's the powerless who suffer when free speech is threatened - The Guardian

HBO'sGirls was never going to be family-friendly viewing, executive producer Judd Apatow told The Hollywood Reporter. "From the beginning, we were aware that what we were doing was sexually provocative" he said, adding, "Lena [Dunham, Girls creator] wanted to reveal something that is normally hidden so often you're not talking about a giant part of most people's lives because people don't want to portray it on film and that opened up tons of stories that you're usually not able to tell." There was very little that scared HBO executives, according to the show's creative team. "But then we had a scene with a conclusion shot ..." said Apatow.

Mike Lombardo, HBO's president of programming at the time said, "You don't need it," according to showrunner Jenni Konner, and the Girls team eventually found humor in it. "We were like, 'Oh my God, we've actually found the line at HBO,'" said Apatow. Size might have been the reason why the graphic scene, that involved a large volume of a certain bodily fluid "arcing through a shot," as Dunham described it, got the boot. "In HBO's defense, it was like a fire hose!" said Sue Naegle, former president of entertainment at HBO. It's not clear who the original scene featured, but they eventually filmed an acceptable "conclusion" shot during a scene featuring Adam Driver and Shiri Applby.

Read more from the original source:

Love scenes that were too controversial for TV - Nicki Swift

Gay stories, excessive romance, unscientific fantasy, and narratives that glorify the pre-Communist republican era are reportedly among 20 genres of fiction to be banned or subject to further censorship in China, according to what appears to be new measures emanating from Chinese authorities.

Photos of what appears to be a new directive issued by the National Radio and Television Administration have been widely circulated on Chinese social media platforms Weibo and WeChat over the past few days. However, social media posts containing similar photos from last year are also to be found on the internet. The date and authenticity of the new directives cannot be independently verified.

The directives appear to provide clear instructions on what can and cannot be shown in 20 genres of TV and web drama show. Youth drama, for example, should avoid puppy love, crime, and violence. Romantic dramas should avoid intimacy, but be bold about clashes and conflicts. Fantasy stories will be subject to particular attention and must be told from a scientific perspective.

Time travel stories must be explained with scientific theories and characters involved must be positive and cannot change the course of history. Gay stories are banned and should be replaced with friendship among characters of the same sex.

Dramas that glorify the republican government or warlords in the republican era are to be strictly censored. And crime thrillers will be subject to censorship by the police department. Plots must not reveal how the crimes are solved, though analysis of criminal psychology is allowed. Criminals must be punished. Police cannot be portrayed negatively.

Social media posts containing these pictures have sparked heated discussions online in China. Puppy love, violence and crime in youth dramas have already been banned, but does it mean they do not exist in reality?, one post on WeChat questioned. If the directives are real, then there are no stories left to tell in Chinas film and television.

See the rest here:

Chinese TV Regulators Appear to Increase Story Supervision - Variety