Editor,

Judging from the May 18 letters to the editor in this publication, I must have gored a sacred cow. That all but one letter and the cartoon referenced The Big Lie as the truth and anyone who questions the official findings is a radical insurrectionist says more about their ideology than mine.

First, let me commend the editors of the News-Times for being true to their header. If more of your readers would read it, they might understand the power of honest discussion to find truth than bowing to some preconceived script.

I have always been a skeptic of mail-in voting and extended voting times. If I trusted that all people were honest, there would be no question that we had honest results, but having lived on this planet for over 70 years, I know that a few of my fellow humans cant be trusted. Lyndon Johnson was noted for delivering enough late votes in Texas to give his partys candidate a win.

This state has a history of holding recounts on close elections until the results are what the power brokers want. Dishonest? Perhaps. Provable? Probably not. But it does point to problems in trust.

That Democrats oppose in- person voting, valid IDs, and want ballot harvesting makes me cringe. And if studies are correct, mail-in voting actually decreases participation. Strange way to instill trust in the electorate.

This is, of course, my opinion and if that upsets you, I suggest you look to the bottom of the published letter and if it is from me, dont read it.

I promise I wont be offended, and I wont tell the editors not to publish yours.

Fred Wilferth

Coupeville

Go here to see the original:

Letter: You don't have to agree, but don't call for censorship - Whidbey News-Times

Almost as fast as social media posts about Israel and Gaza began multiplying, so too did complaints of censorship from both sides. Posts were identified as hate speech and taken down; influencers insisted that they had been shadow-banned a term for when a users posts are left up but the algorithm does not show them to users noting lower than usual views on posts about Israel, East Jerusalem or Gaza. There have been allegations of censorship on both sides of the political spectrum, but the issue appears to be more systemic and well-documented among those posting pro-Palestinian content.

This is not just a conspiracy theory.

Last week, Instagram posted an apology to Twitter explaining that a glitch had led to Instagram stories not posting or archived stories disappearing, resulting in reports of silencing from those advocating around events in both East Jerusalem and Colombia, where anti-government protests have resulted in bloody clashes with the police.

This is a widespread global technical issue not related to any particular topic, Instagrams communications team said in a statement on Twitter. Another, longer statement posted the next day specifically named East Jerusalem in its apology, reasserting that Instagram had no intention of suppressing voices reporting from there.

Meanwhile, Instagram was also automatically hiding or removing posts tagged with al-Aqsa, in both English and Arabic. The tag refers to the Aqsa mosque compound, Islams third-holiest site, in the Old City of Jerusalem, which is known to Jews as the Temple Mount, and was the site of intense conflict between the Israeli police and Muslim worshippers at the onset of the current escalation.

Instagram had flagged alaqsa as associated with violence or a terrorist association. The tag was being used during the end of Ramadan as violence erupted between Israeli police and Palestinians at the holy site, and many trying to draw attention to the violence found their posts blocked right as Israeli police stormed the grounds with rubber bullets and stun grenades, injuring 220 Palestinians.

By iStock

The tagging issue has since been resolved, thanks to employees flagging it internally, and Facebook has apologized; an internal post obtained by Buzzfeed News said that the posts were flagged because al-Aqsa is also the name of an organization sanctioned by the United States government. Both issues disproportionately impacted Palestinian posts, blocking posts in the tens of thousands.

Israeli voices have also complained of censorship, though to date there are no reports of a systemic rule with as broad an impact as the al-Aqsa issue. The writer Hen Mazzig had an infographic defending Israel removed, though it was later reinstated; Mazzigs post had been in response to a viral anti-Israel infographic that was not censored.

Another account, @the.israel.files has also posted complaints about censorship and removed posts, while several lifestyle influencers who posted pro-Israel content saw a dropoff in views, suggesting that they had been shadowbanned for posting pro-Israel content.

This week, the Israeli Defense Forces complained that one of its tweets warning of a rocket alert was not allowed to post. But as its own screenshot suggested, the tweet was likely blocked because Twitter does not allow identical posts within a short period of time.

Users across other social media platforms, including Twitter and TikTok, voiced similar complaints. Rest of World, a global nonprofit news outlet, reported that Venmo was flagging and delaying payments listed to Palestinian emergency relief fund, but payments listed with similar pro-Palestinian phrases such as Free Palestine or Palestinian Fund were processed without delay.

A Venmo spokesperson said the issues were OFAC related, referring to regulations from the U.S. Department of the Treasurys Office of Foreign Assets Control, which has a list of groups and organizations under U.S. sanctions, including any groups suspected of being controlled by Hamas.

Moderation during rapidly unfolding events is a nightmare for tech platforms, which find themselves the arbiters of complex questions about what counts as misinformation, hate speech or incitement during a situation in which the truth is often unclear and events are quickly changing.

News outlets across the world reported that Israeli troops had invaded Gaza late Thursday, for example, based on an inaccurate statement an IDF spokesman made to international journalists. Some analysts believe the mistake, which took more than two hours for the IDF to correct, was intentional, part of a ploy to lure Hamas fighters into underground tunnels that Israel was targeting with airstrikes and artillery.

Posts showing violence are limited, unless they are deemed to be educational or to raise awareness about a world event. Yet Palestinians report that their posts have been taken down for being too violent, and further they havecomplained of Western standards being applied to other regions and language norms where they do not make sense.

Also tricky is the question of what counts as hate speech.

Whether anti-Zionism is equivalent to antisemitism has been hotly debated throughout the Jewish community; those who believe anti-Zionism is inherently antisemitic have demanded that anti-Zionist posts be removed for hate speech, while those who believe criticism of the state of Israel is not inherently antisemitic criticize platforms discrimination if anti-Zionist posts are removed. The fact that anti-Zionism is sometimes, though not always, paired with overt antisemitism, such as using the terms Zionists and Jews interchangeably, does not help clarify the situation.

Facebooks definition of hate speech states: We define hate speech as a direct attack against people on the basis of what we call protected characteristics: race, ethnicity, national origin, disability, religious affiliation, caste, sexual orientation, sex, gender identity and serious disease. We define attacks as violent or dehumanising speech, harmful stereotypes, statements of inferiority, expressions of contempt, disgust or dismissal, cursing and calls for exclusion or segregation.

The definition also includes some protections for characteristics such as occupation, when theyre referenced along with a protected characteristic such as ethnicity or religion.

By iStock

While the definition goes into detailed examples, it is nearly impossible to identify and list every potential form of hate.

In a global event in which many protected characteristics, such as ethnicity, national origin and religion, are all the subject of discourse, it is difficult to fairly moderate conversation from users, many of whom are deeply upset and prone to vitriolic statements.

Other forbidden statements include voicing a desire to segregate or exclude a group, which also crops up in discussions about the situation in Israel and the West Bank, which often includes opinions on where borders should be drawn that would limit the movements of Palestinians or Israeli Jews.

In all of these cases, the line between controversial opinion and misinformation or hate speech is hard to determine. In a situation as loaded as that in Israel, Gaza and Jerusalem, many feel the other sides opinion is objectively misleading or hateful, flagging posts and accounts they disagree with an issue the Forwards own comments section struggles with.

Most platforms, including Facebook, Instagram and TikTok, increasingly use technology and algorithms to moderate hate speech and incitement.

Facebook, which shares a moderation team with Instagram, updated their technology to help identify new forms of inflammatory speech, according to a report from May 2020. The company told the Forward that improving and increasing the use of algorithms in the moderation process helps ensure that reviewers will spend more of their time reviewing truly borderline cases.

Facebook also partners with local experts and organizations to help contextualize issues, and told the Forward that the company has over 35,000 people working on safety and security, including 15,000 content reviewers.

The company said that the team consists of native language speakers who understand local cultural context and nuances; they also said their policies are extremely prescriptive to help ensure objectivity.

When breaking news events change a situation, content is often escalated to a Risk and Response team that is better qualified to make tough calls, according to a report from Vice. In this case, Facebook said it has established a Special Operations Center, staffed by experts from across the company, including native Arabic and Hebrew speakers.

Yet any reliance on algorithms to flag and remove posts means human nuance can get lost. Even human moderators reviewing individual posts often need to be deeply embedded in a particular communitys language and discourse to have a hope of effectively understanding the weight of different terms or accusations.

These questions are relevant for any outlet platforming or taking part in any public discussion of world events, including news outlets. But while such outlets have journalists focused on the details of a breaking story, social media content moderators are often from third party firms sitting in call centers trying to follow bullet-point guidelines issued to them. While experts may make the guidelines, it is an army of individuals adjudicating individual instances. They are seeing revenge porn and animal cruelty alongside posts about Israel or Gaza, and they often lack cultural or political context to apply during the 30 seconds they spend on each post, according to an investigation by The Verge.

Given the volume of posts on social media each day, it is hard to imagine a better system for moderation. But its just as clear that this one is flawed.

View original post here:

Have social media giants been censoring posts about Israel and Gaza? - Forward

Facebook says that its services were interrupted 84 times in 19 countries in the second half of last year, compared to 52 disruptions in eight countries that took place during the first half of the year. That's a symptom of a growing trend among countries to restrict access to social media and the open internet.

Why it matters: Government censorship, whether through complete blackouts or laws limiting certain types of content, is a growing threat to the notion of the internet as an open global network.

Details: During the last six months of 2020, Facebook also said government requests for user data increased 10% from 173,592 to 191,013. The company says it continues to scrutinize all government requests for any user data.

The big picture: The COVID-19 pandemic saw a surge in local law enforcement agencies cracking down on content that they argued was tied to misinformation that could impactpublic safety.

Separately: Facebook also noted that the amount of content it removed from organized hate groups surpassed the amount it removed from terrorist organizations. As Protocol notes, that's the first time that's happened since Facebook began reporting such stats in late 2017.

Meanwhile: Twitter posted a blog acknowledging that following an investigation, it determined the tool that automatically cropped images on the site contained bias that favored white people and women.

Link:

Facebook says government internet shutdowns are on the rise - Axios

Social media users who have reported shadow banning and AI restrictions of Palestinian content on platforms like Facebook and Instagram have found an ingenious way to elude these censorial algorithms. In recent days, an increasing number of Arabic-speaking users online have been reverting to at least a thousand-year-old version of the language, which eliminates all dots (diacritics) from the modern alphabet.

As recently revealed by BuzzFeed News, Instagram has removed posts and blocked hashtags related to Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem, one of Islams holiest sites, because it was deemed as a terrorist organization by the companys moderation system. When trying to share footage of the Israeli raid on the mosque earlier this month, Instagram users said that their posts were restricted from view or removed entirely. Facebook, which owns Instagram, called the removals enforcement errors in response to complaints by dismayed employees. However, Israeli officials haveannouncedthat the country works closely with Facebook to monitor and remove inflammatory content (from Israels perspective) on the platform.

Diacritical points (dots above or below letters) were introduced to the Arabic script between the 8th-11th century, as the Islamic Empire grew in size. The practice is believed to have been borrowed from the Syriac script for clarity and more accurate pronunciation of consonants.

In an article on the independent Egyptian news website Mada Masr, written in the dotless Arabic script, activist Muhammad Hamameh describes how he came up with the idea, saying that he had previously considered using Morse code or replacing some letters with symbols.

Its not a new idea, Hamameh wrote. The original Arabic script did not know pointing and Diacritics until decades after the passing of the prophet Mohammad.

Its an easy technique, even for handwriting, Hamameh continued. We draw our letters, so we can simply ignore adding the points. But its much more challenging to the AI machine, which has a [binary] code for each letter.

Those who are interested in converting Arabic text to the dotless script can do so on the website http://www.dotless.app. But how long will it take before Facebooks programmers develop an algorithm to identify the ancient script?

Of course, it is only a matter of time before the automated systems also understand dotless Arabic script, an article on the website Arabic for Nerds says. But there are many other possibilities, the article suggests. Dialects in non-uniform transcription, for example, are still difficult for computers.

Fun fact: the word Algorithm itself originates from Arabic, named after the 9th-century mathematician Abu Jafar Muhammad ibn Musa, who was more commonly known as al-Khwarizmi.

Continue reading here:

People Are Using an Ancient Method of Writing Arabic to Combat AI Censors - Hyperallergic

The next time someone tells you campus censorship is a myth, made up by right-wing tabloids and leapt upon by a Tory government keen to wage a culture war against the left, tell them to Google Lisa Keogh.

Keogh is a 29-year-old law student at Abertay University in Dundee. She is currently being investigated by the university for the crime of saying that women have vaginas and men are stronger than women. For all the naysaying on the left, campus censorship is now apparently so extensive that stating widely accepted facts is a risky business.

As the Times reports, Keogh is facing disciplinary action over offensive and discriminatory comments that she made during lectures and seminars. These include saying that women are born with female genitalia and that the difference in physical strength of men versus women is a fact. Such heresies upset her younger classmates, who complained to the university.

Keogh also claims she was muted during a seminar for suggesting that trans women, given their physical advantages, shouldnt be able to compete against women in mixed martial arts. I made the point that this woman had testosterone in her body for 32 years and, as such, would be genetically stronger than your average woman, she said. I wasnt being mean, transphobic or offensive. I was stating a basic biological fact. She also objected to other students suggesting that all men are rapists.

When Keogh was informed that she was under investigation, she thought it was a joke: I thought there was no way that the university would pursue me for utilising my legal right to freedom of speech. But that is precisely what is happening. Abertays definition of misconduct includes using offensive language, and the ultimate punishment is expulsion. Students have been expelled at other universities for the crime of expressing their opinions. Felix Ngole, a Christian social-work student at Sheffield, was thrown off his course in 2016 for saying on Facebook that homosexuality is a sin.

There are no bigger pariahs on campus today than women who dare to believe in biological sex. Selina Todd, a trans-sceptical academic at Oxford, had to be given a security detail last year. Rosa Freedman, a professor at the university of Reading, found her office door covered in urine after she criticised proposed changes to gender-identification laws. And Jo Phoenix, a professor of criminology at the Open University, was no-platformed at Essex university in 2019. She was due to give a talk about the issues around putting trans women in womens prisons.

We can only hope that common sense will prevail in Lisa Keoghs case. Joanna Cherry, SNP MP for Edinburgh South West and deputy chairwoman of the Joint Committee on Human Rights, has written to Abertay demanding to know what steps are being taken to protect students rights. Surely, expelling a young women for the crime of saying that biological sex is real is a PR blunder beyond even the wokest of university administrators. But, then again, common sense went out of fashion on campus a long time ago.

Excerpt from:

Lisa Keogh and the myth of campus censorship - Spectator.co.uk

Parler has now returned to the iOS App Store after "months of productive dialogue with Apple," with a solution including censoring content that violates Apple's guidelines on the mobile app.

The social media site's interim CEO, Mark Meckler, said that the company has worked to "address Apple's concerns without compromising our core mission." Essentially, the platform will censor content on iOS to keep Apple happy.

"Anything allowed on the Parler network but not in the iOS app will remain accessible through our web-based and Android versions. This is a win-win for Parler, its users, and free speech," Meckler said in a statement to The Verge.

Parler positions itself as a free speech-focused alternative to Twitter or other social media sites. The platform was banned by Apple, Google, and other web platforms after the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol because it didn't do enough to curb violent content that encouraged the riot.

Apple approved Parler's return to the App Store in April. That came after a rejection from Apple in March, when the Cupertino tech giant said that Parler still had objectionable content on its platform including Nazi imagery and white supremacist symbols.

According to Parler, the iOS app now has an automated system that can automatically detect violent or inciting content while still preserving user privacy. The company says that kind of content "has always violated Parler's guidelines."

As of writing, Parler remains absent from the Google Play Store. Unlike on iOS, however, users can still sideload the app on Android devices.

Stay on top of all Apple news right from your HomePod. Say, "Hey, Siri, play AppleInsider," and you'll get latest AppleInsider Podcast. Or ask your HomePod mini for "AppleInsider Daily" instead and you'll hear a fast update direct from our news team. And, if you're interested in Apple-centric home automation, say "Hey, Siri, play HomeKit Insider," and you'll be listening to our newest specialized podcast in moments.

See the rest here:

Parler returns to App Store, says it will censor objectionable content on iOS - AppleInsider

Are sex workers being unfairly targeted by tech companies? Heres how social media censorship affects adult industry influencers.

According to a Centro University study, social media censorship is costing sex workers hundreds of millions of dollars a year. A survey sent out to adult industry influencers back in February revealed startling results, with nearly half of respondents reporting that one of their social media accounts (on Twitter or Instagram) had been banned in the past year. Nearly 1 in 10 reported that both of their accounts had been banned.

Some adult industry influencers also reported that their accounts had been shadowbanned, meaning their traffic and engagement fundamentally came to a halt.

Though most of these influencers play by the Terms of Service, avoiding explicit content, monitoring what sorts of things they link and advertise, and keeping an eye on their followers and hashtags, they find themselves with banned accounts nonetheless. They often dont know just where and how they violated the Terms, and they often have no chance to appeal.

This comes at a detriment to their very livelihoods.

FanCentro VP Kat Revenga says, Social media censorship isnt some theoretical issue for adult influencers, it robs them of huge amounts of income. The majority of adult influencers are small business owners who use the income to pay rent and put food on the table, and the arbitrary closure of an account can be devastating, depriving them of tens of thousands of dollars.

CentroU wanted to see exactly how much an adult industry influencer could be affected by unfair social media bans, and created a profile of a typical adult influencer. They reported that someone earning $4,000 per month in January could easily drop to under $1,000 per month in July. By the end of the first year, they reported, an influencer suffers over $30,000 in lost income.

Revenga went on to say, Social media has enabled a new generation of independent adult influencers to thrive, and to own what they produce, but the true power rests with the social media companies. Their arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement is costing an already marginalized population hundreds of millions of dollars a year.

CentroU is a free school for adult influencers and sex workers.

Photo at topby Seyi Ariyo on Unsplash

Continued here:

Social Media Censorship Is Costing Sex Workers and Adult Influencers Big Money - Hornet

Herman Mashaba's party, Action SA, has released a billboard with names and faces of various political party leaders with labels such as criminal, crook and fraud next to their names. He said that the refusal by media houses to flight the billboard amounted to censorship.

A screenshot of Action SA's election billboard.

JOHANNESBURG - The election season has not reached fever pitch yet, but the new kid on the block, Action SA, is already crying foul.

Herman Mashabas political project accused media houses on Tuesday of refusing to flight an election campaignbillboard in which leaders of various parties were labelled as anarchists, criminal and divisive among others.

Mashaba said through a statement that the refusal to flight their campaign amounted to censorship.

The aim of the billboard was not to target the individuals featured on our billboard, but rather to expose a political system that results in the selection of compromised candidates by political parties to serve in some of the highest public offices in the land.

"This system serves political parties instead of serving the people of South Africa. Despite the right to the freedom of speech entrenched in our Constitution, no less than six media owners refused to flight the billboard for fear of political reprisal, vandalism or defamation, Mashaba said in a statement.

The controversial billboard features Democratic Alliance (DA) chairperson Helen Zille and Solly Msimanga, Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) leader Julius Malema, and from the African National Congress (ANC), Mashabas party targeted suspended ANC secretary-general Ace Magashule, Zandile Gumede, Geoff Makhubo and Bathabile Dlamini.

Meanwhile, political parties representing the named leaders in the Action SA billboard were contacted for comment. Eyewitness News received only one, saying that "commenting would give it traction."

Download the Eyewitness News app to your iOS or Android device.

Read the original here:

Action SA's Mashaba slams media houses over 'censorship' of election billboard - Eyewitness News