Category Archives: Censorship

Bamseom Pirates Seoul Infernoby Jung Yoon-Suk (image courtesy M-Line Distribution)

The Last Waltz, Martin Scorseses quintessential concert film chronicling the last show of the 70s rock group The Band, begins with text declaring across the screen: This film should be played loud. In the decades following the 1976 classic, this advice found its way into the beginning of countless music films. Most recently, the spirit of the message traveled across the globe to South Korea in Jung Yoon-Suks documentary Bamseom Pirates Seoul Inferno (2017), the story of the college punk duo Bamseom Pirates and their struggles with government censorship. But the onscreen statement near the beginning of Jungs film skews in a more political direction, notifying the viewer, The sounds of the film were left unbalanced to help you experience the imbalances in Korean society. In the background, we hear the Pirates aggressive, discordant music.

As a bellwether of whats to come, the statement works twofold. First, it prepares the viewer for an on-the-ground look at the politics and class conflicts of contemporary South Korea. Second, like the rest of the movie, it presents an endlessly compelling subject in a clodding, inelegant manner.

The film, which is playing at the New York Asian Film Festival at the Film Society of Lincoln Center, revolves around the arrest of the bands producer and manager Park Junggeun. He is said to have violated the countrys nebulous National Security Laws after posting tweets that were seen as praising the enemy. These tweets, including Dear leader, please buy me some chocolate and Kim Jong-Il is Car Sex, show how vague and easily manipulable the laws are. The messages are shared on-screen in front of images of Park dressed in costumes goofing off with friends, making it even clearer that Park is joking. However, South Korean culture seems to treat any expression of dissent comical or not as aiding the enemy.

Watching the Pirates at work is a riveting experience. Sarcasm and irony infuse everything they do especially their lyrics. In some songs, they seemingly, wholeheartedly endorse North Korean Communists, with choruses like All Hail Kim Jong-Il! But we recognize this stance is a farce in moments where the band discusses its almost nonexistent politics. Having spent his young life firmly on the south side of the DMZ, the drummer of the band, Kwon Yung-man, admits at one point, Honestly I know almost nothing about North Korea. The musicians scream slogans praising their countrys enemies just to provoke the powers that be.

Despite efforts to mirror the bands slapdash aesthetic, the film unfortunately follows a fairly consistent formal structure that keeps it from being engaging. A protest ensues around the privatization of Seoul University and a Korea-US free trade agreement. Then the band Yung-man and bassist Jang Sung-geon performs at the protest, offering a set of their signature punk/metal fusion and nonsense banter. The handheld cinematography that fills most of the film is a visually unspectacular means of chronicling these happenings, and Kwons tendency to tell the camera exactly what the band is doing instead of simply showing it drags the story on.

More interesting is Jungs repurposing of newscasts that intrude on the bands story, giving cultural context for the society that yielded the Pirates. A story about a 1994 meeting between North and South Korean officials, where the Communist representative warns that his country can turn their countries into an inferno if provoked, offers context for the tense political climate on both sides of the DMZ; this anecdote also explains the origins for the name of the Pirates debut album Seoul Inferno, which is excerpted throughout the film. Later in the film, as Park is on-trial, Jung appropriates propaganda from the era, where in a staged conversation two men and two women discuss their thoughts on war with the north. One of them declares, If certain elements within the South cause turmoil when the North attacks, they will pay dearly for their mistakes. Jungs appropriation of this footage paints a vivid portrait of the social consensus allowing the crackdown on Park, which ends in a 10-month jail sentence and two years probation.

Following the delivery of the verdict, however, Bamseom Pirates Seoul Inferno fails to end on a note acknowledging this very emotional moment. The viewer is treated to shots of the pirates riding in cars through the city at night, a middle-aged man asleep on public transportation, and cats, as well as scenes of the band recording screams, moans, claps, belches, and the whir of power tools. The film suffers for not making a final statement regarding the censorship imposed on artists in South Korea. The fault lies with the filmmaker and not the artists, whose dadaist sensibilities are the reason to watch this documentary.

Bamseom Pirates Seoul Infernois playingat the New York Asian Film Festival at the Walter Reade Theater, Film Society of Lincoln Center (165 W 65th St, Upper West Side, Manhattan) on Tuesday, July 11.

More here:
A Korean Punk Band's Struggles with Censorship - Hyperallergic

The Bolshoi Ballet has denied bowing to a controversial Russian law banning "homosexual propaganda" after it cancelled a new production about Rudolf Nureyev three days before the premiere.

The long-anticipated production had been due to open on Tuesday but was called off at the weekend amid speculation that authorities had balked at its depiction of Nureyev's love life.

Vladimir Urin, the theater's director general, said on Monday that he had cancelled the ballet about the Soviet dancer-turned-defector because rehearsals showed it was not ready.

"The ballet was not good," he said, saying it had been postponed rather than cancelled and would open in May next year instead.

Earlier the Tass news agency cited a culture ministry source saying Vladimir Medinsky, Russia's minister of culture, cancelled the production because he feared it broke a controversial law banning the promotion of homosexuality to minors.

Mr Medinsky's ministry confirmed he had spoken to the director, but denied issuing a "ban."

"Yes there was a long conversation with Urin," Irina Kaznacheeva, a spokeswoman for the culture ministry said in a statement. "But a ban is the not the ministry's working style."

Rudolf Nuryev was one of the most celebrated ballet dancers of his generation. In 1961 he became was one of the first acclaimed Soviet artists to defect to the West, where he had successfulcareer - and a turbulent love life including a string of gay relationships - until his death in 1993.

Read more from the original source:
Bolshoi Ballet denies bowing to censorship over canceled Rudolf Nureyev show - Telegraph.co.uk

Banners at the Moscow Theater ushered in the Golden Apricot International Film Festival

2 LGBT-Themed Films at the Center of Controversy YEREVANOpening ceremonies for the 14th annual Golden Apricot International Film Festival were held Sunday, kicking off this years festival amid controversy stemming from the organizers decision to cancel an off-competition screening of 40 films showcasing work of filmmakers from around the world, with some accusing organizers of censorship.

Filmmakers who had submitted their work to be screened in an off-competition program entitled, Armenians: Internal And External Views, were informed Friday through an email from Golden Apricot organizers that the screening of the entire slate of films was cancelled, without elaborating on a reason for this decision.

Filmmaker Hrayr Eulmessekian, whose film Vah Oshagan: Between Acts, was to have been screened during Armenians: Internal And External Views received the email, which he shared on his Facebook page.

We want to inform you that Armenians: Internal And External Views non-competition program is completely cancelled. We apologize for any inconveniences, said the email received by Eulmessekian and the other filmmakers whose works were to be screened.

The decision has also baffled Beirut-based filmmaker Nigol Bezjian whose documentary, Temple of Light, centering on the closure of the Melkonian School in Cyprus, was to have been screened during the program.

The film is about shutting down of the Melkonian School and now the film is shut [down] in Yerevan, Bezjian told Asbarez through Facebook Messenger, pointing to the irony of the situation.

At the same time, activists took to social media to voice their anger at the cancelation, with some claiming that two LGBT-themed films, which were part of the programs slate were at the heart of the decision to cancel the entire program.

A documentary, Listen to Me: Untold Stories beyond Hatred and Apricot Groves a fiction film featuring LGBT characters were originally included in the Armenians: Internal And External Views lineup.

Armenias Cinematographers Union said that due to the passing of the groups former director, Rouben Gevorgyants on June 23, the group was in mourning and would not screen any films. The group had said earlier that the two LGBT-themed films would have to be removed and threatened to cancel the entire showcase of 40 films.

Throughout the weekend social media sites were abuzz with allegations and finger pointing and conclusions that the Golden Apricot organizers caved in to archaic approaches toward LGBT people and cancelled the entire slate.

The organizers are doing themselves a disservice by not clearly articulating the impetus for the cancelations. Asbarezs email inquiry to the organizers of the festival remains unanswered.

Canadian Armenian filmmaker Atom Egoyan and his actress and activist wife Arsine Khanjian posted an announcement on Facebook decrying the decision to cancel the slate of films. They also argue that the best way to honor a late cinematographer is to ensure that the medium continues to flourish and proliferate.

We are very concerned about the censorship by the Union of Cinematographers and the following decision to cancel an entire programming by the Golden Apricot Film Festival. Atom was President of the Festival for almost ten years and its dismaying to see a festival that we both proudly advocated for within the international film community in the name of films and filmmakers that spoke of such urgent human rights issues can be suppressed, especially when these ideas need to be discussed and brought to light, said the announcement by the two Diasporan artists.

Surely there is no better way to honour the spirit of an important Armenian filmmaker, Rouben Gevorgyants, than by making sure new films from Armenian voices can be seen and shared. We have never heard of a program of new films being cancelled to commemorate a cineastes death as a sign of mourning and respect! This claim seems, therefore, quite preposterous. We urge the Festival to review this outlandish decision. We urge the Festival to present this programme of thought-provoking work which reflects the true diversity of voices present in Armenia today and the Diaspora alike, added the announcement.

The festival kicked off on Sunday with the traditional blessing of the apricots, a fruit indigenous to Armenia, and continued with the unveiling of stars of directors Frunze Dovlatyan, Yuri Yerznkyan and cinematographer Sergey Israelyan at Charles Aznavour Square in Yerevan.

Welcoming remarks were delivered by founding director of the festival Harutyun Khachatryan and Ralph Yirikian, the General Manager of VivaCell-MTS, which is the general partner of the festival.

After the introduction of the jury and the competition program, the festivals opening film, Khaspush by Hamo Beknazaryan, was screened.

According to the organizers, this year, the annual film festival, founded in 2004, received 1,100 film submissions from 96 countries. Organizers selected 47 films to compete in three main categories: International Feature Competition (12 films), International Documentary Competition (16 films) and Armenian Panorama National Competition (19 films).

See original here:
Golden Apricot Festival Kicks Off Amid Censorship Allegations - Asbarez Armenian News

'Lipstick Under My Burkha' director Alankrita Shrivastava said film censorship needs to be bid a goodbye. Her debut feature film was caught in a tussle with the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) which deemed it too lady-oriented to see the light of the day. But when the makers approached the Film Certification Appellate Tribunal (FCAT), they got a green signal. Talking about the issue, Shrivastava said, "We are reaching a crisis point. We have to decide, as citizens of India in 2017, whether we want to claim our freedom and live in a free and democratic country or do we want to live with this guardianship."

"I think time is up on censorship and we need to bid it a proper and clear goodbye. We need to get into a process which is much more matter of fact in certification."

"Censorship is not something new in India. We have been living with censorship for decades. Censorship is coming to sharp focus now, because there are many more independent films being made which are more international in nature."

"As a citizen of a free and democratic country, I also want the freedom to be able to make whatever I like because I see people from other free countries making whatever they like."

'Lipstick Under My Burkha' to release on July 28

01:10

Konkona Sen Sharma strikes a pose during a photo shoot, held at Intop Studio, Jogeshwari in Mumbai on July 08, 2017.

Aahana Kumra looks gorgeous during a photo shoot, held at Intop Studio, Jogeshwari in Mumbai on July 08, 2017.

Ratna Pathak Shah during a photo shoot, held at Intop Studio, Jogeshwari in Mumbai on July 08, 2017.

Plabita Borthakur is all smiles during a photo shoot, held at Intop Studio, Jogeshwari in Mumbai on July 08, 2017.

(L-R) Plabita Borthakur, Konkona Sen Sharma, Alankrita Shrivastava, Ratna Pathak Shah and Aahana Kumra during a photo shoot, held at Intop Studio, Jogeshwari in Mumbai on July 08, 2017.

Konkona Sen Sharma strikes a pose during a photo shoot, held at Intop Studio, Jogeshwari in Mumbai on July 08, 2017.

Aahana Kumra looks gorgeous during a photo shoot, held at Intop Studio, Jogeshwari in Mumbai on July 08, 2017.

Ratna Pathak Shah during a photo shoot, held at Intop Studio, Jogeshwari in Mumbai on July 08, 2017.

Plabita Borthakur is all smiles during a photo shoot, held at Intop Studio, Jogeshwari in Mumbai on July 08, 2017.

(L-R) Plabita Borthakur, Konkona Sen Sharma, Alankrita Shrivastava, Ratna Pathak Shah and Aahana Kumra during a photo shoot, held at Intop Studio, Jogeshwari in Mumbai on July 08, 2017.

Read more:
Alankrita Shrivastava: It's time to bid goodbye to censorship - Times of India

Startup of the week:

Who they are:IranCubator

What they do:Its atech incubator that producesapps focused on achieving social change in Iran, backed by Berkeley-based nonprofitUnited for Iran.

Why its cool:Launchedthree years ago, IranCubator matches activists with app developers to create technology that can change the lives of Iranian citizens. The program has launched a series of apps in recent months, including womens health appHamdam. Geared toward women who dont have access to sexual health resources women from conservative families or from rural areas, for example Hamdam provides information on sexually transmitted diseases and contraception, and also offers the only Persian menstruation calendar, according to United for Iran founder and executive director Firuzeh Mahmoudi. And Hamdam offers resources to help women who often arent granted the same legal protections as men answer questions on marriage law, divorce, employment and more.

Another IranCubator app,RadiTo, lets Iranians listen to news programs blocked by the government, such as BBC Persian, as well as audio books and talk shows. Thats crucial in a country that has a reputation as being one of the worlds most restrictive regimes when it comes to accessing information Reporters Without Borders this year ranked Iran 165th out of 180 countries initsWorld Press Freedom Index.

IranCubator also released an appcalled Haami thats geared toward Irans 2.2 million drug users offeringrecovery resources including Narcotics Anonymous information translated into Persian and a personal safety app calledToranjthat helps women defend against domestic violence.

To learn more visitUnited4Iran.org.

Where they stand:Womens health appHamdam, the incubators most popular app, has been downloaded more than 70,000 times since its launch in March.

Only in Silicon Valley:

Bummed out by shoes that dont fit?Iovadopromises to fix that problem by combining Silicon Valley technologywithItalian fashion. Customers use the companys app to take 10 pictures of their foot, which Iovado converts into a 3D model. That model is then sent to leather workers in Italy who use it to make a pair of handcrafted shoes built exactly to your specifications. The whole process costs 240 Euros, or about $274.

Iovado had raised almost $65,000 on Kickstarter as of Thursday, surpassing its goal of $22,678.

Run the numbers:

When considering whether to invest in a startup, venture capitalists question female founders differently than male founders, according to a recentstudypublished in the Harvard Business Review. Investors are more likely to ask men about their potential for gains, and women about their potential for losses, according to researchers from Columbia University and the University of Pennsylvania, who analyzed interactions between 140 VCs and 189 entrepreneurs at TechCrunch Disrupt New York.

Sixty-seven percent of questions posed to male founders had to do with promotion focusing on hopes, achievements, advancement and ideals, according to the study. On the other hand, 66 percent of questions asked of female founders had to do with prevention they focused on safety, responsibility, security and vigilance. For example, VCs were more likely to ask men how they will acquire new customers, and ask women how they will prevent current customers from leaving.

Those lines of questioning make a difference, the researchers argue. The male-led startups they studied raised five times more funding than those led by women.

Click here:

Following a string of female startup founders who have spoken out aboutsexual harassmentthey faced frommale investors, entrepreneur Perri Chase this week addressedthe more subtle nuances of the investor/founder relationship. In a blog post titled I had sex with an investor & I am sorry, Chase described a meeting over drinks with an angel investor she hoped would back her startup. Whenhe started hitting on her, Chase wrote, it became clear that he hadnt intended theinteraction to be a pitch meeting. She says she made a consensual choice to reciprocate his advances.

In all that has been emerging this week it dawned on me that I gave him permission to act this way, Chase wrote. My sleeping with him is actually part of the problem.

But its complicated, Chase wrote, adding that in a world where its common to meet investors over happy hour, the line between professional and social interactions can become blurred, and clarifying it needs to become a priority.

Read the rest here:
Early Stage: Apps to fight censorship, drug addiction and sexism in Iran - The Mercury News

Ive been storing a truckload of my deceased parents stuff. This summer, after several moves and even more years, I decided to go through it and make the hard decisions about getting rid of (at least) some of it.

In one box was a clear plastic bag with newspapers in it. Tribune-Stars, haphazardly folded, but with a similarity; they were the D section of the Sunday Trib containing my essays. My mother was saving my essays. Id discovered a treasure trove. Until 2007ish I didnt save my Tribune-Star essays, so these have been termed Moms archive and Ive been digitizing them and (re)publishing them on my personal blog.

Some of these previous essays beg for updating and that is what I am doing today, updating an essay published on Feb. 6, 2005, titled A reaction laced with hypocrisy. The essay was about a survey published by the Knight Foundation on the attitudes of high school students toward the First Amendment. Knight has recently published another survey and given the tensions surrounding the press, its role, journalists rights and fake news it seemed ready-made for an update.

Some of the high points of the survey findings from 2006 were that 70 percent of the surveyed high school students believed that newspapers should seek government approval before running their stories and that only a bit more than a third disagreed that the First Amendment went too far in the rights it guarantees. Those students would be today in their middle to late twenties and voting.

I wrote that this finding was a reason for concern. The Knight Foundation cited a lack of resources and extra-curricular opportunities to learn about the First Amendment such as school newspapers. I pointed to broader changes in schools and likened them to prisons as the lives of students were becoming increasingly regulated leaving less room for student agency.

The hypocrisy referred to in the title had to do with this finding: Fifty-eight percent of students agreed that high schools should be allowed to report on controversial issues in their student newspapers without approval of school authorities. But only 39 percent of teachers did and less than a quarter of principals did.

In 2016, 56 percent of students disagreed that the First Amendment went too far in the rights it guarantees. For the teachers, it was 75 percent who disagreed with that statement. As to newspapers seeking government approval before running their stories, 61 percent of students and 73 percent of teachers agreed. Seems contradictory.

Ninety-one percent of students agreed that people should be able to express unpopular opinions. And those who more frequently consume news and actively engage with news through social media demonstrate stronger support for First Amendment freedoms. Unfortunately, the report does not include data on how many students regularly consumed and engaged with news sources. Based on my experience with my students, I would guess the proportion to be small. Of those who said they engaged often the smartphone was their overwhelming source for their news.

The study asked students and teachers about online news providers right to publish stories without government censorship. Seventy-three percent of teachers and 60 percent of students were supportive of that right, echoing somewhat the proportions responding to whether newspapers should seek government approval before running their stories. To me, this is concerning, especially now that the President of the United States is attempting to discredit the press.

Is there a difference in levels of trust for different media between students and their teachers? The highest trust for both students (83 percent) and teachers (91 percent) is news printed in newspapers. The trust placed on the information in newspapers was similar to information from friends and family. The lowest trust for both students (49 percent) and teachers (34 percent) was in social media. This was also the biggest gap between students and teachers.

The hypocrisy remains, however. Sixty-three percent of students believe high school students should be able to report on controversial issues in their student newspapers without the approval of school authorities. Only 37 percent of teachers agreed. Those numbers havent changed much since 2006.

In an age of high levels of distrust in government, to suggest censorship is an answer to an overreach of press freedom or for it to monitor offensive content seems strange. Three-quarters of teachers and almost 60 percent of students unquestioningly support the First Amendment. Why not look to the market as the answer? Dont like a source, dont read it.

Thomas L. Steiger is a professor of sociology and director of the Center for Student Research and Creativity at Indiana State University. Email: thomas.steiger@indstate.edu.

Here is the original post:
Tom Steiger: A strange attitude concerning press censorship - Terre Haute Tribune Star

Bibliophiles in Iran, clear your weekend: The huge Book Garden center just opened in Tehran.

Officialsunveiled the Book Garden, a giant academic complex on Wednesday. Atroughly 65,000 square meters (about 700,000 square feet), the center has several movie theaters, science halls, classrooms, a restaurant, a prayer room and whole a lot of literature. On its roof is a green park area for reading.

Related: Iran: Donald Trump cartoon contest mocks president as money-obsessed Nazi

Daily Emails and Alerts - Get the best of Newsweek delivered to your inbox

All in all, the center aims to encourage Iranian children to be "active and creative through modern methods and equipment," as the Mehr News Agency reported Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani said earlier this week."The opening of the Book Garden is a big cultural event in the country, so that our children can make better use of this cultural and academic opportunity," Tehran Mayor Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf added.

It was a long time coming. The idea for the Book Garden was first pitched in 2004 as a way to cater to fans of the city's annual International Book Fair year-round. Construction on the center wrapped up last spring, and organizers spent the past few months stocking it with books. More than 400,000 titles areavailableforkids alone.One part of the center even has shorter shelves so youth can reach books better.

Iran has censored its literature for years, making publishers submit their books to the government so it can check for inappropriate content before publication. As such, a number of works have been banned, among them Dan Brown'sThe Da Vinci Code, James Joyce's Ulyssesand Tracy Chevalier'sGirl With a Pearl Earring. In addition, authors have been asked to avoid using termslike kiss,wine,drunk,dogand dance,according to The Guardian.

"Those responsible in the book industry should not let harmful books enter our book market on the basis that we let [readers] choose [what they want to read],"Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said in 2011. "Like poisonous, dangerous and addictive drugs which are not available for everyone without restrictionsas a publisher, librarian or an official in the book industry, we don't have the right to make [such books] available to those without knowledge."

There are some indications the policies have recently relaxed under PresidentHassan Rouhani, but some books are still on the blacklist, according to the Financial Times. Others are being sold underground.

The Book Garden may increase availability, but whether it was officially the largest bookshop wasn't immediately clear.

According to the Guinness World Recordsteam, the biggest individual bookstore since 1999 has been the Barnes & Noble along Fifth Avenue in New York City. It's about 154,000 square feet and includes more than 12 miles of shelves.

More here:
Huge Bookstore, Tehran's Book Garden, Opens in Iran Despite Government Censorship - Newsweek

(Last Updated On: July 8, 2017)

This was an action-packed week of nonstop drama. There was the resurfacing of a 2016 VidCon video featuring Anita Sarkeesian revealing that criticism does not equal harassment. There was a comic book aimed toward the progressive crowd that ended up getting censored because SJWs complained that it was too graphic, and CNN decided to blackmail a Reddit user for posting a meme featuring Donald Trump beating the crap out of CNN WWE style. These stories and more in this drama-filled, July 8th, 2017 edition of the Weekly Recap.

VidCon Reveals Anita Lied

So Anita Sarkeesian claimed in her blog post that Sargon and the other YouTubers harassed her just by making videos. This was in response to the VidCon 2017 incident where Sarkeesian called Sargon a Garbage Human. Well, it turns out that in a VidCon 2016 panel, Sarkeesian claimed that simply making videos criticizing someone isnt actually harassment. Busted. An awesome new game called Fight Knight is in the works featuring medieval combat in a first-person environment that works as a dungeon crawler. Explaining the game is tough but you have to check out Fight Knight because its awesome. And Mass Effect: Andromedas single-player DLC is still on hiatus, and it doesnt look like the DLC will be releasing anytime soon, if ever.

SJWs Get Comic Book Cover Censored

Social Justice Warriors caught wind of a comic book cover depicting a Pakistani mad mutilated and lynched over a sign. They attacked the artist, the comic book and the comic book company, claiming that the art was disgusting and despicable. The company, Image Comics, capitulated to the outcry whims and whines of the Social Justice Warrior community, and censored their comic book after apologizing. The Jak and Daxter collection is set to arrive on the PlayStation 4 sometime soon, likely in August or September. Red Dead Redemption is currently playable on the RPCS3 emulator, which is making great headway in making PS3 games playable on PC. Criminal Girls was banned in New Zealand for justifying and normalizing rape. Weve got a review up of Micro Machines World Series. And it doesnt look like Call of Duty: WW2 is coming to the Nintendo Switch.

CNN Blackmails Kid To Keep Silent

CNN has reached an all new low by blackmailing a 15-year-old into apologizing and staying silent. The situation has escalated to national levels, with CNN coming under fire from everyone, including a U.S., Congressman who has argued that they have crossed a line in blackmailing a U.S., citizen to stay silent. On a lighter note, theres an updated sex mod for Rimworld that adds monster girls to the game. Real tasty treat for weaboos. YouTube, Facebook and other social media sites will be fined nearly $60 million if they dont censor hate speech within 24 hours. Nearly half of all Steam users are rocking 1080p monitors, and less than 1% of Steam users have a VR headset. And speaking of VR not all VR-ready GPUs are actually VR ready.

Engadget Defends CNNs Blackmailing Attempt

Engadget has taken to defending unethical journalism by claiming that CNN did nothing wrong by blackmailing a Reddit user and threatening to dox him if he didnt stop trolling and posting memes of President Donald Trump beating the ever-living-crap out of CNN. Microsoft will be implementing the option to gift games to friends soon through the Xbox Store, but they dont say when just that the feature is not far off. Laytons Mystery Journey was recently announced for mobile devices and the Nintendo 3DS, and it features Professor Laytons daughter Katrielle. The PlayStation Experience is set to take place this year in Southeast Asia in August, and Firefall has officially shut down this week.

See the rest here:
Weekly Recap July 8th: CNN Blackmail, More VidCon Drama, SJW Comic Censorship - One Angry Gamer (blog)

If youve made a habit of either watching Fox News Tucker Carlson Tonight or following the anti-abortion groups that frequently appear on the program, then youve heard allegations that these organizations and the anti-choice misinformation they spread are being censored by any number of media platforms.

Most recently, Lila Rose, founder of the anti-abortion group Live Action, appeared on the June 26 edition of Tucker Carlson Tonight and claimed that Twitter was censoring Live Actions ads. Beyond alleging that Twitter was biased against the anti-abortion group, Rose also conveniently mentioned that Live Action had a $40,000 fundraising goal to meet within the week. Mere hours after Roses appearance, Live Actions homepage carried alarge addecrying Twitters censorship and begging for donations to meet the fundraising deadline. By June 30, the organization had reached its fundraising goal and wasaskingsupporters to continue donating in order to guarantee it could continue working to expose the abortion industry.

Rose is merely the latest person in a long list of anti-abortion extremists to baselessly allege censorship as a tactic in order to raise support and rile up right-wing media allies. When viewed as part of a larger pattern of behavior, it becomes clear that for these anti-abortion groups, crying censorshipto any perceived slight functions as a strategy to gain attention and support for their anti-choice misinformation.

Live Action ads and Twitter

During her June 26appearanceon Tucker Carlson Tonight, Rose claimed that Twitter was refusing to promote ads from either her or Live Actions Twitter accounts. Rose alleged that a Twitter bot had been telling them for months, that this is banned, we wont let you put this out. According to Rose, It took over a year for us to finally get from Twitter whats wrong with these tweets. and finally they said that any tweet that shows an ultrasound, that shows a prenatal life and affirms it, that exposes Planned Parenthood, violates the hate and sensitive policy. Carlson echoed Roses allegations and called Twitters policy an atrocity.

In a blog post, Live Actionpointedto Twitters advertising policies against inflammatory content andalleged that Twitter told them to delete tweets calling for the end of taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood, tweets of our undercover investigations into Planned Parenthood, and tweets including ultrasound images of fetuses. Live Action includedemailsfrom Twitter support staff in the blog post, in which a Twitter representative citedtweets mentioninginfanticideand anotherincluding abirth videoas examples of content that violatedthe platforms sensitive advertising content policy.

The hate and sensitive policy Rose cited is in actuality the platformsad policyon hate content, sensitive topics, and violence. In a statement to Carlson, the social media platformsaid, Twitter has clear, transparent rules that every advertiser is required to follow, and the political viewpoints of an organization do not impact how these rules are applied. Twitters hate content policy also covershate speech or advocacy; violence or threats of violence against people or animals; glorification of self-harm or related content; organizations associated with promoting hate; and offensive, vulgar, abusive or obscene content.

Despite this, Live Actionhas continued to assert that Twitter is playing politics,citinga few tweets by Planned Parenthood to demonstrate the perceived imbalance. These Planned Parenthood tweets mention extremists and talk about Trump defunding the non-profit but without pointing an accusatory finger at a specific group. Many of Live Actions tweets which Twitter did not accept as ads target Planned Parenthood specifically.

Letsnot forgot Live Action is still free to tweet and keep such content on its Twitter account, as Roseclarifiedduring an interview onEWTN News Nightly. The content merely does not meet clear and non-ideological standards for promotion or sponsorship, as dictated by Twitters easily locatedadvertising policies.

Given these facts, it appears that Roses appearance on Tucker Carlson Tonight and claims of censorship werepart of a fundraising strategy for Live Action. As RosetoldCarlson, Were actually doing a campaign right now to get people to fund Live Action and to get out the information that Twitter is trying to block using other platforms using Facebook, using YouTube, using the blogosphere, obviously coming on here and talking with you.

After Roses June 26 appearance, Live Action sent afundraisingemailabout the segment, claiming that Live Action is being suppressed and asking supporters to help us strengthen our efforts against the abortion industry. Live Actions censorship allegations also animated other right-wing media outlets.The Washington Timespromoteditsfundraising appeal, stating, Looking to take their business elsewhere, Live Action started a campaign to raise money to inundate other social media platforms with the pro-life message. On June 29, Christian Broadcasting Network published an article on Live Actions claims about Twitters ad policy, at the end of which itstatedthat Live Action has launched a campaign to compensate for their losses due to Twitters censoring, and directed readers to Live Actions fundraising page.RoseandLive ActionalsopushedthenarrativeonTwitter, using the hashtag #DontDeleteMe despite all content remainingpubliclyavailable on the platform.

Center for Medical Progress videos

In May 2017, the anti-abortion group Center for Medical Progress (CMP)circulateddeceptive video footage that had been barred from release by a federal judge. The videoquickly spreadthrough social media accounts of anti-abortion leaders and groups before Judge William Orrick ordered all copies of the video be taken down as there was aheightened concernfor the safety of abortion providers identified in the footage.

As copiesof the video were removed following Orricks order, anti-choice activists claimedcensorship had occurred and pointed a finger at almost every social media platform as potential culprits. During a May 31appearanceon Fox News Tucker Carlson Tonight, Rose accused both YouTube and Twitter of participating in the chilling effect right now on journalism that is the opposing viewpoint on abortion by complying with the court order to remove the video. Live Action alsoclaimedthat YouTube had caved to the abortion industrys censorship pressure while LifeSiteNewsarguedthat video hosting websites such as Facebook, YouTube, and Vimeo were on a witch hunt against the latest undercover Planned Parenthood video, deleting instances of it wherever they find it.

The anti-abortion group Susan B. Anthony ListaccusedYouTube of partnering with Planned Parenthood to cover up the truth that #PPSellsBabyParts a common social media hashtag among staunch anti-choice activists. Liz Wheeler of right-wing news outlet One America News Network (OANN) took personal offense when YouTube removed a clip of her show, Tipping Point, in which she played some of the barred footage. In a follow-up clip, amusinglyavailable on OANNs YouTube channel, Wheeler said YouTube was trying to silence me and asked, What are liberals so afraid people will see that theyll censor me to ensure nobody sees [footage from the barred video].

Although anti-choice groups and right-wing media outlets alike cried censorshipwhen various platforms removed the video, the fact remains that itwas legally barred from release giving these platforms little choice even if they agreed with CMPs highlydiscreditedclaims. Undeterred, these groups and outlets evenextendedtheir criticisms to attack Orrick andattemptedto have him removed from CMPs case an effort that another federal judge ultimatelydismissedas lacking merit.Despite claiming the video was being censored, anti-choice groups still (somehow!)continuedto re-post andspreadthe video across the internet after Orricks order.

Operation Rescues Google ranking

The extremistanti-choice groupOperation Rescueclaimedthat Google was engaged in censorship after its page views decreased for when internet users searched forabortions in US orabortion statistics. The group alleged that Googles search engine has manipulated search parameters to dramatically reduce exposure to Operation Rescues webpages containing misleading abortion statistics.

In April, Googleannounceda policy change regarding how sites containing misleading or false information would be ranked. If Google is censoring anti-abortion pages as Operation Rescue argued it isnot doing a great job with it. Although the page rankings fluctuate,search results for abortions in US and abortion statistic still yield anti-choice sites, includingFox News, National Right to Life Committee, abortion73, and American Life League.

By alleging it wasbeing censored, Operation Rescue effectively sounded the alarm for other anti-abortion groups to use their own rankings on Googles search results to claim discrimination and promote their content. Within a day of OperationRescues initial post, similar stories were running onLifeNewsand the right-wing outletOneNewsNow. Operation Rescue also sent a fundraisingemailasking for support to launch a massive campaign to ensure our critical abortion research and pro-life content is available, and no longer pushed down by the pro-abortion radicals at Google.

March for Life coverage

Every January, anti-abortion groups andmediaoutletsallegethatmainstreammedia are censoring their protest, called the March for Life, againsttheRoe v. Wadedecision. The supposed lack of coverage has galled anti-abortion groups to such an extent that they started anumbrella groupcalled Alliance for Fair Coverage of Life Issues, which primarily focuses on the March for Life Media Censorship. Many members of the group havecomplainedabout the media blackout of the March for Life on major media platforms. Rep. Alex Mooney R-W.Va., who is one of the two politicians in the Alliance, stated, The liberal medias consistent censorship of the annual March for Life is nothing short of shameful.

However, as some right-wing media outlets have themselves suggested, describing coverage of the March for Life as suffering from consistent censorship is inaccurate.After the most recent March for Life, the extreme right-wing outlet Church Militantpraisedthe media because the 2017 March for Life is receiving more media coverage than ever. Church Militant pointed out thatC-SPANandCNNlivestreamed the march, whileNPRfeatured stories from attendees. In addition,The New York Times,The Washington Post, andABC Newsall ran stories about the march.

The March for Life also benefited from the attention garnered by the Womens March in January 2017. Several anti-abortion groups and individuals tried toco-optthe message of the Womens March to push a so-called feminist anti-choice message. The Womens March ultimatelyadopteda pro-choice message, but the anti-abortion groups stillgainedsubstantialmediacoveragefrombeingsupposedlybannedfrom being sponsors ofthe Womens March.

Anti-abortion messages at schools

In March,anti-choicegroupsandmediaoutletsbegan crying censorship when anti-abortion chalk messages scrawled by a chapter of Students for Life of America (SFLA) were scrubbed from sidewalks at Kutztown University in Pennsylvania. Thehate groupAlliance Defending Freedom (ADF) came to SFLAs defensedeclaring, University officials cant chalk up their censorship to following orders to enforce an unconstitutional campus policy on sidewalk chalking. SFLA President Kristan Hawkinsagreed, saying, Too frequently we see that public colleges and universities feel they can engage in censorship of a student group just because officials dont agree with the viewpoint of those students.

In reality, the messages had beenremovedovernight during a regular cleaning process, and had nothing to do with the content of the chalking.

Hawkins also usedTucker Carlson Tonights right-wing platform toraiseanother issue of censorship in schools. During the June 2 appearance on the show, Hawkins supported a high school student whoclaimedher school had denied her permission to form a SFLA chapterbecause it was too controversial. According to school officials, the studentssimplydidnt followthe requirements for club formation and would be approved once they did.

Buffer zones

In 2014, ADF successfully arguedMcCullen v. Coakleybefore the Supreme Court,striking downa Massachusetts buffer zone law that banned anti-choice protestors inside a 35-feet parameter around abortion clinics. ADFclaimedthat this buffer zone in which anti-abortion extremists were not allowed to protest created a censorship zone where the First Amendment doesnt apply. Equating buffer zones with censorship has been a common tactic of anti-choice groups when challenging laws that mandate them. For example, ADF alsousedthe censorship zone argument when arguing against a Pittsburghordinance. Similarly, the anti-abortion group Created EqualclaimedOhios 15-feet buffer zone constituted a censorship zone that infringed on its right to protest outside abortion clinics.

Despite censorshipclaims from anti-abortion groups, buffer zones are essential for abortion access and to deter threats of violence against patients, providers, and clinics. The Massachusetts ordinance that was struck down inMcCullen v. Coakleywasoriginally introducedbecause of a 1994 shooting at a Brookline, MA clinic that killed two people. While anti-abortion protesters complain about the ability to spout their hateful rhetoric,violenceat abortion clinics has not only continued but increased in recent years; in 2015, ashootingat a Colorado Planned Parenthood clinic killed three people and injured nine more. Data from the National Abortion Federation (NAF)showsthat protests outside abortion clinics rose in 2016 to the highest level since NAF began tracking them in 1977. There wasalsoan increase in a wide range of intimidation tactics meant to disrupt the provision of health care at facilities, including vandalism, picketing, obstruction, invasion, trespassing, burglary, stalking, assault and battery, and bomb threats.

As recent cases in Kentucky and Missouri have shown, someanti-choicegroupsintentionally harass abortion providers or engage in civil disobedience outside clinics. When these groups face backlash or legal pushback, they invokecensorshipas a tactic in order to continue their campaigns of harassment.

Crying censorship: An anti-choice tactic

These examples are wide-ranging, reaching from social media platforms, to news coverage, to sidewalk access, but the common thread and indeed, the underlying tactic at play is anti-abortion groups labeling a perceived injustice against them as censorship.These groups have much to gain and very little to lose by employing this tactic. By claiming theyve been unjustly censored, anti-abortion groups not only elevate their lies and misinformation, they are also able to incite followers and raise funds by claiming they are being persecuted.

Crying censorship is a win-win tactic for anti-abortion extremists. Meanwhile, clinic intimidation andviolencecontinues to rise asright-wing mediaagitate their increasingly polarized base to support anti-abortion causes,and an increasing number oflawsare being implemented to limit abortion rights. Anti-choice organizations also have thebenefitof PresidentDonald Trumpsadministrationbeing filled withanti-choiceextremistsalreadyon arampageagainstabortionandcontraception access.

But please, thoughyou have an overtlyanti-choice administration that relies on a direct pipeline of information from anti-abortion extremists, continue to feign outrage about being unable to place ads on Twitter.

Read more:
How anti-choice zealots cry censorship whenever they are challenged - Salon

CNN is still licking their wounds after a rather disastrous couple of weeks, where a shoddy Russia-Trump story led to three staffers resigning, a Project Veritas investigation exposed that the network's producers peddled the Russia story for ratings, and what came off as a wholly inappropriate veiled threat against an anonymous Reddit user who created a Trump WWE video, which the president tweeted before the Fourth of July Holiday. The video shows Trump beating up WWEs Vince McMahon, whose face has been superimposed with the CNN logo. The media went apoplectic as an attack against the press; it wasnt. This spurred the network's reporters to find the user and pretty much threaten to dox him if he continues to post things CNN doesnt like. Yet, before we get to that, lets revisit the Russia-Trump story that had to be retracted, along with The Intercepts Glenn Greenwald torching the media for their repeated trip ups in covering this story.

Three prominent CNN journalists resigned Monday night after the network was forced to retract and apologize for a story linking Trump ally Anthony Scaramucci to a Russian investment fund under congressional investigation. That article like so much Russia reporting from the U.S. media was based on a single anonymous source, and now, the network cannot vouch for the accuracy of its central claims.

[]

Several factors compound CNNs embarrassment here. To begin with, CNNs story was first debunked by an article in Sputnik News, which explained that the investment fund documented several factual inaccuracies in the report (including that the fund is not even part of the Russian bank, Vnesheconombank, that is under investigation), and by Breitbart, which cited numerous other factual inaccuracies.

And this episode follows an embarrassing correction CNN was forced to issue earlier this month when several of its highest-profile on-air personalities asserted based on anonymous sources that James Comey, in his congressional testimony, was going to deny Trumps claim that the FBI director assured him he was not the target of any investigation.

Greenwald then lays into other outlets for peddling shoddy stories, like the Russian hacking into the Vermont power grid, the piece about an anonymous group identifying sites that peddled disinformation stories planted by Russia, the server in Trump Tower thats used to communicate with a Russian bank, and the claim that Wikileaks Julian Assange and Vladimir Putin are best friendsall of which fell apart. Yet, the media wonders why conservatives are using them for punching bags; its because theyre on a witch-hunt against this president. Not only that, theyre sucking at it. It only gives the Trump administration more ammunition and more for his supporters to relish when he delivers an uppercut to the liberal news media, who for months could not contain their outrage that he beat her majesty, Hillary Rodham Clinton. He noted that no one is perfect, and that we all make mistakes. Townhall (and by Townhall, I mean myselfmea culpa) posted about the Vermont grid story, albeit a short blurb that really didnt go into a deep dive, but it was not correct and we added a correction. At the same time, were not in the same mold as other outlets concerning the Russian threat. To this day, there is zero evidence that Trump campaign officials colluded with the Russians to tilt the election.

What is most notable about these episodes is that they all go in the same direction: hyping and exaggerating the threat posed by the Kremlin. All media outlets will make mistakes; that is to be expected. But when all of the mistakes are devoted to the same rhetorical theme, and when they all end up advancing the same narrative goal, it seems clear that they are not the byproduct of mere garden-variety journalistic mistakes.

[]

The importance of this journalistic malfeasance when it comes to Russia, a nuclear-armed power, cannot be overstated. This is the story that has dominated U.S. politics for more than a year. Ratcheting up tensions between these two historically hostile powers is incredibly inflammatory and dangerous. All kinds of claims, no matter how little evidence there is to support them, have flooded U.S. political discourse and have been treated as proven fact.

And thats all independent of how journalistic recklessness fuels, and gives credence to, the Trump administrations campaign to discredit journalism generally.

That story was posted on June 27. It took less than a week for CNN to get another face full of buckshot when they decided to search for the Reddit user that created the video of Trump beating up CNN right before the Fourth of July holiday. The user is not someone to be defended aggressively. Hes admitted to posting racist and anti-Semitic material on the site. Hes apologized, but heres where things got controversial [emphasis mine]:

CNN is not publishing "HanA**holeSolo's" name because he is a private citizen who has issued an extensive statement of apology, showed his remorse by saying he has taken down all his offending posts, and because he said he is not going to repeat this ugly behavior on social media again. In addition, he said his statement could serve as an example to others not to do the same.

CNN reserves the right to publish his identity should any of that change.

And of course, Greenwald had a response:

There is something self-evidently creepy, bullying, and heavy-handed about a large news organization publicly announcing that it will expose someones identity if he ever again publishes content on the internet that the network deems inappropriate or objectionable. Whether it was CNNs intent or not, the article makes it appear as if CNN will be monitoring this citizens online writing, and will punish him with exposure if he writes something the network dislikes.

[]

Moreover, if this persons name is newsworthy on the ground that racists or others who post inflammatory content should be publicly exposed and vilified does it matter if he expressed what CNN executives regard as sufficient remorse? And if his name is not newsworthy, then why should CNN be threatening to reveal it in the event that he makes future utterances that the network dislikes?

If youre someone who believes that media corporations should expose the identity even of random, anonymous internet users who express anti-Semitic or racist views, then you should be prepared to identify the full list of views that merit similar treatment. Should anyone who supports Trump have their identity exposed? Those who oppose marriage equality? Those with views deemed sexist? Those who advocate communism? Are you comfortable with having corporate media executives decide which views merit public exposure?

Whatever else is true, CNN is a massive media corporation that is owned by an even larger corporation. It has virtually unlimited resources. We should cheer when those resources are brought to bear to investigate those who exercise great political and economic power. But when they are used to threaten and punish a random, obscure citizen who has criticized the network no matter how objectionable his views might be it resembles corporate bullying and creepy censorship more than actual journalism.

The point with all of this is that its not just conservative media that are complaining about CNN and others tripping up. Greenwald is no fan of Donald Trump, conservatives, or our intelligence community - specifically the CIA - but hes also known for keeping both sides honest. In February, he criticized the media for forgetting that the Obama administration was heavy handed with the press, especially when it came to whistleblowers. He also said what the Deep State is doing to the Trump White House by intentionally leaking highly sensitive information is a prescription for the destruction of democracy."

The Intercept is a site where leakers to come forward with information that exposes government corruption or malfeasance. Its the safe space for leakers, but its another thing to leak classified material in the hopes of hamstringing an administration from governing because youre upset about an election result. Earlier this year, he told Amy Goodman of the left wing Democracy Now that the actions of the Deep State are akin to a soft coup as well:

Even if youre somebody who believes that both the CIA and the deep state, on the one hand, and the Trump presidency, on the other, are extremely dangerous, as I do, theres a huge difference between the two, which is that Trump was democratically elected and is subject to democratic controls, as these courts just demonstrated and as the media is showing, as citizens are proving. But on the other hand, the CIA was elected by nobody. Theyre barely subject to democratic controls at all. And so, to urge that the CIA and the intelligence community empower itself to undermine the elected branches of government is insanity. That is a prescription for destroying democracy overnight in the name of saving it.

Vox Media, which isnt a right wing rag either, also were appalled by CNNs apparent threat are highly unethical:

A plain reading of CNNs article, however, contradicts what the network and Kaczynski are saying. If CNN really intended to withhold HanA**holeSolos information regardless of what he did, then why didnt the news organization say it was withholding his private information simply because hes a private citizen? Why did it go on to add all the conditions about his behavior? And why did it say it could release the private information with an explicit condition tied to his behavior?

Personally, if I reported this story, it would have been pretty straightforward: CNN is not publishing HanA**holeSolos name because he is a private citizen. Period. The rest of the information in that paragraph is unnecessary, because a media organization simply shouldnt release a private citizens personal information. He shouldnt have his private information threatened just because the president picked up one of his Reddit sh**posts, which he made with the expectation that he would be kept anonymous. (Though it is a truly bizarre turn of events that its even possible to write this sentence.)

In journalism, there is a clear line between public and private figures. Public figures are held to a higher standard since they represent not just themselves but their offices, their industries, and so on. But private figures are given a veil of privacy, since its not really in the public interest to get some random persons private information.

The month isnt over yet; CNN could step on the rake once more. Stay tuned.

View original post here:
Glenn Greenwald: CNN Engaged In 'Corporate Bullying And Creepy Censorship' On Pro-Trump Reddit Story - Townhall