Category Archives: Censorship

Newspaper headline posters display the main headlines for the Zimbabwean daily newspapers. (Photo: EPA-EFE/AARON UFUMELI)

On 14 April ZBC News online, the official Twitter page of Zimbabwes only TV station, posted a video of President Emmerson Mnangagwa saying that he was aware of a false statement on social media saying he would be extending lockdown until 3 May. He said he would ask the Central Intelligence Office (CIO) to investigate it and that if the person responsible was caught they should get at least 20 years imprisonment for spreading falsehoods.

An example needs to be made, the President said.

The CIO operates under the Office of the President. Many of Zimbabwes abductions, extrajudicial murders and enforced disappearances are said to be committed by the CIO. The head (minister) of State Security which oversees the CIO, Owen Mudha Ncube, was recently added to the US sanctions list for Human Rights violations. Emmerson Mnangagwa himself was the minister responsible for the CIO during the Gukurahundi genocide that left 20,000 civilians dead in Matebeleland.

Hearing the president take the trouble to publicly threaten whoever wrote the statement with CIOs was unsettling. We all feared the worst not just for whoever the president was threatening but also for ourselves.

However, on Sunday 21 April, what was meant to be the last day of the lockdown, the president announced that he was extending it until 3 May 2020, just as the allegedly fake statement had said. This gave rise to several questions and suspicions. Had the statement truly been fake or was the president a victim of a leak from his office? Many wondered what the alleged falsehood mongerer would be charged with if found, now that the president had announced exactly what the statement had said he had decided.

Was this fake news after all and, will the fake news charge stick? people asked.

On 20 April the Zimbabwe Republic Police (ZRP) tweeted that they had arrested Lovemore Zvokusekwa for Publishing or communicating false statements prejudicial to the state as defined in section 31 (a) (i) of the Criminal law (Codification and reform) act Chapter 9:23.

As the president had stated in the video this crime attracts 20 years in jail and because the president had vowed to make an example of this case, there was an outcry from the public. Some questioned the word circulating in the charge.

Did Zvokusekwa produce the letter or had he just circulated it as hundreds of other Zimbabweans had when the letter fell into their inboxes and on their timelines?

Were they going to find and arrest everyone who had forwarded the letter?

Some argued that the law Zvokusekwa was being charged with had long since been ruled to be unconstitutional by the constitutional court in the case of Chimakure vs the Attorney General, rendering the arrest and charge an illegality and an abuse of Zvekusekwas rights. Some simply asked was it fake news that the lockdown had been extended when the president had in fact extended it?

All these questions did not stop the state from dragging Zvekusekwa before a magistrate on 20 April and remanding him in custody until 13 May a total of 23 days.

Something to be laughed at

The case of Zvokusekwa, whose surname in Shona ironically means something to be laughed at, illustrates a dangerous trend seen elsewhere. Covid-19 has provided an excuse to authoritarians to ramp up the stifling of dissent. The destination of choice has been attacks of freedom of expression and the media.

In Zimbabwe, starting with the case of the late Zororo Makamba, the first person to test positive in the country, the government has been accused of manipulating information on the true status of infections and its response to it. The digital or social media space has been the go-to alternative for a country hungry for information. It has also been a revolutionary space for government criticism, exposure of corruption and other excesses and demands for accountability. That, it seems, is the space the government has its eyes on.

But it faces a dilemma.

The government itself needs the digital media space for its own propaganda. The national broadcaster, ZBC, maintains a Twitter handle which it actively uses to churn out propaganda. On the page they post stories about everything the president does as well as stories highlighting the generosity and benevolence of the president and the first lady.

For years the Zimbabwean government has used twin devilish and draconian pieces of legislation to stifle political activity and dissent and public criticism: the Public Order and Security Act (Posa) and the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA).

The former, in requiring police permission for public gatherings, has been used to stop opposition from holding its rallies, while the latter has been used to intimidate and prevent journalists from doing their work. When he tried to show potential Western investors that he and his government were different from the late former president Robert Mugabe, Mnangagwa promised to repeal the two laws. Replacement drafts have been tabled but are no different. Meanwhile, Posa was used in August 2019 to stop opposition protests.

Code for repression

It is now clear that while all attention has been focused on Posa and AIPPA, the real devil is in the Criminal Code used to arrest Zvokusekwa which is equally draconian but carries far more severe penalties.

The obvious glee by the president in announcing to a nervous nation his eagerness to set his dreaded CIO on a citizen and then send that citizen to jail for spreading falsehoods demonstrates the importance of this piece of legislation in the repression toolbox of the regime. The governments intention to use the Criminal Code to turn up its autocratic volume during the lockdown was exposed by the Permanent Secretary of Information hours before the publication of the regulations establishing the lockdown, when he threatened that people would soon see themselves in jail for spreading falsehoods.

The Covid-19 statutory instrument did not disappoint, importing verbatim the entire provisions of the code related to criminalising the publication of falsehoods. What seemed lost to the government, which does not seem to respect its own laws, let alone its own courts, is that this entire provision of the Criminal Code was struck down by the constitutional court in the Chimakure case six years ago. The Minister of Justice cited in the case at the time was none other than Emmerson Mnangagwa, now president. Nothing demonstrates the levels of lawlessness and lack of accountability more than this. This is clearly a government that does not consider itself bound by anything or accountable to anyone.

War on digital democracy

It is clear that digital or social media will continue to be a new battleground for repression in Zimbabwe.

In the wake of Covid-19, the disastrous policy failures in the governments response have been accompanied by allegations of shocking levels of procurement-related grand corruption and abuse of Covid-19 aid. Last week it was reported that a company run by (the presidents son) Collins Mnangagwas business partner, Delish Nguwaya, was awarded a $60-million contract to deliver pharmaceuticals related to Covid-19. The story was broken in digital media.

The Minister of Finance announced a programme to provide livelihood support via cash transfers to vulnerable households. The contract to disburse this money was awarded to a telecoms company closely linked to the political elite.

To make matters worse, the process to determine who is eligible for the government funding remains clouded in mystery. The only explanation the Minister of Finance gave was that they used a complex algorithm to select beneficiaries. With such opaque explanations and poor accountability, it is clear that even this money is likely to have been looted. In Covid-19 the government has found a new golden goose for its voraciously corrupt appetite.

In all this, the digital and social media space stands fast in ensuring that these scandals come to light, that the president is called to answer for his videos threatening citizens, the Minister of Health is asked to explain his policies and reports on Covid-19 and the Minister of Finance is asked to justify how government money is spent.

The power of digital and social media to counter state propaganda was also witnessed last week when the secretary of information posted this tweet:

We received 65 Zimbabweans from the UK. Available place of quarantine is Belvedere Teachers College. They are refusing this accommodation demanding hotels. Govt cant afford. Why come from a Covid-19 hotspot during a lockdown & demand posh facilities at stretched public cost?

The returnees managed to expose the government lying by posting videos from the college where they were quarantined showing that the reason why they were asking to be moved to a better place was that there was no running water and more than 20 people were sharing just two toilets. The plan to deceive the public about why the returnees were rejecting the quarantine facility backfired terribly. The videos, by default, also served to expose the dire conditions under which students at the teachers college have been living in for years.

With a crumbling and discredited state media enterprise, the government needs the digital space. It will continue to need it for its propaganda, for PR exercises for the president and first lady and for Covid-19. But, with its tendency to capture and monopolise everything, it has yet to find a formula to control the digital media space beyond unconstitutionally switching off the internet. It has also yet to find a legal way to stop Zimbabweans from sharing information that exposes its failures besides provisions of the Criminal Code struck down by the constitutional court but brazenly used to detain a civilian for almost one month.

In all this, it remains clear that if ever the falsehoods law was constitutional and anyone needed to be jailed, it would be the government and its litany of propagandists. It also highlights that in crying only for Posa and AIPPA to be repealed, citizens have ignored a greater danger the devil is in the Criminal Code.

It is unacceptable that the president of Zimbabwe, who himself has never spent a single day in custody for any of his crimes from genocide to looting minerals in the DRC and running down Zanu-PF companies as alleged by Mugabes administration before the coup can arrest and threaten a man with 20 years in prison for circulating fake news that turned out to be true. DM/MC

Thandekile Moyo is a writer and human rights defender from Zimbabwe. For the past four years, she has been using print, digital and social media (Twitter: @mamoxn) to expose human rights abuses, bad governance and corruption. Moyo holds an Honours degree in Geography and Environmental Studies from the Midlands State University in Zimbabwe.

Please note you must be a Maverick Insider to comment. Sign up here or if you are already an Insider.

Continue reading here:
Censorship in Zimbabwe: When fake news is true and official news is fake - Daily Maverick

In the early days of the coronavirus outbreak, President Trump referred to the virus as the China virus and the Chinese virus. But in a press briefing on March 18, the president got pushback from the media. A reporter asked why he was calling it the "Chinese virus" when there were reports of bias against Chinese Americans.

Trumps immediate response (because it comes from China), as well as his references to Chinas conspiracy theory implicating the U.S. military, made everything clear. But in the days following, he changed his wording to COVID, COVID-19, the virus, and sometimes plague.

So what about Taiwan? I ask this question because the small, vibrant democracy is effectively independent of China yet mostly Chinese in ethnicity. Not surprisingly, Taiwanese people would also have a problem with the term Chinese virus. Instead, government officials have long been using Wuhan virus and Wuhan coronavirus interchangeably with more general names. They are also reminding the world where the virus started.

Dr. Alexander Chieh-cheng Huang is a professor and former deputy minister of the Taiwanese governments Mainland Affairs Council. He also served as a senior consultant at Taiwans representative office in Washington. When I asked his thoughts on the virus language, Huang noted its political nature.

I guess everyone knows well that using Wuhan matches the anti-China public sentiments stirred up since 2019, when Beijings image in Taiwan had drastically deteriorated due to Xi Jinpings one country, two systems statement and the anti-extradition movement in Hong Kong lingering even after Taiwans 2020 presidential campaign," he said.

As it becomes clearer that Chinas censorship and cover-ups exacerbated this crisis, officials in the United States could follow Taiwans example. Lets call it the "Wuhan virus" to memorialize the human tragedy that China's authoritarian government has created. Lets call it the "Wuhan virus" to remind us of continued vigilance against the lack of transparency in China.

Dr. Li Wenliang of Wuhan tried to send warnings through Weibo, Chinas Twitter, that there was a mysterious and deadly outbreak afflicting patients and medical providers. Wuhan police threatened criminal charges against Li, who later succumbed to the virus himself and died. There was an uncommon public uprising in China over the doctors treatment. People began calling for freedom of speech and an end to government censorship. Eventually, the central government ruled that Wuhan police acted unlawfully and inappropriately. While there is evidence that Beijing also engaged in a cover-up of sorts, it is clear that the crackdown on speech started in Wuhan.

Wuhan residents were trying to get the word out. They were trying to say that the true death toll in their city was far higher than reported. They pointed to thousands of urns being shipped to the city. Far worse has also been alleged. One famous Wuhan resident, writer and poet Fang Fang, was posting daily reflections and revelations during Wuhans lockdown. She openly criticizes the local government, even as censors and trolls harass her to this day. In response to Fang Fang and people like her, Beijing passed tougher legislation on March 1 to control online content. Finally, last month, Beijing acknowledged that the toll in Wuhan was underreported. But considering the government's track record, even those numbers may not be accurate.

Wuhan authorities have still not closed the wet markets, where many health officials believe the virus was first transmitted.

Although we will probably never know, intelligence officials reportedly believe that there is a high possibility that the virus may have come from a Wuhan research lab. Lax security and standards could have resulted in an infected official or animal before the virus got out later into the community.

Taiwans early detection of something wrong in Wuhan and its strong mitigation efforts have won the island praise. It got one more thing right the name.

Dr. Guy Redmer is an English professor and author currently teaching in Taipei, Taiwan.

See more here:
One more thing Taiwan got right about the virus: Its name - Washington Examiner

While the rest of the world might be struggling in the darkness of a global health saga, with livelihoods and even lives under threat this is turning into Big Techs moment to shine.

After years of media and political elites trying to whip these powerful tools of data collection and mass surveillance into just the right shape the coronavirus pandemic has given tech giants a guise under which to do their thing unchecked by anyone except some independent media outlets and blogs, and incredulous social media users.

One such incident involves Aytu BioScience, which on Aril 20 announced it had entered an exclusive worldwide partnership with Cedars-Sinai to develop the Healight Platform Technology.

Dr. Ruchi Mathur of Ceders-Sinai announced this in a tweet the same day, saying, Weve already shown that the Healight kills bacteria. Now we show that it can also kill coronavirus.

Double your web browsing speed with today's sponsor. Get Brave.

Mathur also provided a link to a Yahoo News article announcing the deal.

But as of this writing, Aytu BioSciences video on YouTube has been banned, while its Twitter account was also temporarily suspended.

As it turned out, all it took to deplatform a company that just partnered with a renowned medical and academic center like Ceders-Sinai in order to try bring potentially life-saving treatment to the world was a (politically) disgruntled New York Times reporter.

The reporter, Davey Alba, said on Twitter on April 25 that she reported a video promoting Heatlight to YouTube because it was proving to be very popular and shared on social networks by people asserting that it backs up Trumps idea throwing it out there that UV rays kill coronavirus. The research and video was posted before Trumps comments.

YouTube quickly obliged and removed the video, according to Albas tweet. It was in the meantime confirmed that the video has been deleted, with a shocking message replacing it saying the content violates YouTubes guidelines.

On April 26, Twitter user @ShoreProgress shared the news of this case in a tweet adding that Twitter had also decided to suspend Aytu BioSciences account, apparently for no other reason than to spite US President Donald Trump.

(The user backed the claim of the Twitter account suspension with a screenshot but it seems that the social giant has changed its mind and that the account is back online, at least for now.)

More here:
YouTube and Twitter censor medical research center's UV therapy after NY Times journalist probe - Reclaim The Net

Recently The Jewish Voice ran a story about 2 doctors in California, who disagree with the quarantines , who stated that EMS is over-counting COVID-19 deaths and in detail described their data and the science of immunity. The doctors videos on youtube went totally viral, with over 6 million people watching them

Youtube began to take down the videos , even the original interview and news clip which was done by KERO 23, an ABC affiliate. You tubers keep re-posting them and as of now, we linked to 3 compete videos of Dan Erickson and Artin Massihi.

These are medical doctors, who held a press conference, big tech, does not believe you deserve to hear their studies and experiences.

The censorship being perpetrated by You Tube is out of control. They no longer act like a platform, they are officially publishers, that decide what you can see and not see. YouTube should be forced to declare themselves PUBLISHERS, which would hold them accountable for everything they PUBLISH. You Tube wants it both ways, they want to claim they are a platform to avoid any legal responsibility from the user content and at the same time, want to select what you are allowed to see. You cant have it both ways.

Fox News host Tucker Carlson reported on this topic last night. and discusses censorship and the power of big tech. He does a wonderful job. Watch below:

Go here to see the original:
Tucker Carlson Reports on California Doctors, YouTube are Trying to Censor over COVID Views - The Jewish Voice

Daryl Hannahs bare behind in Splash isnt the only thing being censored by Disney Plus and its family-friendly streaming service, as a few other shows and films have received subtle edits.

Although Splash had been streaming since February, sharp-eyed viewers noticed Hannahs hair had been CGId to cover her bare butt as her character goes running off into the ocean. A Disney spokesperson did confirm that a few scenes in the film have been slightly edited to remove nudity.

1999s Toy Story 2 had its post-credits sequence edited for an inappropriate scene when the film was re-released on DVD to tie in with Toy Story 4.

The censors removed a casting couch joke where Stinky Pete (Kelsey Grammer) flirts with two Barbie dolls hinting that he can get them into movies. You know, Im sure I could get you a part in Toy Story 3, Stinky Pete says.

The scene was deleted in light of the #MeToo movement. The original scene is below and does not appear in the streaming service version.

But Disney Plus did have a change of heart, it seems, over animated series Gravity Falls. Creator Alex Hirsch tweeted back in November 2019 about its decision to remove a symbol from Stanley Pines initial fez. Hirsh said, Lol apparently the geniuses over at Disney+ decided to remove Grunkle Stans fez symbol for no reason, but then accidentally left it in the thumbnails.

The symbol appears to be back on Stanleys fez, at least for American audiences.

Screencap Courtesy of Disney Plus

Lilo and Stitch audiences have noticed a subtle change to one of its scenes. After fighting with her sister, Lilo runs into the laundry room and climbs into a clothes dryer. In the edited version, Lilo climbs into something that looks like a pizza box.

Go here to see the original:
Disney Plus Censors Casting Couch Joke in Toy Story 2 and Other Subtle Edits - Variety

Over the course of the semester, the Lanthorn will be conducting an editorial series titled News on News revolving around how news is consumed today, the concept of fake news and the fight journalists continue to fight to have their voices be heard.

Over doing this editorial series, I learned a lot about how journalists think and learned some helpful lessons as to how to react to institutional pressures.

I highlighted the importance of the #FreeIgnace movement, the beninese journalist who is sadly still incarcerated for simply doing his job. I talked to students who have experienced censorship, both in their time at GVSUand in the Ukraine.

I learned some important lessons from journalists who continue to fight the good fight, whether it be Matthew Kauffman leading the charge to free Ignace Sossou or Raymond Joseph continuing to investigate a corrupt South African lottery system.

These journalists and students speaking out against the powers that be has always been important, but is crucial now more than ever, as Americans everywhere are staying in their homes trying to prevent the spread of COVID-19.

While journalists are not doing the work of essential workers and nurses and doctors working the front lines to fight the virus, those spreading news to the public are in the next tier below. Now more than ever, citizens around the world are looking towards local and national news.

As journalists, we have a responsibility to give the public accurate news, especially in this time of crisis. One of my roles as a part-time assignment editor at Fox 17 is to answer the phone of nervous viewers. Here are what the majority of those calls have consisted of the past few weeks:

Hey, my boss is making us go in to work, but my wife and I are nervous about me getting infected. What do I do to report them?

How do I file for unemployment?

Im about to run out of rent money ever since I lost my job, where can I turn to if I end being homeless in the next few weeks?

My daughter needs her heart medicine to survive. Is it even safe to go into pharmacies right now?

The Walmart by me is not practicing social distancing. Is there anything you guys can do about that?

While it can be nice to provide people with certain resources to help them get what they need in this worldwide pandemic, its a lot of pressure to try to help these people, who appear to have nowhere else to go.

I am nowhere near a guidance counselor or a life coach or a motivational speaker, but I have had to play all of those roles in these phone calls. While I struggle to sleep at night thinking of the thousands of people struggling just in West Michigan alone, its through these phone calls that I have realized that journalists are more than writers, editors, reporters, broadcaster and anchors: we have a job to help people in this time of crisis.

Phone calls such as the ones above are the reason why I am confident I will stay in journalism. As Kauffman and Gamble and Joseph advised in our interviews, journalists need to have thick skin; not just in dealing with criticism and institutional censorship and threats, but also helping those in need, whether that be in providing accurate information, conducting an investigation, or simply giving news consumers a guiding light and someone to talk to.

Through this editorial series, it has been reiterated to me that thick skin and a refusal to back down is a crucial skill that every young journalist needs to develop.

We will face criticism. We will face threats. We will be called pigs and biased, and our writing will be deemed as fake news and thats on the tame end of the criticism. But for every negative message towards us, the positive support comes through tenfold, and knowing that we have a truly important role informing and helping people makes this job more worth it than I ever could have imagined.

Link:
News on News: Reflecting on institutional censorship and the conversations with the experts - Grand Valley Lanthorn

HONOLULU(KHON2)Emotions ran high in Fridays special Senate Committee meeting on COVID-19. Senators accused the governors chief of staff of censoring information and reprimanded the director of human resources for not responding to redeployment of state workers with a sense of urgency.

The budget shortfall and the redeployment of state workers to help in the unemployment office and other areas were just two topics discussed in the meeting. Senators didnt hide their disapproval with how both issues were being handled.

The Department of Labor and Industrial Relations (DLIR) was short-staffed even before COVID-19.

Sen. Donovan Dela Cruz said the state also needs help calling and tracking visitors who arrive in Hawaii and the Department of Health needs 100 additional workers.

So why havent state workers, that arent currently working due to the stay-at-home order, been sent to fill those positions?

Department of Human Resources (DHRD) Director Ryker Wada said part of whats happening is theyre vetting people for redeployment and making sure they have the right skill-set.

I know we have very skilled workersyou dont have to be a rocket scientist to do screening. We just have to have willing bodies Thats what were talking about. Using those bodies, not next weekthe bottom line is we need to be proactive, Sen. Kurt Fevella said.

Sen. Michelle Kidani, Fevella and Dela Cruz all said they had offered their own staff to be used to fill needed positions weeks ago, but were turned down.

Dela Cruz and Kidani grilled Wada for wasting time, and expressed frustration that DHRD is now considering using their staff.

This has been going on for three weeks and we told you before DLIR requested employees and it was turned downIt seems like were imploding from the inside, Kidani said.

Dela Cruz said DHRDs lack of action was unacceptable and pointed out that they shouldnt be using National Guard to fill job openings when the state has capable workers, currently sitting at home, who can do it.

Wada explained that DHRD was giving some people an option to work.

We should be redeploying people much faster instead of using the National GuardThere are lots of things we need help with and at some point its not going to be a volunteer thing, Dela Cruz said.

Things got even more heated when Dela Cruz questioned the governors Chief of Staff Linda Chu Takayama about withholding information about the budget.

Yesterday, I made phone calls to different departments and they said they were told not to send (budget information) to us, Dela Cruz said.

Takayama explained that she thought it would be better if information first went through The Department of Budget and Finance first.

If theres a sense of urgency, why are you continuing to filter and delay? Dela Cruz asked.

Takayama again tried to explain that she felt BNF should look at it first.

Thats for us to determine, not youThis is the third time you filtered and censored informationthe departments are supposed to respond to the LegislatureThis committee is seriously thinking of sending the governor a vote of no confidence in your ability I just dont understand why you continue to delay information and not allow us to do our job, Dela Cruz said.

Fevella asked Takayama whether the governor had given her authority to withohold information.

The governor is aware, Takayama said.

So the governor himself asked you and the departments not to respond? asked Dela Cruz.

I kept him informed and he did not object, Takayama said.

The tense discussion continued for several more minutes before Takayama said again that she would talk to BNF and get the budget information to the Special Senate Committee on COVID-19 on Monday.

See original here:
Legislators accused the governors chief of staff of censoring timely information - KHON2

Dissent and protest are protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution, which guarantees freedoms of speech, assembly, and the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances. These rights are fundamental to our democracy. They cannot be sacrificed even, and perhaps particularly, in times of public emergency.

On April 14, 2020, the police department in Raleigh, North Carolina, tweeted, Protesting is a non-essential activity, as an explanation for breaking up a protest. As organizations dedicated to protecting civil liberties and the First Amendment, the undersigned groups are deeply disturbed by this statement and other remarks and actions by public officials suggesting that peaceful protest can be outlawed during a national crisis. The ongoing Covid-19 pandemic cannot be used to justify the suspension of First Amendment rights. People must be free to express disagreement with government decisions, even when it involves criticism of essential public health measures.

Upholding First Amendment rights need not be at odds with the governments authority and obligation to protect public health and safety. The emergency decrees that call for social distancing, wearing of face covers or masks, and limits on the size of public assemblies can regulate the manner in which protests occur. However, regulations should be narrowly tailored to what is necessary to protect public health and cannot be so broad that they ban protest completely or so poorly drafted that they restrict peaceful demonstrations.

Most protesters have been exercising their constitutional rights without threatening the health of their fellow citizens: wearing masks and standing six-feet apart outside hospitals and other places of business to protest inadequate safety precautions; participating in car demonstrations in Arizona, California and Michigan, and launching digital campaigns.

Public officials in Ohio and Michigan have included explicit protections for First Amendment rights in their emergency decrees. Some states have also acknowledged information-gathering and reporting as essential services.

We urge all public officials to recognize their obligation to defend First Amendment rights while they protect public safety. These rights are critically important during uncertain times like these.

Co-signed:

National Coalition Against CensorshipAmerican Booksellers for Free ExpressionAmericans for Prosperity FoundationAssociation of American PublishersThe Authors GuildThe Buckeye InstituteCaesar Rodney InstituteThe Center for Media and DemocracyCivil Liberties Defense CenterCoalition for Policy ReformThe DKT Liberty ProjectDefending Rights & DissentFirst Amendment Lawyers AssociationFirstAmendment.comFree PressFree Speech CoalitionFreedom ForumFreedom Foundation of MinnesotaFreedom to Read FoundationIdaho Freedom FoundationInstitute for Free SpeechKurt Vonnegut Museum and LibraryMackinac Center for Public PolicyMississippi Center for Public PolicyPEN AmericaPEN America Childrens and Young Adult Books CommitteeRestore The Fourth, Inc.United for MissouriWoodhull Freedom FoundationDavid A. Schulz, Media Freedom & Information Access Clinic at Yale Law School *institution listed for identification purposes only

See original here:
The Right to Protest During the Pandemic - Blogging Censorship

According to the Motion Picture Association of America,Splash is rated PG. According to Disney+,Splashis rated PG-13. In almost every case, studios work hard to bringdown a movies ratings. Im not sure Ive ever seen a movie studio willfully (and seemingly unilaterally)slap a higher rating on a film that it has been given by the MPAA.

That doesnt mean that Disney has added more sexuality toSplash, the 1984 romantic comedy about a guy (Tom Hanks) who falls in love with an actual mermaid (Daryl Hannah). Quite the contrary. As observed by Allison Pregler on Twitter and confirmed by me with my own eyes on my own Disney+ account Disney has added extra CGI hair to Hannahs character in a key scene in order to remove any inkling that she might be naked onscreen.

Watch the censoredSplash footage right here:

Heres the original version of the scene, albeit in a low-res version that makes comparing a little tougher than it would be otherwise. You will note that Hannahs character already has extremely long hair that masks some of her private areas. Its not like her posterior was just hanging out there for the whole world to see. The Disney+ version just addsmore hair until it looks like shes wearing hair underwear:

Even though its only (technically) rated PG,Splashwas actually Disneys first movie ever released through its Touchstone Pictures label, which was explicitlycreated for films from Disney that were deemed to adult for the traditional, family-friendly Walt Disney Studios banner. Why, then, is it on Disney+, which is specifically intended for that same family audience? Why not put it on Hulu, the Disney-controlled streaming site that has much more adult content? I dont know. All I know is that censoredSplash footage is wild. Really, really wild.

Gallery The Disney Movies Were Surprised Are Actually on Disney+

Here is the original post:
Disney Plus Censors 'Splash's Nudity In the Most Ridiculous Way - ScreenCrush

After Thai actor Vachirawit Chivaaree liked a photo on Twitter that listed Hong Kong as a "country," Chinese fans inundated his Instagram and other social media with comments "correcting" him, and he soon postedan apologyfor his "lack of caution talking about Hong Kong," which is a semi-autonomous Chinese city, and not an independent nation.

Vachirawit, who goes by the name "Bright," was not the first foreign celebrity or brand to cause offense in China by mischaracterizing issues related to Hong Kong or Taiwan, or by crossing numerous other political red lines familiar to those within China's Great Firewall.

Nor was he the first to try to apologize, only to have more alleged transgressions dredged up by nationalist Chinese web users looking for a new scalp.

They called for a boycott of Vachirawit and his TV show, "2gether," and some began posting attacks against his girlfriend on both Weibo and Twitter under the hashtag #nnevvy.

The expression of similar sentiments on Twitter were met with pushback by Thai fans, who quickly found themselves targeted by the Chinese users, who posted insults demeaning the southeast Asian country and its government. But here the users, used to debating within the limits of the Great Firewall, revealed something of how limited their political worldview is by censorship and propaganda.

In seeking to insult the Thais they were arguing with, they turned to the worst topics they could imagine, but instead of outrage, posts criticizing the Thai government or dredging up historical controversies, were met with glee by the mostly young, politically liberal Thais on Twitter.

While all this may seem petty and inconsequential, the failure of this particular trolling campaign is illustrative of a wider issue. The attitude expressed by the angry "little pinks" engaging in it, an easily offended, touchy nationalism that links love for country with love of the Communist Party and its leaders, has grown substantially in recent years, drowning out -- with the assistance of the censors -- what limited criticism there was of the government on the Chinese internet.

This type of groupthink could have potential real world consequences down the line. While China's leaders do not need to worry about public opinion in the same as their counterparts in a democracy, they cannot ignore it entirely. On issues such as pollution, corruption and food safety, public opinion has had a notable effect on government policy, even as the censors worked to ensure that people did not escalate their online dissatisfaction to offline protests.

However, in the past the authorities have seen patriotic anger run out of their control.

In both instances, intense policing both online and off was able to rein in the protests, but it also exposed the government to a level of public anger they were not used to for not giving in to calls for a more belligerent response to either Japan or the Philippines.

This led to calls from many online in mainland China for the Chinese military to intervene.

When the Hong Kong government instead gave in to some of the protesters' demands, it was to the understandable shock of many in China whose view of the unrest had been shaped by state media. This led to a backlash against Beijing, with some online asking the obvious question of why Hong Kong protesters, which state media had persistently referred to as rioters, could win concessions?

In both instances, just as the #nnevvy trolls were unable to conceive of anyone not being offended by having their government mocked, the limits of political imagination had been constrained by censorship and propaganda.

While some Hong Kongers and Taiwanese were crowing over the embarrassment of the Chinese trolls, they shouldn't be too complacent about the potential ramifications for any future debate over either territory's sovereignty.

If China's leaders one day find themselves painted into a corner by their own propaganda, unable to pursue or even consider more pragmatic solutions, the results could be potentially disastrous.

Continued here:
Nnevvy: Chinese troll campaign on Twitter exposes a potentially dangerous disconnect with the wider world - CNN