Internet News

In the last couple of days, a report emerged that the Government of India is permanently banning 59 Chinese apps, including TikTok permanently from June 2021. TikTok, which was originally temporarily banned in June 2020, has decided to wind up its business in India.

The permanent ban also has repercussions for PUBG Mobile India.  PUBG Mobile India is now coming to terms that the relaunch which was planned for March 2021 might never happen.

In June and September, when 59 and 118 Chinese apps including PUBG Mobile India were banned, the Government of India stated in the order that the apps were prejudicial to the sovereignty and integrity of India, defence of India, the security of the state and public order. The apps gave a written response to the Government of India. However, it has now emerged according to reports that the government is not satisfied with the response and explanation that were given by these companies. Hence the ban for these 59 apps is permanent now.

Following nine months of study and deliberations, the Canadian Commission on Democratic Expression has settled on a series of principles and recommendations that can lead to a practical course of action. What we set forth is a series of functional steps to enable citizens, governments and platforms to deal with the matter of harmful speech in a free and democratic, rights-based society like Canada. We recognize the complexity of the issues at play and offer these as a path forward and with the knowledge they will be subject to further debate and molding.

PRINCIPLES

• Free speech is fundamental to a democratic society and that the internet enables more people to participate in public discussions and debates.

• The rise of hatred, disinformation, conspiracies, bullying and other harmful communications online is undermining these gains and having a corrosive impact on democratic expression in Canada.

• The status quo of leaving content moderation to the sole discretion of platforms has failed to stem the spread of these harms and that platform companies can find themselves in conflict between their private interests and the public good.

• We find fault with the notion that platforms are neutral disseminators of information. Platforms curate content to serve their commercial interests and so must assume greater responsibility for the harms they amplify and spread.

• Government must play a more active role in furthering the cause of democratic expression and protecting Canadians from online harms.

• Any policy response must put citizens first, reduce online harms and guard against the potential for over-censorship of content in putting forth remedies. This requires a balanced and multi-pronged approach.

These principles have led the Commission to an integrated program of six scaffolding recommendations.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. A new legislated duty on platforms to act responsibly.

Establishment by Parliament of a statutory Duty to Act Responsibly imposing an affirmative requirement on platforms under legislation and regulation, including social media companies, large messaging groups, search engines and other internet operators involved in the dissemination of user-generated and third-party content. In addressing harms, the details of this duty must take account of principles such as the fundamental nature of free speech.

2. A new regulator to oversee and enforce the Duty to Act Responsibly.

Creation of a new regulatory body, operating within legislated guidelines, that represents the public interest and moves content moderation and platform governance beyond the exclusive preserve of private sector companies. The regulator would oversee a Code of Conduct to guide the actions of parties under its supervision, while recognizing that not all platforms can be treated in precisely the same manner. Regulatory decisions will be judicially made, based in the rule of law and subject to a process of review.

3. A Social Media Council to serve as an accessible forum in reducing harms and improving democratic expression on the internet.

Ensuring an inclusive dialogue on ongoing platform governance policies and practices, including content moderation, through a broadly based social media council that places platforms, civil society, citizens and other interested parties around the same table.

4. A world-leading transparency regime to provide the flow of necessary information to the regulator and Social Media Council.

Embedding significant, world-leading transparency mechanisms at the core of the mandate for the regulator and Social Media Council -- on data, ads, bots and the right to compel information. This will also assist researchers, journalists and members of the public with access to the information required for a publicly accountable system.

5. Avenues to enable individuals and groups to deal with complaints of harmful content in an expeditious manner. An e-tribunal to facilitate and expedite dispute resolution and a process for addressing complaints swiftly and lightly before they become disputes.@

Creating rapid and accessible recourse to content-based dispute settlement by a dedicated e-tribunal charged with addressing online content disputes in a timely manner. And creating a process that enables targets of harms to compel platforms to make creators aware of a complaint.

6. A mechanism to quickly remove content that presents an imminent threat to a person.

Development of a quick-response system under the authority of the regulator to ensure the rapid removal of content -- even temporarily -- that creates a reasonable apprehension of an imminent threat to the health and safety of the targeted party.

The Commission considered imposing takedown requirements on platforms as some nations have done. These generally identify offending categories of content, provide a fixed window, such as 24 hours, for it to be removed and may levy significant penalties. We are concerned that such systems could create incentives for over-censorship by platform companies. Our recommendations do less to circumscribe speech in recognition of the fact that harmful speech and the unjustified denial of freedom of expression are both problematic.

The standards of the Duty to Act Responsibly are purposely left vague at this point to give government, the regulator, and the Social Media Council an opportunity to flesh it out as part of a Code of Conduct. To be sure, we are not recommending the creation of a self-standing new tort as the basis for a cause of action, but rather imposing affirmative requirements on the platforms to be developed under legislation and regulation. We expect the Code will evolve given the recentness of the problem and the rapid evolution of the internet.

Italy's data protection censor has ordered video sharing app TikTok to temporarily block the accounts of any users whose ages can't be confirmed. The order comes after the death of a 10-year-old girl in Palermo, whose parents told authorities their daughter was participating in a blackout challenge she saw on the app. The child died of asphyxiation, and authorities are investigating whether anyone invited her to try the challenge.

The Italian Data Protection Authority ordered TikTok to block unverified users in Italy until at least February 15th. The temporary suspension of unverified accounts in Italy bans TikTok from further processing user data for which there is no absolute certainty of age and, consequently, of compliance with the provisions related to the age requirement.

Under its terms of service, users must be at least 13 years old to sign up for an account on TikTok, but Italian authorities said it's easy to get around that rule. TikTok has a version of its app in the US for children under 13-- TikTok for Younger Users wich operates with limited content and interaction.

Earlier this month, TikTok updated the default privacy settings for users between 13 and 15 years old, putting limits on who can see and comment on their videos.

The US company Toki is building 'school-in-a-box' devices to connect up to 1 billion people across Africa and Asia, using technologies that it claims could bypass local censorship. The devices will be Wi-Fi-ready servers that can handle dozens of concurrent users.

One of Toki's country managers describes on LinkedIn that the devices would also run a decentralized search engine, designed to be anonymous, private and censorship-resistant. They will be donated to communities in the developing world by U.S.-based eRise, which was founded in 2019 to, according to its website, focus on digital empowerment initiatives that are capital-efficient, and which improve access to content, community and commerce.

Both Toki and eRise were founded by entrepreneur and free speech advocate Rob Monster. Monster owns domain registration company Epik, which allowed controversial social network Parler to come briefly back online last week after the site was booted from Amazon's cloud service. Parler is just one of several platforms enabled by Epik, and Monster's other domain and web hosting companies, that have been home to right leaning forums that western states and social media companies censor and ban.

Presumably technology that was designed to help developing countries with their censorship problems could now be repurposed to helping western countries with their censorship problems.

Back in September 2020, Google announced that it would be demanding identity verification for those wanting to watch videos Google has decided should be restricted to adults, Google explained:

In line with upcoming regulations, like the European Union's Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD), we will be introducing a new age verification step over the next few months. As part of this process some European users may be asked to provide additional proof of age when attempting to watch mature content. If our systems are unable to establish that a viewer is above the age of 18, we will request that they provide a valid ID or credit card to verify their age.

Well now it seems that Google is now implementing this policy and several Melon Farmers readers have reported that they have been blocked from viewing adult rated videos on YouTube. Google demands either a credit card transaction or else hand over personal details on government issued ID.

A policeman has been charged with a criminal offence after allegedly sending a supposedly grossly offensive image of the arrest of George Floyd to colleagues.

He will appear in court charged with sending the image by means of a public electronic communications network, contrary to the Communications Act 2003, on May 30 last year.

The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) said the charge against the Devon and Cornwall Police sergeant came after an altered image of George Floyd's arrest in the US was shared within a WhatsApp group that included a number of other police officers and staff.

An IOPC spokesman added that they had investigated the image after it was brought to their attention by Devon and Cornwall Police. The officer is due to appear before Newton Abbot Magistrates' Court on January 28, the IOPC said.

Of course the public aren't being allowed to judge for themselves, and the joke has been kept secret.

A new Amazon Prime series, Tandav ,  has resulted in calls for censorship in India.  Several politicians have complained about scenes that offended religious sensitivities.

Tandav is an Indian political drama along the lines of the Netflix series House of Cards . The main character of the series is a power-hungry politician who will do anything to become India's prime minister.

MP Manoj Kotak, a member of the ruling Hindu nationalist party Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), wrote on Twitter that he had contacted the Ministry of Information requesting it to ban the controversial web series. According to Kotak, the show seemed to be deliberately mocking Hindu gods.

Ram Kadam, another BJP member, went to the police in Mumbai to file a complaint, accusing Amazon of trying to outrage religious sentiments and publishing material that can cause harm.

A police investigation has already been launched in the state of Uttar Pradesh against Amazon's chief of Indian Prime Aparna Purohit and the show's director Zafar.

The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting has announced that it would contact Amazon about the show.

 

Update: Tandav censored

21st January 2021. See article from hindustantimes.com

One scene from Tandav has particularly caught the attention of a few people, which shows actor Mohd Zeeshan Ayyub playing the role of (a modern day) Lord Shiva in a college play. Netizens claimed that it hurts religious sentiments. Another contentious scene involves characters played by Anuup Sonii and Sandhya Mridul, and the two talk about castes.

Tandav film makers have now agreed to censor out the material that offended the easily offended.

Pakistan is threatening to prosecute non-Pakistanis in foreign countries for breaking its blasphemy laws online.

The decision seems to be focused on Ahmadis, an Islamic offshoot whose beliefs are considered blasphemous in Pakistan. The Pakistan Telecommunications Authority (PTA) sent a legal notice to the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community USA demanding that it shuts down its website, trueislam.com, or get charged with blasphemy, a crime that carries a ten-year prison sentence.

The website trueislam.com is run by a US-based organization. So the legal notice is the government's way of saying that the Pakistan Blasphemy Laws can apply to non-Pakistanis and beyond the Pakistan territory.

On January 14, the US House Foreign Affairs Committee tweeted that it was very concerning to see Pakistan using attempts to apply its controversial cybercrime laws to repress Americans' freedoms of speech and worship well outside of Pakistan's own borders.

It is unlikely that the US will allow any such interference in US free speech but it Pakistan could arrest offending AMericans  if they travel to Pakistan or any other country friendly with Pakistan. And of course relatives of offending Americans who live in Pakistan could be persecuted.

The company which approves Internet domains in Hong Kong said it will now reject any sites that could incite illegal acts, a further reduction in Hong Kong freedom after Beijing's imposition of a national security law on the Chinese-ruled city last year.

Holders of .hk domains were advised of the policy change late on Thursday, after Internet service provider Hong Kong Broadband Network (HKBN) said it had blocked access to HKChronicles, a website offering information about anti-government protests.

The Hong Kong Domain Name Registration Company (HKDNR) alerted holders of .hk domains to the new acceptable use policy by its parent, Hong Kong Internet Registration Corporation Limited (HKIRC), which goes into effect on Jan. 28. It said it could reject applications for new .hk sites that it believes could incite criminal acts, abuse privacy or provide false or misleading information.

WhatsApp is forcing users to agree to sharing information with Facebook if they want to keep using the service.

The company warns users in a pop-up notice that they need to accept these updates to continue using WhatsApp - or delete their accounts.

But Facebook, which owns WhatsApp, said European and UK users would not see the same data-sharing changes, although they will need to accept new terms.

See details in article from bbc.co.uk

See also comment piece WhatsApp users are really Facebook customers now -- it's getting harder to forget thatfrom theguardian.com

Update: Postpones

17th January 2021. See article from theverge.com

WhatsApp on Friday announced a three-month delay of a new privacy policy originally slated to go into effect on February 8th following widespread confusion over whether the new policy would mandate data sharing with Facebook. The changes will now apply from 15th May 2021.

The update does not in fact affect data sharing with Facebook with regard to user chats or other profile information; WhatsApp has repeatedly clarified that its update addresses business chats in the event a user converses with a company's customer service platform through WhatsApp.

In a mass censorship movement from politicians and internet companies, all sorts of measures have been adopted to silence Donald Trump, his supporters, and anyone else with right leaning views. Here are just a few of the most notable actions.

 

Right leaning Parler forum taken down by Amazon

11th January 2021. See article from bbc.co.uk

Parler has dropped offline after Amazon pulled hosting support for the right leaning free speech social network.

The platform had been reliant on the tech giant's Amazon Web Services (AWS) cloud computing service to provide its alternative to Twitter.

It is popular among supporters of Donald Trump, although the president is not a user.

Google and Apple had already removed Parler from their app stores towards the end of last week.

Snapchat and Twitch cancel Trump

See article from reclaimthenet.org

Snapchat and Twitch have joined other Big Tech companies in censoring Trump. Rachel Racusen, a spokeswoman for the company, said:

We can confirm that earlier today we locked President Trump's Snapchat account.

Until Snapchat lifts the restriction, Trump will not be able to share anything with his nearly two million subscribers on the platform.

Meanwhile the games based social network Twitch has similarly cancelled Trump. A spokesperson said:

In light of yesterday's shocking attack on the Capitol, we have disabled President Trump's Twitch channel.

The company claims it will reassess Trump's account after he leaves office.

Shopify cancels Trumps merchandising outlet

See article from vox.com

Shopify, the Canada-based tech company that makes popular software tools to help merchants run online stores, shuttered the Trump Organization's TrumpStore.com on Thursday morning, as well as the e-commerce portion of the president's election website.

So one less place to buy MAGA hats from.

Facebook cancels Trump and also the #WalkAway campaign

See article from reclaimthenet.org

Facebook on Thursday said it will block President Trump on its platforms at least until the end of his term on Jan. 20, as the mainstream online world moved forcefully to limit the president after years of inaction.

Facebook has also  banned the #WalkAway Campaign -- a popular grassroots movement that encourages people to walk away from the divisive tenets endorsed and mandated by the Democratic Party of today.

The far-reaching ban has impacted the campaign's main Facebook group (which had over 500,000 followers), its main Facebook page (which had over 182,000 followers), and every member of the #WalkAway Campaign team, including its founder Brandon Straka.

Twitter cancels the US President, his close associates, and other right leaning voices

See article from nbcnews.com

After permanently cancelling the account of the USA President, Twitter moved on to cancelling Trumps associates.

Twitter on Friday removed the accounts of Michael Flynn, Sidney Powell and other high-profile supporters of Trump who promoted the conspiracy theory that the elites from the Democratic Party coordinate with the media, big tech and large corporations to override democratic processes.

Twitter also removed the account of Ron Watkins, the administrator of the website 8kun, which was formerly named 8chan and hosts posts from Q, the false digital prophet at the heart of the QAnon conspiracy theory.

In a video leaked by Project Veritas, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey discussed Trump's account and stated:

This is going to be much bigger than just one account, and it's going to go on for much longer than just this day, this week. And the next few weeks and go on beyond the Inauguration.

He also cited the platform's mass censorship of QAnon as one such example of a much broader approach that we should be looking at and going deeper on.

YouTube cancels the US Presidents channels for 7 days

14th January 2021. See article from dailymail.co.uk

YouTube has temporarily blocked Donald Trump from uploading a video from his Texas speech on Tuesday where he said he was at zero risk of 25th amendment removal and warned Democrats be careful what you wish for.

Amazon cancels 'Stop the Steal' merchandising

16th January 2021. See article from reclaimthenet.org

Thousands of pieces of merchandise containing Stop the Steal, a slogan that is used by those who believe Democrats stole the election, have been pulled from Amazon.

T-shirts, stickers, masks, hats, and other products containing this slogan that were recently available to purchase on Amazon are now gone. Many of these products are still visible in searches for stop the steal amazon.com but attempting to open any of these results now returns a Sorry we couldn't find that page message.

Comment: Angela Merkel denounces censorship by social media companies

11th January 2021. From the FT

Angela Merkel, German chancellor, has sharply criticised Twitter's decision to ban US president Donald Trump, calling it a problematic breach of the fundamental right to free speech.

Merkel said through her spokesman that the US government should follow Germany's lead in adopting laws that restrict online incitement, rather than leaving it up to platforms such as Twitter and Facebook to make up their own rules.

Comment: Australia criticises social media

11th January 2021. See article from theguardian.com

Australia's acting prime minister, Michael McCormack, has accused Twitter of censorship for permanently suspending Trump's account for the risk of further incitement of violence, and he attempted to draw comparisons between the riots and last year's Black Lives Matter protests against racial injustice.

Comment: Poland criticises social media

17th January 2021. See article from digitalmarketnews.com

Poland has come forward to voice against the social media censor imposed on Donald Trump, the President of the United States of America. The officials of the government of Poland expressed their denouncement concerning the ban of President Trump, imposed by several major companies of social media.

Following the case, the Polish officials made it known that a draft law is being readied by them to cover the matter. The law will aim to protect the people living in Poland against any form of social media censor. Such actions imposed by the technology companies will be considered to be an illegal deed.

Comment: The woke purge

11th January 2021. See article from spiked-online.com by Brendan O'Neill

Twitter's suspension of Donald Trump is a chilling sign of tyranny to come.

The Canadian government plans to introduce new internet censorship laws in the name of targeting hate speech on social media platforms. The laws will reportedly be tabled in 2021.

A briefing note on the new regulations from Canadian Heritage Minister Steven Guilbeault's department stated:

We are working to introduce regulations to reduce the spread of illegal content, including hate speech, in order to promote a safer and more inclusive online environment. We want to protect Canadians online.

The briefing added that:

Social media platforms can also be used to threaten, intimidate, bully and harass people, or used to promote racist, anti-Semitic, Islamophobic, misogynist and homophobic views that target communities, put people's safety and risk and undermine Canada's social cohesion or democracy.

Open Rights Group writes:

This is a short joint submission to the Law Commission's Harmful Online Offences consultation. This submission is by the Open Rights Group and Preiskel & Co LLP solicitors.

Opposing the new offence

• We do not support the Law Commission's proposed offence. We are concerned with its breadth. We echo and adopt Article 19's submissions in this regard.

• The threshold of a "likelihood to harm" appears to be very broad, and it could include many communications which could cause distress to readers, as the result of their strongly-held religious, political or cultural beliefs, but be legitimate discourse.

• The "Intent to harm or awareness of the risk of harming a likely audience" compounds this. "Risk" as a threshold seems very low. It appears to open up prosecution to anyone whose postings can be related to someone who has experienced mental distress as a result of reading those communications.

• "Likely audience" again is in our view vague and open to interpretation. Making communications "without reasonable excuse" reverses the normal burden for speech: speech, protected as a fundamental right, is permissible unless it is unlawful. Speech should not be confined to that which courts feel is most socially useful, and therefore defensible under a "reasonable excuse" defence.

• In short, by attempting to capture a wide range of behaviours within a single online offence, with a highly malleable concept of mental distress and wide potential audiences, the offence opens up the potential for a wide range of legitimate communications to be deemed criminal.

• Additionally, the problems we identify with the new potential offence may be made worse by the government's proposed Online Harms framework, which will impose a legal duty over Internet Society Services to exercise a "duty of care" over their users. Given that "mental distress" is very personal and driven by context, this ambiguity could exacerbate the legal uncertainties inherent within the "duty of care" expectations. If the legal test for the point where mental distress triggers criminal liability is difficult to understand, or to assess content against, this is likely to create an incentive for companies to remove legal content that is found in the grey areas of "likely audiences" experiencing a "risk" of mental distress in order to successfully carry out their legal duties, and avoid direct risk of regulatory action.

...See full consultation response from openrightsgroup.org

TikTok users aged under 16 will have their accounts automatically set to private, as the app introduces a series of measures to improve child safety.

Approved followers only can comment on videos from these accounts. Users will also be prevented from downloading any videos created by under-16s.

TikTok said it hoped the changes would encourage young users to actively engage in their online privacy journey.

Those aged between 13 and 15 will be able to approve friends for comments and choose whether to make videos public. But those accounts will also not be suggested to other users on the app. media caption Why is TikTok so popular among teens?

The accounts of 16- and 17-year-olds will prevent others downloading their videos - but the youngsters will have the ability to turn off this restriction.

There was a dreadful debate in Westminster Hall giving the opportunity for a few MPs to call for an end to online anonymity (seeming so that their online social media critics could be pursued). None of these MPs seem to have spent any time whatsoever in considering the downsides to these policies.

 

Russian President Vladimir Putin has signed several internet censorship laws into force, including one that introduces crippling fines for failing to remove banned material.

Although sexually explicit content is technically legal in Russia, existing laws banning the illegal production, dissemination and advertisement of pornographic materials and objects and other laws claiming to protect the health of Russian children are deployed by the state at its own discretion against sites hosting adult content.

The end-of-the-year legislative package signed into law by Putin, according to Reuters , also grants the Russian government new powers to restrict U.S. social media giants, label individuals 'foreign agents,' and to crack down on the disclosure of its security officers' personal data.

One of the measures was a response complaints about supposed bias and prejudice shown by Facebook, Twitter and YouTube against Russian media. If social media companies block Russian websites then these social media websites will be blocked in Russia.

Another of the new laws introduces hefty fines of up to 20% of their previous year's Russia-based turnover for sites that repeatedly fail to remove content banned in Russia.